As a control player, I deleted the game this week after 6 years of playing. These Quests and Combo's are ridiculous. Warlock, Mage, also Shaman: after turn 1 I now I will lose :(. No interaction at all. I might come back next expansions :D
I have been saying before release that this expansion kills the game. The quests are all broken, so are many other decks. Team 5 destroyed the tempo of the game and matches are over before they start.
Inevitability is good and necessary, especially in a game like Hearthstone where you only play best-of-one, there should always be at least 1 deck that almost certainly beats yours, if there was a deck with no bad match ups everybody would play it. Inevitably also gives diversity, some people might play more counters against their worst match-ups, some might just say eff it and don't run any. If you could have access to a sideboadd there would be (almost) no inevitability but for the balance of the game (yeah heah the game is bad shut up) it's necessary and you should be thankful for it, especially when you get your free win vs the deck you counter
The Demon Seed is the issue. You won't survive more than 8 turns max vs. this before you start getting fatigue damages from them. Makes it so unless you are hyper aggro there's no point.
I enjoy limited resources and trying to conserve and try to win out at the end when no cards exist 2 many infinite GENERATION decks just turn me off the game entirely...
if u like the way of inevitability... then why don't u just have a deck with 30 of the same copy of the same card or 30 ignites? like that's the point cuz that's the INFINITE game plan? what's the point? just silly at that point makes zero sense... there's a reason why u can only put 2 copies of 1 card... no card should generate infinite value
I think that "inevitability" as a general concept is a little too vague for it to have a concrete yes/no answer to whether it is a good thing. In essence, what do really mean by it? And when we apply the concept to a specific situation, are we giving it the appropriate objectivity, or is it tempered with the subjectivity of our opinion on it?
To be a little less vague in my reply here, I am certain that there are times when you face a matchup which appears to have a foregone conclusion that we consider to be an inevitable outcome (assuming that is the sort of thing you are alluding to) - and let's assume for a moment, that this is indeed the case and we put aside the possibility of variance and fortune (and skill perhaps) - well then you are left with an assured outcome that might be negative for you at this moment, but the flip side of this is that there will also be times when you are the assured victor. Now, objectively that might seem like this takes the fun and skill out of the game - but that's because we are looking at it from a flawed premise where we have started with that assertion and hence why we reach it.
Long-winded answer short, I think hard inevitability is detrimental in some amount, but the nature of variance and differing outcome means that the likelihood of that sort of inevitability actually happening is pretty low overall, so shouldn't really have a heavy impact on anything.
Bro, this game has been reduced to rock paper scissors with the outcome largely determined by turn 4. You have your head in the sand.
This game has been a Rock-Paper-Scissors methodology since it was released in Beta. Where have you been? That doesn't effect any of what I said, nor the OPs point about inevitability of outcome.
I think that "inevitability" as a general concept is a little too vague for it to have a concrete yes/no answer to whether it is a good thing. In essence, what do really mean by it? And when we apply the concept to a specific situation, are we giving it the appropriate objectivity, or is it tempered with the subjectivity of our opinion on it?
To be a little less vague in my reply here, I am certain that there are times when you face a matchup which appears to have a foregone conclusion that we consider to be an inevitable outcome (assuming that is the sort of thing you are alluding to) - and let's assume for a moment, that this is indeed the case and we put aside the possibility of variance and fortune (and skill perhaps) - well then you are left with an assured outcome that might be negative for you at this moment, but the flip side of this is that there will also be times when you are the assured victor. Now, objectively that might seem like this takes the fun and skill out of the game - but that's because we are looking at it from a flawed premise where we have started with that assertion and hence why we reach it.
Long-winded answer short, I think hard inevitability is detrimental in some amount, but the nature of variance and differing outcome means that the likelihood of that sort of inevitability actually happening is pretty low overall, so shouldn't really have a heavy impact on anything.
Bro, this game has been reduced to rock paper scissors with the outcome largely determined by turn 4. You have your head in the sand.
Go watch Joseph Anderson's video on hearthstone please, you'll find it enlightening. Much like all the people who live with those cute nostalgia goggles on 24/7 when it comes to the game not having aaaaaany inevitability in the past as compared to now.
A neutral Legendary minion with subpar stats that destroys the enemy quest is all we need. More often than not it won't be drawn in time; but the mere threat of its existence will shift the game to a healthier state.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
I think that "inevitability" as a general concept is a little too vague for it to have a concrete yes/no answer to whether it is a good thing. In essence, what do really mean by it? And when we apply the concept to a specific situation, are we giving it the appropriate objectivity, or is it tempered with the subjectivity of our opinion on it?
To be a little less vague in my reply here, I am certain that there are times when you face a matchup which appears to have a foregone conclusion that we consider to be an inevitable outcome (assuming that is the sort of thing you are alluding to) - and let's assume for a moment, that this is indeed the case and we put aside the possibility of variance and fortune (and skill perhaps) - well then you are left with an assured outcome that might be negative for you at this moment, but the flip side of this is that there will also be times when you are the assured victor. Now, objectively that might seem like this takes the fun and skill out of the game - but that's because we are looking at it from a flawed premise where we have started with that assertion and hence why we reach it.
Long-winded answer short, I think hard inevitability is detrimental in some amount, but the nature of variance and differing outcome means that the likelihood of that sort of inevitability actually happening is pretty low overall, so shouldn't really have a heavy impact on anything.
Bro, this game has been reduced to rock paper scissors with the outcome largely determined by turn 4. You have your head in the sand.
Go watch Joseph Anderson's video on hearthstone please, you'll find it enlightening. Much like all the people who live with those cute nostalgia goggles on 24/7 when it comes to the game not having aaaaaany inevitability in the past as compared to now.
I remember back in the freeze mage days in beta when you could literraly concede turn 1 against warrior, because freeze mage couldn't mathematicaly kill the warrior. (besides very few fringe cases)
I would be interested in a legit Blizzard run poll that pinged every HS client out there, and asked them if they liked longer games or shorter games. Just to see what the actual majority of players liked. And it would have to be straight to the client, forum posters aren't a reliable source alone.
I can understand if the developers just believe shorter games with a well defined (inevitable) finish to them is what they think is best for the game. And if that's the case, we don't have much say over it.
But if the decision to makes games faster/shorter was because of player outcry, then really, how many of us really don't like long games?
I mean, we had people on both sides of the argument every day before. "Bah, face hunter is annoying for winning so fast" and "Bleh, control priest is soooo boring to fight". Well, what's the actual percentage?
Anyway, it doesn't matter much now, the game is what it is, and the devs probably won't intentionally slow down the game, whether it was their own choice or a PR band-aid. Just curious, is all.
They need to do something if they are planning to sell more packs and expansions, I mean they can print whatever card they want but in order to sell that nex expansion should with even more broken-power creep ooooooor they nerf current cards, otherwise they can print a 8 mana 20/20 destroy all other minions, restore 10 health and drawn 5 cards, still will be useless.
If you think about it what kind of cards could be printed in the current to change te meta and sell more packs? tech card to disable quest? hero cards even more broken than quest, like 2 mana Kurtus hero card with hero power drawn 2 cards and cost (0) or mage hero card with hero power reduce the cost of spell by (1), and the next steps in further expansions will be all cards cost 0. So they need to do something and that something will be right before the mini set (some nerfs or buffs) or as said include especific tech cards anti quest.
Honestly right now I cant (i dont want) imagine what kind of cards are being printed for the next expansion without nerfing to the ground current meta. But for now they need to keep selling current exp packs and they cannot nerf without puting on sale next pre order expansion.
I have been thinking a lot about that exact point made above since the expac released. I mean what could be the next logical step after crossing such a huge power level threshold in the current meta state? Not only would the next set’s cards need to be unbelievably strong, but they would need to be even faster than the current turbo win condition decks to make any impact. It’s inevitably going to lead to a clown fiesta scenario like Yu-Gi-Oh where an unbreakable board comes out on turn one unless your opponent draws badly. The only thing I’m holding out for is the power level reset idea that Iksar hinted at for the next set rotation. If they don’t go for that approach then the game as we knew it is a thing of the past.
I think discard would really hurt the quest decks. We don't have any now, but I could see Rogue getting some. I think you could print something like a minion with, 'Players may not play more than one card during their turn. Can't be targeted by spells' (when this dies the effect ends) Maybe pally gets something like, Cost 2: Put a random taunt minion on top of your opponents deck. Draw a card.
Basically, I'm thinking of things that screw with the opponents gameplan. Either by messing with their hand, deck, mana, or ability to play numerous cards. All this things would slow the game down to a speed where other decks would have some room to breathe. However, slowing down the game seems like the opposite of what the devs want to do. So, I am not hopeful.
I think discard would really hurt the quest decks. We don't have any now, but I could see Rogue getting some. I think you could print something like a minion with, 'Players may not play more than one card during their turn. Can't be targeted by spells' (when this dies the effect ends) Maybe pally gets something like, Cost 2: Put a random taunt minion on top of your opponents deck. Draw a card.
Basically, I'm thinking of things that screw with the opponents gameplan. Either by messing with their hand, deck, mana, or ability to play numerous cards. All this things would slow the game down to a speed where other decks would have some room to breathe. However, slowing down the game seems like the opposite of what the devs want to do. So, I am not hopeful.
Absolutely love the idea of adding a card to the top of their deck.
I have a feeling play numbers have dipped sharply this expansion. The devs will get the message if people are not playing the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
I think discard would really hurt the quest decks. We don't have any now, but I could see Rogue getting some. I think you could print something like a minion with, 'Players may not play more than one card during their turn. Can't be targeted by spells' (when this dies the effect ends) Maybe pally gets something like, Cost 2: Put a random taunt minion on top of your opponents deck. Draw a card.
Basically, I'm thinking of things that screw with the opponents gameplan. Either by messing with their hand, deck, mana, or ability to play numerous cards. All this things would slow the game down to a speed where other decks would have some room to breathe. However, slowing down the game seems like the opposite of what the devs want to do. So, I am not hopeful.
Absolutely love the idea of adding a card to the top of their deck.
I have a feeling play numbers have dipped sharply this expansion. The devs will get the message if people are not playing the game.
They don't get the message that's why they are launching Mercenaries
I think discard would really hurt the quest decks. We don't have any now, but I could see Rogue getting some. I think you could print something like a minion with, 'Players may not play more than one card during their turn. Can't be targeted by spells' (when this dies the effect ends) Maybe pally gets something like, Cost 2: Put a random taunt minion on top of your opponents deck. Draw a card.
Basically, I'm thinking of things that screw with the opponents gameplan. Either by messing with their hand, deck, mana, or ability to play numerous cards. All this things would slow the game down to a speed where other decks would have some room to breathe. However, slowing down the game seems like the opposite of what the devs want to do. So, I am not hopeful.
Absolutely love the idea of adding a card to the top of their deck.
I have a feeling play numbers have dipped sharply this expansion. The devs will get the message if people are not playing the game.
They don't get the message that's why they are launching Mercenaries
No such message had been sent when Mercenaries was in development. Most trolls at least try to seem logical.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
I think discard would really hurt the quest decks. We don't have any now, but I could see Rogue getting some. I think you could print something like a minion with, 'Players may not play more than one card during their turn. Can't be targeted by spells' (when this dies the effect ends) Maybe pally gets something like, Cost 2: Put a random taunt minion on top of your opponents deck. Draw a card.
Basically, I'm thinking of things that screw with the opponents gameplan. Either by messing with their hand, deck, mana, or ability to play numerous cards. All this things would slow the game down to a speed where other decks would have some room to breathe. However, slowing down the game seems like the opposite of what the devs want to do. So, I am not hopeful.
Absolutely love the idea of adding a card to the top of their deck.
I have a feeling play numbers have dipped sharply this expansion. The devs will get the message if people are not playing the game.
They don't get the message that's why they are launching Mercenaries
No such message had been sent when Mercenaries was in development. Most trolls at least try to seem logical.
Mercenaries is still in development right now and such messages have been sent weeks/months ago, up to this day. I 100% respect your pursuit of truth and logic, but you are not honoring it in the slightest right now
But you're right, they'll get the message, eventually, after the 5th new game "mode" or something, when literally everyone has left the original hearthstone game
I think discard would really hurt the quest decks. We don't have any now, but I could see Rogue getting some. I think you could print something like a minion with, 'Players may not play more than one card during their turn. Can't be targeted by spells' (when this dies the effect ends) Maybe pally gets something like, Cost 2: Put a random taunt minion on top of your opponents deck. Draw a card.
Basically, I'm thinking of things that screw with the opponents gameplan. Either by messing with their hand, deck, mana, or ability to play numerous cards. All this things would slow the game down to a speed where other decks would have some room to breathe. However, slowing down the game seems like the opposite of what the devs want to do. So, I am not hopeful.
Absolutely love the idea of adding a card to the top of their deck.
I have a feeling play numbers have dipped sharply this expansion. The devs will get the message if people are not playing the game.
They don't get the message that's why they are launching Mercenaries
No such message had been sent when Mercenaries was in development. Most trolls at least try to seem logical.
Mercenaries is still in development right now and such messages have been sent weeks/months ago, up to this day. I 100% respect your pursuit of truth and logic, but you are not honoring it in the slightest right now
But you're right, they'll get the message, eventually, after the 5th new game "mode" or something, when literally everyone has left the original hearthstone game
Mercenaries has been in development for well over a year. No one was complaining about the Stormwind meta a year before the Stormwind meta even happened, and most players were genuinely excited to hear about a new game mode when it was initially announced.
Are they really supposed to abandon all that work because things in Hearthstone got rocky a couple of months before Mercenaries launch?
Inevitable is fine. What's not fine is fatigue not mattering anymore, combos going off on Turn 3 or 4, or infinite damage in hand
As a control player, I deleted the game this week after 6 years of playing. These Quests and Combo's are ridiculous. Warlock, Mage, also Shaman: after turn 1 I now I will lose :(. No interaction at all. I might come back next expansions :D
I have been saying before release that this expansion kills the game. The quests are all broken, so are many other decks. Team 5 destroyed the tempo of the game and matches are over before they start.
Inevitability is good and necessary, especially in a game like Hearthstone where you only play best-of-one, there should always be at least 1 deck that almost certainly beats yours, if there was a deck with no bad match ups everybody would play it. Inevitably also gives diversity, some people might play more counters against their worst match-ups, some might just say eff it and don't run any. If you could have access to a sideboadd there would be (almost) no inevitability but for the balance of the game (yeah heah the game is bad shut up) it's necessary and you should be thankful for it, especially when you get your free win vs the deck you counter
And i don’t even play Paladins
The Demon Seed is the issue. You won't survive more than 8 turns max vs. this before you start getting fatigue damages from them. Makes it so unless you are hyper aggro there's no point.
This. I hope the game drains down the toilet :)
I enjoy limited resources and trying to conserve and try to win out at the end when no cards exist 2 many infinite GENERATION decks just turn me off the game entirely...
if u like the way of inevitability... then why don't u just have a deck with 30 of the same copy of the same card or 30 ignites? like that's the point cuz that's the INFINITE game plan? what's the point? just silly at that point makes zero sense... there's a reason why u can only put 2 copies of 1 card... no card should generate infinite value
This game has been a Rock-Paper-Scissors methodology since it was released in Beta. Where have you been?
That doesn't effect any of what I said, nor the OPs point about inevitability of outcome.
Go watch Joseph Anderson's video on hearthstone please, you'll find it enlightening. Much like all the people who live with those cute nostalgia goggles on 24/7 when it comes to the game not having aaaaaany inevitability in the past as compared to now.
A neutral Legendary minion with subpar stats that destroys the enemy quest is all we need. More often than not it won't be drawn in time; but the mere threat of its existence will shift the game to a healthier state.
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
I remember back in the freeze mage days in beta when you could literraly concede turn 1 against warrior, because freeze mage couldn't mathematicaly kill the warrior. (besides very few fringe cases)
inevitability is a good thing, nobody wants every other game to last 45 minutes and every matchup to be 50% win rate.
Consistent turn 5 inevitability is a bad thing though.
They need to do something if they are planning to sell more packs and expansions, I mean they can print whatever card they want but in order to sell that nex expansion should with even more broken-power creep ooooooor they nerf current cards, otherwise they can print a 8 mana 20/20 destroy all other minions, restore 10 health and drawn 5 cards, still will be useless.
If you think about it what kind of cards could be printed in the current to change te meta and sell more packs? tech card to disable quest? hero cards even more broken than quest, like 2 mana Kurtus hero card with hero power drawn 2 cards and cost (0) or mage hero card with hero power reduce the cost of spell by (1), and the next steps in further expansions will be all cards cost 0. So they need to do something and that something will be right before the mini set (some nerfs or buffs) or as said include especific tech cards anti quest.
Honestly right now I cant (i dont want) imagine what kind of cards are being printed for the next expansion without nerfing to the ground current meta. But for now they need to keep selling current exp packs and they cannot nerf without puting on sale next pre order expansion.
I have been thinking a lot about that exact point made above since the expac released. I mean what could be the next logical step after crossing such a huge power level threshold in the current meta state? Not only would the next set’s cards need to be unbelievably strong, but they would need to be even faster than the current turbo win condition decks to make any impact. It’s inevitably going to lead to a clown fiesta scenario like Yu-Gi-Oh where an unbreakable board comes out on turn one unless your opponent draws badly. The only thing I’m holding out for is the power level reset idea that Iksar hinted at for the next set rotation. If they don’t go for that approach then the game as we knew it is a thing of the past.
I think discard would really hurt the quest decks. We don't have any now, but I could see Rogue getting some.
I think you could print something like a minion with, 'Players may not play more than one card during their turn. Can't be targeted by spells' (when this dies the effect ends)
Maybe pally gets something like, Cost 2: Put a random taunt minion on top of your opponents deck. Draw a card.
Basically, I'm thinking of things that screw with the opponents gameplan. Either by messing with their hand, deck, mana, or ability to play numerous cards. All this things would slow the game down to a speed where other decks would have some room to breathe. However, slowing down the game seems like the opposite of what the devs want to do. So, I am not hopeful.
Galavant Animation
Absolutely love the idea of adding a card to the top of their deck.
I have a feeling play numbers have dipped sharply this expansion. The devs will get the message if people are not playing the game.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
They don't get the message that's why they are launching Mercenaries
No such message had been sent when Mercenaries was in development. Most trolls at least try to seem logical.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Mercenaries is still in development right now and such messages have been sent weeks/months ago, up to this day. I 100% respect your pursuit of truth and logic, but you are not honoring it in the slightest right now
But you're right, they'll get the message, eventually, after the 5th new game "mode" or something, when literally everyone has left the original hearthstone game
Mercenaries has been in development for well over a year. No one was complaining about the Stormwind meta a year before the Stormwind meta even happened, and most players were genuinely excited to hear about a new game mode when it was initially announced.
Are they really supposed to abandon all that work because things in Hearthstone got rocky a couple of months before Mercenaries launch?
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland