Yes, I know that even with the best Magic deck you can lose if you start with no (or only) Lands, but other than that, are there actual cards with the word "random" on it? I think there were a couple of "flip a coin" stuffs, but not so important that could win or lose the game alone.
As i said the RNG that isnt blunt is the RNG that effects the game. Because "even with the best Magic deck you can lose if you start with no (or only) Lands"
And the chance of not having Lands or creatures is a lot higher than the chance of having only one factor; minions. There for RNG loses you a lot more games than it would in HS.
I don't know why people continue to tear themselves apart mentally at the seams. Why is it SO hard for people to play games that have a decent amount of random effects and can simply never accept it? It's not worth getting upset over. There is randomness in the game. Varying games have varying levels of randomness. If you play a game, you need to mentally accept whatever random mechanics that particular game has before you sit down and play. I'm not saying I'm perfect or anyone is and that you won't ever get frustrated, we all do, but to blame the RNG instead of mentally accepting it's something that you cannot control is just silly. It becomes SO much easier when you just ACCEPT it.
I'm actually surprised nobody (sorry if i missed it) picked apart his original post where it should have been - and that's at the OP's mentality. When you blame a game's randomness for your losses, you've already lost because you're deflecting the responsibility away from yourself, therefore there's nothing you could of done (in your mind, which is completely false) and therefore you cannot improve and you won't imrpove. You're taking the opportunity to get better away from yourself. Once you make a decision to blame RNG, nothing you do afterward is going to work out well for you because you've already mentally fucked yourself. It's a wrap at that point. The mental side of card games is SO much more important than people give it credit for. If we're pitting two players against each other with equal skill level, randomness isn't going to decide a majority of the games, it's the person's mentality. How they respond to adversity, whether or not a coin flip loss tilts them, things like that all matter a shit ton.
People bring up arguments often about which games require more or less skill all the time. If you want a game with 0% luck, as has been said many times before, play something like chess. But to put a game like Hearthstone, Magic, Poker, or whatever down and say it's somehow LESS of a game because you can't find a solution other than blaming the game is so stupid. It's not less of a game, it's a DIFFERENT game. Be smarter than that, demand more of yourself than that and raise your standards. It's easy to blame RNG, that's why 90% or more of people do it. BE DIFFERENT. Think different if you want to be an elite player in games like this, don't think like everyone else.
You even said in your original post that you were playing a deck that you had MASTERED and that it wasn't difficult. Really bro? You've MASTERED the deck you were playing? Last time I checked it takes 10,000 hours to master a craft. Even if we could all unanimously agree on who the best hearthstone player in the world is, which would be near impossible, even THAT person wouldn't have mastered ANY decks. He might play them exceptionally well, but he/she hasn't mastered a goddamn thing. Learning is a continual process, but also, back to what I said about mentality, if you've told yourself that you've mastered a deck, you can no longer improve therefore it must be the games fault or randomness that you lost.
TL;DR Fix your mentality, nothing about Hearthstone is broken or wrong, it's your mentality that's wrong, take the game at face value and for what it is, and use the randomness to your advantage when you can.
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.
what i mean by that is this,
its turn 8, in magic your aggro opponent might be out of gas by then. on turn 8 your opponent wont be playing large drops because they cant afford to slot them in their deck. you play an aggro deck, you focus on the early game, and if your opponent can make it later into the game they are "supposed to win". basically i like how aggro decks actually have a weakness in magic, unlike hearthstone. imo aggro has too much gas for the late game in hearthstone.
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.
what i mean by that is this,
its turn 8, in magic your aggro opponent might be out of gas by then. on turn 8 your opponent wont be playing large drops because they cant afford to slot them in their deck. you play an aggro deck, you focus on the early game, and if your opponent can make it later into the game they are "supposed to win". basically i like how aggro decks actually have a weakness in magic, unlike hearthstone. imo aggro has too much gas for the late game in hearthstone.
Aggro too much gas in the late-game in Hearthstone. How it this possible ? If the aggro deck has some gas left when it reaches turn 9 then it's clearly more a mid-game deck then an early deck. You might be secluded between tempo and aggro.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Used to be a proud Handlock player.
Legend 17 times.
Still flirting with the ladder from times to times with Renolock.
I don't know why people continue to tear themselves apart mentally at the seams. Why is it SO hard for people to play games that have a decent amount of random effects and can simply never accept it? It's not worth getting upset over. There is randomness in the game. Varying games have varying levels of randomness. If you play a game, you need to mentally accept whatever random mechanics that particular game has before you sit down and play. I'm not saying I'm perfect or anyone is and that you won't ever get frustrated, we all do, but to blame the RNG instead of mentally accepting it's something that you cannot control is just silly. It becomes SO much easier when you just ACCEPT it.
I'm actually surprised nobody (sorry if i missed it) picked apart his original post where it should have been - and that's at the OP's mentality. When you blame a game's randomness for your losses, you've already lost because you're deflecting the responsibility away from yourself, therefore there's nothing you could of done (in your mind, which is completely false) and therefore you cannot improve and you won't imrpove. You're taking the opportunity to get better away from yourself. Once you make a decision to blame RNG, nothing you do afterward is going to work out well for you because you've already mentally fucked yourself. It's a wrap at that point. The mental side of card games is SO much more important than people give it credit for. If we're pitting two players against each other with equal skill level, randomness isn't going to decide a majority of the games, it's the person's mentality. How they respond to adversity, whether or not a coin flip loss tilts them, things like that all matter a shit ton.
People bring up arguments often about which games require more or less skill all the time. If you want a game with 0% luck, as has been said many times before, play something like chess. But to put a game like Hearthstone, Magic, Poker, or whatever down and say it's somehow LESS of a game because you can't find a solution other than blaming the game is so stupid. It's not less of a game, it's a DIFFERENT game. Be smarter than that, demand more of yourself than that and raise your standards. It's easy to blame RNG, that's why 90% or more of people do it. BE DIFFERENT. Think different if you want to be an elite player in games like this, don't think like everyone else.
You even said in your original post that you were playing a deck that you had MASTERED and that it wasn't difficult. Really bro? You've MASTERED the deck you were playing? Last time I checked it takes 10,000 hours to master a craft. Even if we could all unanimously agree on who the best hearthstone player in the world is, which would be near impossible, even THAT person wouldn't have mastered ANY decks. He might play them exceptionally well, but he/she hasn't mastered a goddamn thing. Learning is a continual process, but also, back to what I said about mentality, if you've told yourself that you've mastered a deck, you can no longer improve therefore it must be the games fault or randomness that you lost.
TL;DR Fix your mentality, nothing about Hearthstone is broken or wrong, it's your mentality that's wrong, take the game at face value and for what it is, and use the randomness to your advantage when you can.
i have no clue how you got any of that from my post. i deleted the part that said how long i've been playing card games(all of my life) the only people who constantly blame RNG as the only reason they lose are players who are new to card games. i've been playing card games for far too long to have that kind of mentality. I also stated I also dont think my wins were skill based. A lot of my wins felt like i just drew the right curve and got the right RNG from my RNG cards.
i said it because it's everywhere in your original post. you said you've mastered the deck you were playing and went on to say it isn't even difficult. that line right there would be all i would need to know where your problems lie. it means you think you have no learning left to do, that the game from that point on is entirely left up to randomness. you also mentioned a sample of 40 games. 40 games is an insanely small sample size in the grand scheme of things. anyway i'm just genuinely trying to help you.
also you say in your original post that it isn't about whether or not you're outplaying your opponent or they're outplaying you. if your not slowly moving up, you're getting outplayed. you might not see how or why, but they're making slightly better decision than you over time. that's why it's so important to be self critical of your game instead of passing blame. you even bashed a rank 200 legend player for playing grim patron poorly - i didn't see the game so i can't say definitively, but if he's at rank 200 and your rank 1 and struggling, it's your skill level not randomness. and if you're confident it is randomness, volume and sample size will place you above him eventually. that is a mathematical certainty if you are better than he is.
I can tell you the way the RNG comes in to play is less frustrating in magic for sure. You double the cards in your deck sure, but you also get four copies so it's really not that different. Sure you can flood out, but there is also much better card draw to avoid doing so/build in a way you can't.
Also I'm aware Kibler is in the HoF, which is irrelevant in a conversation about RNG. I've played for 15 years, I've played thousands of games, I have a pretty good idea about how the games go. It's definitely not 20-30% of games end because of randomness. That would be on average 1 every match or two, which I disagree with. Somebody might get frustrated at drawing a couple lands in a row late game, but if a game was that tight that it ruined the game for them they probably could've played something differently earlier.
Also the fact that the games that don't end due to randomness require some percentage greater skill (which you can't really put a value on) makes it far more bearable. Hearthstone is a super basic game from a strategy perspective, where as a long game of magic requires so many more decisions that matter so much more (and sometimes are a LOT harder than the hardest decision you've made in hearthstone). At this point I am going to bow out of this discussion, I'm sure saying Hearth is a super easy game to play on a Hearthstone forum will encounter some amount of backlash, which I don't really care enough to fire back at.
I'm sure saying Hearth is a super easy game to play on a Hearthstone forum will encounter some amount of backlash, which I don't really care enough to fire back at.
Honestly, that's probably the worst part of what you said. You think we don't know the game is relatively simple? That's part of the selling point to us. The elegant simplicity makes matches quicker and makes the game in general more casual and accessible.
This is a surprise to me. I haven't played MTG for such a long time, when did the tradewind guys come out, then, but I don't remember there being much draw to speak of, at least not compared to what Hearthstone has.
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.
what i mean by that is this,
its turn 8, in magic your aggro opponent might be out of gas by then. on turn 8 your opponent wont be playing large drops because they cant afford to slot them in their deck. you play an aggro deck, you focus on the early game, and if your opponent can make it later into the game they are "supposed to win". basically i like how aggro decks actually have a weakness in magic, unlike hearthstone. imo aggro has too much gas for the late game in hearthstone.
Aggro too much gas in the late-game in Hearthstone. How it this possible ? If the aggro deck has some gas left when it reaches turn 9 then it's clearly more a mid-game deck then an early deck. You might be secluded between tempo and aggro.
It very much seems like he's confusing Tempo with Aggro. Tempo never runs out of steam but cannot recover from a lost board. Aggro burns out fast and will be desperately cobbling some last ditch burn by around turn 7. The exceptions are very particular decks like old-school zoo's "second wind" thanks to their card draw and Paladin's Divine Favor, both of which are unreliable and fightable. However, I'm betting that he's referring more to things like Midrange hunter and Tempo mage, which many mistakenly confuse for aggro and thus wonder why the deck keeps running strong by turn 8.
Which is WHY you have to use the terms properly . Otherwise you'll get confused why certain decks don't work the way you 'think' they do. Thinking that HS 'burn decks' doesn't burn out quickly is a perfect example.
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.
Well firstly it's primarily the randomness of the mana flood/starve that you can get with the land cards in MtG.
Secondly, there are quite a few MtG cards with random effects, mainly in red. This is one of my favourites, since it relies on randomness to win you the game:
Well firstly it's primarily the randomness of the mana flood/starve that you can get with the land cards in MtG.
*a voice from the ages passed* Llanowar Elves disagree. You get two forests, two Priests of Titania and suddenly no LD can ever wreck you, since your 1/1 elves just tap you mana for something SO huge that can only be countered by direct destruction. So why your black opponent gets three swamps for Rain of Tears, you set up a Verdant Force (or a similar fatso) and just make them be STOMPED. And those Llanowar Elves got brothers from a neighboring forest, so there can be 8 of them in deck, that's as good as having 8 forests swapped for somwthing more useful.
@Vesperbot And yet, mana screw/flood is a thing. You still have your lands in your deck (probably 17-18 even in an elf deck), and so land flood happens. I know it does. I spend many years playing MtG. :)
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.
You act like that is not a possibility in Hearthstone. Who is to say that something along those lines couldn't be added in the future?
its turn 8, in magic your aggro opponent might be out of gas by then. on turn 8 your opponent wont be playing large drops because they cant afford to slot them in their deck. you play an aggro deck, you focus on the early game, and if your opponent can make it later into the game they are "supposed to win". basically i like how aggro decks actually have a weakness in magic, unlike hearthstone. imo aggro has too much gas for the late game in hearthstone.
Aggro too much gas in the late-game in Hearthstone. How it this possible ? If the aggro deck has some gas left when it reaches turn 9 then it's clearly more a mid-game deck then an early deck. You might be secluded between tempo and aggro.
I totally agree with FryChikN.
I take full-face hunter deck and put highmanes into it. Why? Because I can. And it's actually good here. Before turn6 I totally can afford to have some unplayable card in hand, and at t6 it's a nightmare for my opponent.
In MTG we have higher difference between mana costs and draw useless lands 1/3 of the time. 5-mana cards in MTG is something like 8-mana cards in HS, 3-mana - something like ~4-5 mana cards. That means two things: you draw less as aggro (2/3 drops are relevant, 1/3 is mana), your opponent get faster to the point when you can do nothing against them.
So when you choose to get less lands and more cheap creatures in MTG and you got boardwiped t3 (again, RNG luck to get that boardwipe in time, but meh) - it's the game. Cuz you can do nothing against t3-t4 drops, or your opponent plays full-control and will have enough mana each turn to remove everything you drop. If you somehow chosen to add 4-mana creature to aggro deck in MTG - that will have two outcomes. First: you have enough mana to play it, but that mana cards substitute for early creature cards, so you lose. Second: you don't have mana to play it, it's a dead drop.
So yeah, I like HS mana system more, but I totally agree that aggro just never ever runs off steam here, if you don't heal up high. And that's stupid. Aggro needs to be much more punishable to counter the fact it's faster to rank with it.
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.
I'm on your team, Asylum. Lands were terrible. Entire matches could be decided either by clumping lands or not seeing one. So, matches you're not actually seeing any play, just frustration. And the much more limited mulligan sistem didn't help MTG either.
Card draw has WAY more effect on the outcome of the game than what character Knife Juggler hits or how many Imps get spawned by Implosion. The proof is that when you need a certain card and get it the game magically swings to your side. If you do NOT get a card you need then magically you are likely screwed. There are very few times where "superior skill" will get you out of tough situations. Can your deck synthesis help? Sure. Can top players find that combo or make that play to maybe stave off lethal? They can. However, the vast majority of the time the starting cards and what you draw over the course of the first 4-6 turns dictates what's going to happen.
it is what it is. We all benefit from and get screwed by it on a daily basis. Period.
The thing that is good about lands isn't that they require the right mix of lands and spells to play; the good thing is that they IMPOSE A COST on deckbuilding.
You can run a 21-land mono color deck that tops out at 4 mana cards and almost never have mana problems, or you can run a 27 land control deck with lots of card draw and always have stuff to do, but in both cases THERE IS A COST. You sacrifice power for consistency by playing fewer colors, or playing lands that have spell-like effects but don't make colored mana. You sacrifice tempo for consistency and always having spells to play by playing lots of lands and card draw. etc.
Now, part of what makes Magic such a great game is that there are SO MANY cards and SO MANY interactions in every zone, and a lot of those interactions are due to the mana system. A lot of Magic players that complain about mana problems are losing a lot of value with bad mulligan decisions, scrying incorrectly, playing cards in the wrong order (you should scry THEN draw or whatever). Also, it's a card game; every decision is percentage-based and any one game isn't reflective of your overall skill. Results over time are what matter because you have an equal degree of luck and bad luck in the long-term.
If another game had that depth and wealth of interactions while having a different resource system I would definitely play it. As is though, Magic is simply the best TCG that exists.
The thing that is good about lands isn't that they require the right mix of lands and spells to play; the good thing is that they IMPOSE A COST on deckbuilding.
This is a good thing because...? It's not like other card games without resource cards (including Hearthstone, and Hearthstone isn't the only one) don't have costs on deckbuilding. They're just different ones that don't statistically require that your resource system end up screwed up in about of the third of the games you play.
I'm sorry, that just sounds like a really poorly conceived and contrived, almost fanboyish after-the-fact attempt at justification. You don't need to do that. It's okay to like Magic despite it's flaws. I l like plenty of games (including Hearthstone) despite their flaws, flaws that aren't a big deal to me but that I realize are justified deal-breakers for others.
We are by now conceding the point, though, that the resource card system is a not-insignificant source of RNG though, right? Because I think that was the major point here. If you're of the opinion that MtG is the better game, I highly disagree, but that's fine. I'm just making sure we're not still pretending that it's superior in terms of RNG rather than just different.
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.
I don't believe you've played very much MTG in the last 10+ years if you truly believe that less than half of all MTG games are played with both players getting reasonable mana curve. I play a lot of HS and a lot MTG and while yes, you do get mana flooded/screwed and it happens to opponents as well, it is much below 50% of the games that is determined by that.
With that being said, there are plenty of decks in HS that can get screwed by drawing a bunch of their mid-late game cards early and then topdecking cards like Zombie Chow late. Unlike MTG, however, there is a TREMENDOUS amount of games that are determined by a series of coin flips aside from your draw. You have cards like Knife Juggler, Implosion, Flamewaker, and Ragnaros the Firelord, Dr. Boom, Ysera, and even Shaman hero ability having big impact in the current meta and that's just on the lower spectrum of RNG with more defined random numbers (a coin flip up to the roll of a standard die in most cases). Then you also have Unstable Portal, Ram Wrangler, Bane of Doom, Webspinner, Piloted Shredder, and Murloc Knight now that have huge permutations that can just break games on pure dumb lick (i.e. I don't even have the cards that are now the threats IN MY DECK - they just poof into existence based on my luck). There is no card in MTG that I'm aware of that just randomly puts cards into the game that weren't in either deck to start (there are a few that say 'from outside the game' but that's limited to your 15-card sideboard).
As i said the RNG that isnt blunt is the RNG that effects the game. Because "even with the best Magic deck you can lose if you start with no (or only) Lands"
And the chance of not having Lands or creatures is a lot higher than the chance of having only one factor; minions. There for RNG loses you a lot more games than it would in HS.
I don't know why people continue to tear themselves apart mentally at the seams. Why is it SO hard for people to play games that have a decent amount of random effects and can simply never accept it? It's not worth getting upset over. There is randomness in the game. Varying games have varying levels of randomness. If you play a game, you need to mentally accept whatever random mechanics that particular game has before you sit down and play. I'm not saying I'm perfect or anyone is and that you won't ever get frustrated, we all do, but to blame the RNG instead of mentally accepting it's something that you cannot control is just silly. It becomes SO much easier when you just ACCEPT it.
I'm actually surprised nobody (sorry if i missed it) picked apart his original post where it should have been - and that's at the OP's mentality. When you blame a game's randomness for your losses, you've already lost because you're deflecting the responsibility away from yourself, therefore there's nothing you could of done (in your mind, which is completely false) and therefore you cannot improve and you won't imrpove. You're taking the opportunity to get better away from yourself. Once you make a decision to blame RNG, nothing you do afterward is going to work out well for you because you've already mentally fucked yourself. It's a wrap at that point. The mental side of card games is SO much more important than people give it credit for. If we're pitting two players against each other with equal skill level, randomness isn't going to decide a majority of the games, it's the person's mentality. How they respond to adversity, whether or not a coin flip loss tilts them, things like that all matter a shit ton.
People bring up arguments often about which games require more or less skill all the time. If you want a game with 0% luck, as has been said many times before, play something like chess. But to put a game like Hearthstone, Magic, Poker, or whatever down and say it's somehow LESS of a game because you can't find a solution other than blaming the game is so stupid. It's not less of a game, it's a DIFFERENT game. Be smarter than that, demand more of yourself than that and raise your standards. It's easy to blame RNG, that's why 90% or more of people do it. BE DIFFERENT. Think different if you want to be an elite player in games like this, don't think like everyone else.
You even said in your original post that you were playing a deck that you had MASTERED and that it wasn't difficult. Really bro? You've MASTERED the deck you were playing? Last time I checked it takes 10,000 hours to master a craft. Even if we could all unanimously agree on who the best hearthstone player in the world is, which would be near impossible, even THAT person wouldn't have mastered ANY decks. He might play them exceptionally well, but he/she hasn't mastered a goddamn thing. Learning is a continual process, but also, back to what I said about mentality, if you've told yourself that you've mastered a deck, you can no longer improve therefore it must be the games fault or randomness that you lost.
TL;DR Fix your mentality, nothing about Hearthstone is broken or wrong, it's your mentality that's wrong, take the game at face value and for what it is, and use the randomness to your advantage when you can.
what i mean by that is this,
its turn 8, in magic your aggro opponent might be out of gas by then. on turn 8 your opponent wont be playing large drops because they cant afford to slot them in their deck. you play an aggro deck, you focus on the early game, and if your opponent can make it later into the game they are "supposed to win". basically i like how aggro decks actually have a weakness in magic, unlike hearthstone. imo aggro has too much gas for the late game in hearthstone.
Aggro too much gas in the late-game in Hearthstone. How it this possible ? If the aggro deck has some gas left when it reaches turn 9 then it's clearly more a mid-game deck then an early deck. You might be secluded between tempo and aggro.
Used to be a proud Handlock player.
Legend 17 times.
Still flirting with the ladder from times to times with Renolock.
i have no clue how you got any of that from my post. i deleted the part that said how long i've been playing card games(all of my life) the only people who constantly blame RNG as the only reason they lose are players who are new to card games. i've been playing card games for far too long to have that kind of mentality. I also stated I also dont think my wins were skill based. A lot of my wins felt like i just drew the right curve and got the right RNG from my RNG cards.
i said it because it's everywhere in your original post. you said you've mastered the deck you were playing and went on to say it isn't even difficult. that line right there would be all i would need to know where your problems lie. it means you think you have no learning left to do, that the game from that point on is entirely left up to randomness. you also mentioned a sample of 40 games. 40 games is an insanely small sample size in the grand scheme of things. anyway i'm just genuinely trying to help you.
also you say in your original post that it isn't about whether or not you're outplaying your opponent or they're outplaying you. if your not slowly moving up, you're getting outplayed. you might not see how or why, but they're making slightly better decision than you over time. that's why it's so important to be self critical of your game instead of passing blame. you even bashed a rank 200 legend player for playing grim patron poorly - i didn't see the game so i can't say definitively, but if he's at rank 200 and your rank 1 and struggling, it's your skill level not randomness. and if you're confident it is randomness, volume and sample size will place you above him eventually. that is a mathematical certainty if you are better than he is.
I can tell you the way the RNG comes in to play is less frustrating in magic for sure. You double the cards in your deck sure, but you also get four copies so it's really not that different. Sure you can flood out, but there is also much better card draw to avoid doing so/build in a way you can't.
Also I'm aware Kibler is in the HoF, which is irrelevant in a conversation about RNG. I've played for 15 years, I've played thousands of games, I have a pretty good idea about how the games go. It's definitely not 20-30% of games end because of randomness. That would be on average 1 every match or two, which I disagree with. Somebody might get frustrated at drawing a couple lands in a row late game, but if a game was that tight that it ruined the game for them they probably could've played something differently earlier.
Also the fact that the games that don't end due to randomness require some percentage greater skill (which you can't really put a value on) makes it far more bearable. Hearthstone is a super basic game from a strategy perspective, where as a long game of magic requires so many more decisions that matter so much more (and sometimes are a LOT harder than the hardest decision you've made in hearthstone). At this point I am going to bow out of this discussion, I'm sure saying Hearth is a super easy game to play on a Hearthstone forum will encounter some amount of backlash, which I don't really care enough to fire back at.
Honestly, that's probably the worst part of what you said. You think we don't know the game is relatively simple? That's part of the selling point to us. The elegant simplicity makes matches quicker and makes the game in general more casual and accessible.
This is a surprise to me. I haven't played MTG for such a long time, when did the tradewind guys come out, then, but I don't remember there being much draw to speak of, at least not compared to what Hearthstone has.
Galavant Animation
It very much seems like he's confusing Tempo with Aggro. Tempo never runs out of steam but cannot recover from a lost board. Aggro burns out fast and will be desperately cobbling some last ditch burn by around turn 7. The exceptions are very particular decks like old-school zoo's "second wind" thanks to their card draw and Paladin's Divine Favor, both of which are unreliable and fightable. However, I'm betting that he's referring more to things like Midrange hunter and Tempo mage, which many mistakenly confuse for aggro and thus wonder why the deck keeps running strong by turn 8.
Which is WHY you have to use the terms properly . Otherwise you'll get confused why certain decks don't work the way you 'think' they do. Thinking that HS 'burn decks' doesn't burn out quickly is a perfect example.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Well firstly it's primarily the randomness of the mana flood/starve that you can get with the land cards in MtG.
Secondly, there are quite a few MtG cards with random effects, mainly in red. This is one of my favourites, since it relies on randomness to win you the game:
*a voice from the ages passed* Llanowar Elves disagree. You get two forests, two Priests of Titania and suddenly no LD can ever wreck you, since your 1/1 elves just tap you mana for something SO huge that can only be countered by direct destruction. So why your black opponent gets three swamps for Rain of Tears, you set up a Verdant Force (or a similar fatso) and just make them be STOMPED. And those Llanowar Elves got brothers from a neighboring forest, so there can be 8 of them in deck, that's as good as having 8 forests swapped for somwthing more useful.
There is a lot of steak here...
@Vesperbot And yet, mana screw/flood is a thing. You still have your lands in your deck (probably 17-18 even in an elf deck), and so land flood happens. I know it does. I spend many years playing MtG. :)
You act like that is not a possibility in Hearthstone. Who is to say that something along those lines couldn't be added in the future?
I totally agree with FryChikN.
I take full-face hunter deck and put highmanes into it. Why? Because I can. And it's actually good here. Before turn6 I totally can afford to have some unplayable card in hand, and at t6 it's a nightmare for my opponent.
In MTG we have higher difference between mana costs and draw useless lands 1/3 of the time. 5-mana cards in MTG is something like 8-mana cards in HS, 3-mana - something like ~4-5 mana cards. That means two things: you draw less as aggro (2/3 drops are relevant, 1/3 is mana), your opponent get faster to the point when you can do nothing against them.
So when you choose to get less lands and more cheap creatures in MTG and you got boardwiped t3 (again, RNG luck to get that boardwipe in time, but meh) - it's the game. Cuz you can do nothing against t3-t4 drops, or your opponent plays full-control and will have enough mana each turn to remove everything you drop. If you somehow chosen to add 4-mana creature to aggro deck in MTG - that will have two outcomes. First: you have enough mana to play it, but that mana cards substitute for early creature cards, so you lose. Second: you don't have mana to play it, it's a dead drop.
So yeah, I like HS mana system more, but I totally agree that aggro just never ever runs off steam here, if you don't heal up high. And that's stupid. Aggro needs to be much more punishable to counter the fact it's faster to rank with it.
I'm on your team, Asylum. Lands were terrible. Entire matches could be decided either by clumping lands or not seeing one. So, matches you're not actually seeing any play, just frustration. And the much more limited mulligan sistem didn't help MTG either.
Card draw has WAY more effect on the outcome of the game than what character Knife Juggler hits or how many Imps get spawned by Implosion. The proof is that when you need a certain card and get it the game magically swings to your side. If you do NOT get a card you need then magically you are likely screwed. There are very few times where "superior skill" will get you out of tough situations. Can your deck synthesis help? Sure. Can top players find that combo or make that play to maybe stave off lethal? They can. However, the vast majority of the time the starting cards and what you draw over the course of the first 4-6 turns dictates what's going to happen.
it is what it is. We all benefit from and get screwed by it on a daily basis. Period.
I win due to skill and lose due to bad RNG. :D
The thing that is good about lands isn't that they require the right mix of lands and spells to play; the good thing is that they IMPOSE A COST on deckbuilding.
You can run a 21-land mono color deck that tops out at 4 mana cards and almost never have mana problems, or you can run a 27 land control deck with lots of card draw and always have stuff to do, but in both cases THERE IS A COST. You sacrifice power for consistency by playing fewer colors, or playing lands that have spell-like effects but don't make colored mana. You sacrifice tempo for consistency and always having spells to play by playing lots of lands and card draw. etc.
Now, part of what makes Magic such a great game is that there are SO MANY cards and SO MANY interactions in every zone, and a lot of those interactions are due to the mana system. A lot of Magic players that complain about mana problems are losing a lot of value with bad mulligan decisions, scrying incorrectly, playing cards in the wrong order (you should scry THEN draw or whatever). Also, it's a card game; every decision is percentage-based and any one game isn't reflective of your overall skill. Results over time are what matter because you have an equal degree of luck and bad luck in the long-term.
If another game had that depth and wealth of interactions while having a different resource system I would definitely play it. As is though, Magic is simply the best TCG that exists.
This is a good thing because...? It's not like other card games without resource cards (including Hearthstone, and Hearthstone isn't the only one) don't have costs on deckbuilding. They're just different ones that don't statistically require that your resource system end up screwed up in about of the third of the games you play.
I'm sorry, that just sounds like a really poorly conceived and contrived, almost fanboyish after-the-fact attempt at justification. You don't need to do that. It's okay to like Magic despite it's flaws. I l like plenty of games (including Hearthstone) despite their flaws, flaws that aren't a big deal to me but that I realize are justified deal-breakers for others.
We are by now conceding the point, though, that the resource card system is a not-insignificant source of RNG though, right? Because I think that was the major point here. If you're of the opinion that MtG is the better game, I highly disagree, but that's fine. I'm just making sure we're not still pretending that it's superior in terms of RNG rather than just different.
I don't believe you've played very much MTG in the last 10+ years if you truly believe that less than half of all MTG games are played with both players getting reasonable mana curve. I play a lot of HS and a lot MTG and while yes, you do get mana flooded/screwed and it happens to opponents as well, it is much below 50% of the games that is determined by that.
With that being said, there are plenty of decks in HS that can get screwed by drawing a bunch of their mid-late game cards early and then topdecking cards like Zombie Chow late. Unlike MTG, however, there is a TREMENDOUS amount of games that are determined by a series of coin flips aside from your draw. You have cards like Knife Juggler, Implosion, Flamewaker, and Ragnaros the Firelord, Dr. Boom, Ysera, and even Shaman hero ability having big impact in the current meta and that's just on the lower spectrum of RNG with more defined random numbers (a coin flip up to the roll of a standard die in most cases). Then you also have Unstable Portal, Ram Wrangler, Bane of Doom, Webspinner, Piloted Shredder, and Murloc Knight now that have huge permutations that can just break games on pure dumb lick (i.e. I don't even have the cards that are now the threats IN MY DECK - they just poof into existence based on my luck). There is no card in MTG that I'm aware of that just randomly puts cards into the game that weren't in either deck to start (there are a few that say 'from outside the game' but that's limited to your 15-card sideboard).
Balancing busted cards version 1.0.