Arena does feel a liitle more RNG to me than last season. More kill or lose cards now, and it seems like I'm having more difficulty getting either large minion removal or mass removal now.
So, it does feel like I'm winning or losing based more on the luck of the draw than before and less on my skill. But, it might just be that I've had a lot of bad arena draws where I'm just not being offered spells often. For instance, the last 2 times I played Paladin I didn't get either a Truesilver or a Consecrate. Made it really hard to deal with stuff that got buffed and prone to either steamrolling opponent or being steamrolled with little inbetween.
Now than I think about it, it's been more than just paladin. I didn't get flamestrike or blizzard when playing mage and didn't get swipe the 2x I played Druid.
Like I said, it could just be a series of bad draws, but, it does 'feel' like it's harder to get those board wipes/removal now.
If you played magic I would assume that you know there is a lot more RNG in magic. And yeah legend multiple times but started playing ranked a week ago is a bit " lol wut "
There is actually less RNG in Magic than Hearthstone by a substantial margin. I'm not saying that for like "Hooray, MTG!" as I love both games, but there is significantly less RNG. I will agree that the mulligan rule in HS + the fact that mana crystals are a given as opposed to something you need to draw leads to higher variance in actual games- but there's very little actual randomness to the game. Effects are more often than not clearly defined and not the flip of a coin all the way up to the roll of an [X] sided die where X= the number of creatures printed in the game.
Also, I think the OP was implying he had previously reached legend multiple times, took a long break from ranked, and started again in TGT release. In any event he/she wasn't very clear.
Lol did you ever notice the land cards that you needed to play cards? Yeah so I would say maybe 1/5 games a player would not actually be able to play the game because they dont draw them. just because you cant see the RNG in magic like you see your shredder shit out a millhouse doesnt mean it isnt there. in reality 1/10 chance to lose the game is a much more RNG dependent factor, over Knife Juggler RNG.
ever notice the land cards that you needed to play cards? Yeah so I would say maybe 1/5 games a player would not actually be able to play the game because they dont draw them. just because you cant see the RNG in magic like you see your shredder shit out a millhouse doesnt mean it isnt there. in reality 1/10 chance to lose the game is much more RNG dependent factor, over Knife Juggler RNG.
There is actually less RNG in Magic than Hearthstone by a substantial margin. I'm not saying that for like "Hooray, MTG!" as I love both games, but there is significantly less RNG.
I will agree that the mulligan rule in HS + the fact that mana crystals are a given as opposed to something you need to draw leads to higher variance in actual games- but there's very little actual randomness to the game.
Lol did you ever notice the land cards that you needed to play cards? Yeah so I would say maybe 1/5 games a player would not actually be able to play the game because they dont draw them. just because you cant see the RNG in magic like you see your shredder shit out a millhouse doesnt mean it isnt there. in reality 1/10 chance to lose the game is a much more RNG dependent factor, over Knife Juggler RNG.
Apparently nobody read my post, but this ^^. Exactly this^^. MTG has more RNG, hands down.
There is actually less RNG in Magic than Hearthstone by a substantial margin.
No, Magic's RNG is just in a different place, specifically it's damned land cards. In Hearthstone, you have a reliable and totally non-RNG-dependent resource system of mana crystals. In Magic, mana clump and mana screw (both the inevitable result of RNG) statistically mean that less than half of games are played with both players getting a reasonable resource curve.
If you played magic I would assume that you know there is a lot more RNG in magic.
What? I don't play Magic anymore, but I did for 4 or 5 years when I was young, and used to have a pretty big collection. I don't remember a single card with a casual effect or casual target.
Then your memory is bad... MTG has tons of cards that weren't competitively viable...
What? I don't play Magic anymore, but I did for 4 or 5 years when I was young, and used to have a pretty big collection. I don't remember a single card with a casual effect or casual target.
Lands actually make the game better imo because it imposes a cost to putting more expensive (mana-wise) cards in your deck. You can't play a face-hunter like mono-red deck with random 6-drops and win because you curved Leper Gnome into Highmane. Your draws on turn 6 are more Leper Gnomes. The Hearthstone mulligan where you can run a few high-cost cards in your aggro deck and rarely be punished aggravates this more.
Whenever I see a Magic deck with a curve like that (Mardu Dargons in current standard comes to mind) I joke that it looks like a Hearthstone deck and only wins the games where it draws its curve in the right order.
I'm on the fence about this on one hand I feel as if both games have substantial RNG. MTG has more devastating RNG because you can simply lose games from poor starting hands. However, you can keep mulliganing until you get a good starting hand whereas Hearthstone you only have one chance to mulligan. Hearthstone can be more forgiving in most circumstances. MTG has no randomized effects because the game is physical whereas with TGT and many of the really strong and prevalent cards in Hearthstone are all based on randomness. (Piloted, Flamewaker, Dr Boom, Unstable Portal, Murloc Knight, Kings Elekk, etc)
I'd just say both have different types of RNG but still both of them are based on coin flips in some situations.
"In this world where time is your enemy, it is my greatest ally. This grand game of life that you think you play in fact plays you. To that I say... Let the games begin!" - Nefarian
For ever one meager upside you can dig up for the existence of land cards, there's a landslide (har har) of negatives. Resource cards are by far the worst part of any card game they're an integral part of, and Hearthstone's lack of them is one of its greatest strengths.
For ever one meager upside you can dig up for the existence of land cards, there's a landslide (har har) of negatives. Resource cards are by far the worst part of any card game they're an integral part of, and Hearthstone's lack of them is one of its greatest strengths.
Really? Land destruction/denial was my favorite deck in MTG. I think having more strategies to win = better game. Land destruction, graveyard recursion, hand destruction, control with counters, all added to what made Magic so much fun IMHO. This Aversion folks have to denial for hearthstone is purile to my mind.
lands keep players honest. you see some ridiculous things in hearthstone because it LACKS a land type resource system. you see aggro decks that get away with being aggro because they can compete late game by playing later game cards.
is this a good thing or a bad thing? i dont know, but i'm just saying there IS actually a reason for the land system in magic, if it was as bad as a lot of hearthstone players think it wouldnt have been around for 20+ years.
Land destruction/denial was my favorite deck in MTG.
I'm not going to say that you're a terrible person, because that's probably not entirely true I guess, but our definitions of what makes a good game are fundamentally incompatible. And that's fine, but you already have then a game for you that allows you your hand destruction, resource destruction, infinite counter decks that win by trollishly not letting your opponent play the damn game, and that game is Magic. Let Hearthstone be for other people then. Magic doesn't have to cater to me, Hearthstone doesn't have to cater to you, and we can both get what we want, just not in the same game.
This is maybe off-topic though. Really, resource destruction/denial isn't a necessary part of games with resource cards any more than it's a necessary part of games without them, and I'm not sure how it necessarily relates to the question of RNG in general or the question of RNG as part of resource systems.
I challenge you to explain WTF that's even supposed to mean. And "Waaah, I hate aggro!" doesn't really cut it.
Also, do you concede that whole point about Magic's land card resource system being massively more RNG-bent than Hearthstone's? Because I guess that was really the major point there. If you're fine with it because it's just RNG "that you like" as opposed to RNG "that you don't like", then we're going to have to get more specific than just complaining about RNG itself.
Arena does feel a liitle more RNG to me than last season. More kill or lose cards now, and it seems like I'm having more difficulty getting either large minion removal or mass removal now.
So, it does feel like I'm winning or losing based more on the luck of the draw than before and less on my skill. But, it might just be that I've had a lot of bad arena draws where I'm just not being offered spells often. For instance, the last 2 times I played Paladin I didn't get either a Truesilver or a Consecrate. Made it really hard to deal with stuff that got buffed and prone to either steamrolling opponent or being steamrolled with little inbetween.
Now than I think about it, it's been more than just paladin. I didn't get flamestrike or blizzard when playing mage and didn't get swipe the 2x I played Druid.
Like I said, it could just be a series of bad draws, but, it does 'feel' like it's harder to get those board wipes/removal now.
Galavant Animation
My favorite is the constant telling us how wonderful he is.. that's the controversial part. and by that I mean.. lol wut?
holy crap i'll remove credentials since most of you are making a big deal out of nothing
There is actually less RNG in Magic than Hearthstone by a substantial margin. I'm not saying that for like "Hooray, MTG!" as I love both games, but there is significantly less RNG. I will agree that the mulligan rule in HS + the fact that mana crystals are a given as opposed to something you need to draw leads to higher variance in actual games- but there's very little actual randomness to the game. Effects are more often than not clearly defined and not the flip of a coin all the way up to the roll of an [X] sided die where X= the number of creatures printed in the game.
Also, I think the OP was implying he had previously reached legend multiple times, took a long break from ranked, and started again in TGT release. In any event he/she wasn't very clear.
Balancing busted cards version 1.0.
Lol did you ever notice the land cards that you needed to play cards? Yeah so I would say maybe 1/5 games a player would not actually be able to play the game because they dont draw them. just because you cant see the RNG in magic like you see your shredder shit out a millhouse doesnt mean it isnt there. in reality 1/10 chance to lose the game is a much more RNG dependent factor, over Knife Juggler RNG.
ever notice the land cards that you needed to play cards? Yeah so I would say maybe 1/5 games a player would not actually be able to play the game because they dont draw them. just because you cant see the RNG in magic like you see your shredder shit out a millhouse doesnt mean it isnt there. in reality 1/10 chance to lose the game is much more RNG dependent factor, over Knife Juggler RNG.
Apparently nobody read my post, but this ^^. Exactly this^^. MTG has more RNG, hands down.
No, Magic's RNG is just in a different place, specifically it's damned land cards. In Hearthstone, you have a reliable and totally non-RNG-dependent resource system of mana crystals. In Magic, mana clump and mana screw (both the inevitable result of RNG) statistically mean that less than half of games are played with both players getting a reasonable resource curve.
Then your memory is bad... MTG has tons of cards that weren't competitively viable...
Do you remember the Land system?
Lands actually make the game better imo because it imposes a cost to putting more expensive (mana-wise) cards in your deck. You can't play a face-hunter like mono-red deck with random 6-drops and win because you curved Leper Gnome into Highmane. Your draws on turn 6 are more Leper Gnomes. The Hearthstone mulligan where you can run a few high-cost cards in your aggro deck and rarely be punished aggravates this more.
Whenever I see a Magic deck with a curve like that (Mardu Dargons in current standard comes to mind) I joke that it looks like a Hearthstone deck and only wins the games where it draws its curve in the right order.
The game has 2 Problems
1. OTHK Burst Decks
2. Bad class balancing
Nobody knows why Miracle was nerfed and this patron bulshit is still araound.
I'm on the fence about this on one hand I feel as if both games have substantial RNG. MTG has more devastating RNG because you can simply lose games from poor starting hands. However, you can keep mulliganing until you get a good starting hand whereas Hearthstone you only have one chance to mulligan. Hearthstone can be more forgiving in most circumstances. MTG has no randomized effects because the game is physical whereas with TGT and many of the really strong and prevalent cards in Hearthstone are all based on randomness. (Piloted, Flamewaker, Dr Boom, Unstable Portal, Murloc Knight, Kings Elekk, etc)
I'd just say both have different types of RNG but still both of them are based on coin flips in some situations.
"In this world where time is your enemy, it is my greatest ally. This grand game of life that you think you play in fact plays you. To that I say... Let the games begin!" - Nefarian
For ever one meager upside you can dig up for the existence of land cards, there's a landslide (har har) of negatives. Resource cards are by far the worst part of any card game they're an integral part of, and Hearthstone's lack of them is one of its greatest strengths.
Really? Land destruction/denial was my favorite deck in MTG. I think having more strategies to win = better game. Land destruction, graveyard recursion, hand destruction, control with counters, all added to what made Magic so much fun IMHO. This Aversion folks have to denial for hearthstone is purile to my mind.
Galavant Animation
lands keep players honest. you see some ridiculous things in hearthstone because it LACKS a land type resource system. you see aggro decks that get away with being aggro because they can compete late game by playing later game cards.
is this a good thing or a bad thing? i dont know, but i'm just saying there IS actually a reason for the land system in magic, if it was as bad as a lot of hearthstone players think it wouldnt have been around for 20+ years.
I'm not going to say that you're a terrible person, because that's probably not entirely true I guess, but our definitions of what makes a good game are fundamentally incompatible. And that's fine, but you already have then a game for you that allows you your hand destruction, resource destruction, infinite counter decks that win by trollishly not letting your opponent play the damn game, and that game is Magic. Let Hearthstone be for other people then. Magic doesn't have to cater to me, Hearthstone doesn't have to cater to you, and we can both get what we want, just not in the same game.
This is maybe off-topic though. Really, resource destruction/denial isn't a necessary part of games with resource cards any more than it's a necessary part of games without them, and I'm not sure how it necessarily relates to the question of RNG in general or the question of RNG as part of resource systems.
I challenge you to explain WTF that's even supposed to mean. And "Waaah, I hate aggro!" doesn't really cut it.
Also, do you concede that whole point about Magic's land card resource system being massively more RNG-bent than Hearthstone's? Because I guess that was really the major point there. If you're fine with it because it's just RNG "that you like" as opposed to RNG "that you don't like", then we're going to have to get more specific than just complaining about RNG itself.
Of every card game I have played, this one is the most random luck dependent.
So... control those variables. And then work with them.
Priest (60) / Warrior (49) / Hunter (47) / Mage (45) / Warlock (36) / Druid (35) / Shaman (34) / Paladin (33) / Rogue (19)
Whew, I'm glad I'm not an entirely terrible person for utilizing one of the intended stategies of MTG.
Galavant Animation