Hearthpwn

I'm not saying this maliciously but if you are actually good at the game, give arena (or heroic duels) a go. I ain't played it for a few years now but before they changed the formatting of deck building it was all I played and was good at it, consistently winning at least 8 games each time and even today Im still reaping the rewards of it with over 80k dust waiting for use (but I also don't play wild so I disenchant all but 1 plain copy of a card when it rotates). You can literally turn 150 gold into an infinite amount, build up lots of dust without realising and multiple packs every run, and there ain't no meta in it either, just good picks during deckbuilding.

But p2w is when something that impacts the gameplay is unavailable without spending money, Finley is still available, just gotta grind for it I'm afraid. It's more like p4p, pay for progress. Just coined that.

And yes, HS is definitely too expensive to play casually and have everything if you use real cash, but apparently there's a new team for HS thats designated for events and new rewards that we'll be seeing the effects of this year so it might get better??

Quote from GuyFromBangBus >>

Bro, the goal of any company is to maximise profits,

 and thats the main issue with the current world and the system(tm). this is an idea we have accepted but which makes 0 sense. growth ? growth for what purpose ?

"I'm so sorry that you have so much money Mr Bill Gate$, and that you bought Blizzard to make even more... but operating system currently running robots on the surface of Mars at this exact moment is not your paid windows. it is the free community Linux."

until then... waiting for Hearthstone code to go open source, be leaked or published on github, then it belongs to everyone and nobody at the same time. anyone free to improve or tweak it (just like your guys are currently creating custom cards ). fed up with Nelly bug ? you patch it. no reason at all for any p2w.

Complaining about value in the battlepass is beyond retarded.

You rly want to hurt the only "fair" way to spend money? 

Quote from Aventurier >>

Quote from GuyFromBangBus >>

Bro, the goal of any company is to maximise profits,

 and thats the main issue with the current world and the system(tm). this is an idea we have accepted but which makes 0 sense. growth ? growth for what purpose ?

"I'm so sorry that you have so much money Mr Bill Gate$, and that you bought Blizzard to make even more... but operating system currently running robots on the surface of Mars at this exact moment is not your paid windows. it is the free community Linux."

until then... waiting for Hearthstone code to go open source, be leaked or published on github, then it belongs to everyone and nobody at the same time. anyone free to improve or tweak it (just like your guys are currently creating custom cards ). fed up with Nelly bug ? you patch it. no reason at all for any p2w.

 

 Whether a line of hypothetical 1's and 0's should be considered anybody's property is a very good question, but I don't think that it's answered through Sir Finley's occurrence in the battle pass deal.  

Open source development is definitely underrated, but I fear that the real discussion is too big and too political for this forum :) 

agreed but overall if Blizzard receives pressure to make money and please shareholders, you could witness the effect in the game. such as, lets say, a valuable card, which could be easily obtainable, by paying.

It would be p2w if it was only available if you pay for it.

Freemium is paying for shortcuts, which this is.

Have you played any other TCG or CCG? Instead of comparing this to chess or counter strike, look at it compared against Gwent on the cheap end and MTG Arena on the expensive end. Buying packs, opening cards, trading cards is the core of the games. What hearthstone actually does is offer $25 drekthars which in turn keeps the core functioning. So instead of pay to win, look at it as players are buying battle passes, cosmetics and tons of packs to subsidize your gameplay experience because if it was the model you suggest, the game either wouldn’t be able to be made or would be much more expensive to play. People who pay money for hearthstone allow people like you to play for free, don’t bite the hand that feeds you.

i'm so glad my dear landlord that you allow such pity subsistence of my miserable peasant life. I hail the bourgeoisie.

the rich allows the poor to live. a flawless point of view. def zero critic can be made to it.

have you though of banning f2p players as well ? i mean, come on, they use something they dont pay for. what an abuse

So a tcg with three sets and no Tabletop sim support. This isn’t a free tcg, it’s fanfiction. If you don’t want to play HS, don’t play. You can play this free “TCG” but I’d rather play something with support. That usually requires developer time, and also money. But more power to you and the oppressed proletariat, viva the revolution or whatever makes you feel better.

time is not money my friend. forget this idea or you will waste your lifetime. cheers

.

Quote from Aventurier >>

so f2p players should disenchant 90% of their collection, which they use to basically ... you know... play the game ?  being restricted to standard, to have a meta card.

ok.

pay2dust

The game is build around cards that you can obtain through either crafting with dust or by pulling them from packs.

There is the option to spend money on packs or the reward track instead of grinding gold for the packs.

If you decide to be f2p and not spend money, then you need to grind. If you think that Finley is so essential to a deck, then yes, dusting a large portion of your collection might be a way to quickly obtain enough dust to craft the card.

There are also 29 other cards in a deck which are probably not all from the Core set and therefore also require dust or packs.

So yeah, I still don't get why a guaranteed legendary from the paid reward track is an issue if you decided to play the grind version of the game.

the average card pack has a disenchanting value of 102.71 dust. it means 16 packs grind. for 1 card. and you dont keep any card. disenchant all.

sure anyone can do it. also do infinite arena, come on. so easy.

after that ~12 grind days when you just play hearthstone basically 6 hours per day, you'd need to grind another legendary to complete your metadeck.

then you'd have 1 class 1 deck.

cant understand why people are using paywall term at all. come on. its so achievable for f2per.

by the time you have completed meta legendaries, the next expansion had already rolled out.

ah nvm. forget it. continue to buy 80 packs per release, then 80 more when you dont have the good ones because Casino-Blizzard and also the tavern pass for the meta legend per expansion. everything's fine.

basically they create a new mechanism: dredge, and put cards at bottom, then create a legendary which synergize with it : Finley and ask you to pay the pass to get it (for sure). if you dont see a problem there then i cant help.

 The paid BP has changed absolutely NOTHING about how a ftp player gets their cards. Paying players have always had the ability to get every single card, good or otherwise, by paying money. Ftp players, on the otherhand, have always had to pick and choose the cards and decks they wanted to play. How is getting a cosmetic version of a legendary on the paid version of the battle pass changed the experience of a ftp player in any way shape or form?

To be honest, your complaint kind of sounds like, "The battle pass allows paying players to get the best cards available with a lower investment of real money than they have in the past. I don't think that's fair to ftp players."

Quote from JamesT >>

 

To be honest, your complaint kind of sounds like, "The battle pass allows paying players to get the best cards available with a lower investment of real money than they have in the past. I don't think that's fair to ftp players."

 thats not my point. buy what you want with your money. if you want to buy edges in games thats your decision. its up to you.

and i dont care if as always been like this. that doesnt become magically fair because it was always done like this. it is unfair to f2pers period. it was and still is.

Quote from Aventurier >>

Quote from JamesT >>

 

To be honest, your complaint kind of sounds like, "The battle pass allows paying players to get the best cards available with a lower investment of real money than they have in the past. I don't think that's fair to ftp players."

 thats not my point. buy what you want with your money. if you want to buy edges in games thats your decision. its up to you.

and i dont care if as always been like this. that doesnt become magically fair because it was always done like this. it is unfair to f2pers period. it was and still is.

 It sure sounded like that was your point. Look, everybody knows this game offers very little value for real money spent. There's nothing new about that. If you don't think it's fair, then why play? Paying money to get more cards has been the revenue model from the beginning. I play entirely ftp and have tons of dust and gold every expansion to do as I see fit. And certainly I don't see any edge to be had in cosmetic cards. In fact I support the cosmetic model of funding a game 100%. That way I can play for free.

Just because the new Sir Finley card is good doesn't mean that it's a P2W card. If it was extremely powerful and the only way you could unlock him was through the Tavern Pass, that would be problematic. But that's not the case. You can always craft one yourself if you want one but you're not hurting your deck by not including him.

The diamond rarity one in the Tavern Pass is just meant to be an incentive for people to get it, it's not paywalling players by hiding a good card behind it. It's not P2W, its pay for access to a shiny legendary.

how many non-diamond Finleys do you see in game ? (ie crafters)

I have counted them very precisely: 0

Quote from Aventurier >>

how many non-diamond Finleys do you see in game ? (ie crafters)

I have counted them very precisely: 0

 I opened mine in a pack and most of the Finley's I've seen haven't been diamond either. On HSReplay, the new Finley is only in 11% of decks and most of those decks have less than a thousand games each, so it isn't like you're seeing him every game.

I thought that we agreed that capitalism has many drawbacks, but happens to be the carrying model for our precious hobby. Finley is just another example of how paying makes progression go faster, but really isn't any big change in itself, so why are we still discussing him?

IF any cards made the game p2w it would be dr. boom, Baku and xilliax, which actually were great cards for f2p since they allowed people to create multiple decent decks with the same card. The more niche the cards, the more dust it takes to play more than 1 deck. If Finley somehow defines 11% of the meta, you have a very dust efficient card to craft right? Also, If the battlepass is very popular, doesn't that make it a good addition?