Hearthpwn

F2P Shaman, F2P Mage, (look up trump) F2P Rogue (tempo rogue requires at most an epic, and that's a very flexible one), F2P Warrior to a lesser extent, cheap variants of controladin as well as aggrodin, F2P Warlock and Hunter as others have said. Even cheaper priests are seeing some innovation.

Should there be more opportunities to get gold/dust/cards, should there be cheaper dust costs/more efficient crafting equations? Oh most probably. Do you need legendaries or epics to make decks work? Absolutely not. Most big legends are replacable, and in some cases /improved/ with sunwalkers, boulderfist ogres, or argent commanders. Class specific legendaries are situational across the board, and often times very sub par. 

Most importantly, playing around legendaries will often be a lot better than simply thinking of them as overpowered big threats. Your opponent's playing really slow? They probably have an alexstraza! Save burst finishes in your hand and keep your opponent around 15~, and feel free to go that far down yourself. See them being aggro? Probably a leeroy jenkins coming up! Do the math, stay as healthy as you need to be. Lost to a deck with 5 legendaries in it? Well you probably could have lost to a staple midrange/control deck with none.

Not having certain cards does not leave you helpless. I have Rag, Cairne, and Thalnos and the frequency with which I'd rather have something else in slots I might use those in is /astounding./ Argent commander, Sunwalker, and boulderfist ogre are all extremely faster cards, which maintains tempo a lot better. Loot hoarder often does more damage and is better to play early. Geomancer tends to stick a lot better (and can be gotten in gold for playing warlock!) 

Know the odds, too! What are the odds of drawing a hard removal? What hard removal do you have in your deck? What creative soft removal can you amass against a coming problem? Do you have silences? How many? Do you need to remove an upcoming big threat? 

Lastly, a thousand wins is a lot less than it sounds. Keep playing, keep having fun. Play in limited tournaments if you think dust allocation is a trouble! Getting stressed out about harmless things that are bugging you instead of meditating and practicing happens to the best and worst of us, but you're going to lose a lot more in regular life than the chance to play hearthstone if you let that get in your way.

I didn't spend a single cent on it and yet I own a full control warrior deck with Garrosh, Cairne, Ysera, Ragnaros, Harrison and a lot of epics in it. It is considered one of the most expensive decks out there, but you can reach it as a full f2p player. I did quite a few arenas to be honest, but as I like limited play a lot, it's fun and entertaining most of the times and doesn't feel like grinding. I did one arena a day on average over the last month, getting 144 gold on average back out of it, so with completing quests I could actually buy some boosters as well as the arena tickets. So this is about 10 packs a week. It doesn't take THAT long to craft a deck you want.

Quote from heyitsmiro »

Playing to cap and doing quests gets you over 4000 gold a month.  That's a load of free packs every month.  You can't not have cards if you actually try, and if you aren't trying then what exactly do you want?  What's wrong with spending money on this game anyways?  The people buying cards are keeping the game going, not the f2p crowd.  Why treat supporting a game as some kind of dirty act?  Buying cards isn't paying to win, it's just how games work.  

Zoo and Hunter were already given as examples of viable free-to-play decks, and the response was a cry for help about being pigeon holed.  I don't understand how you can refuse to spend money or time on a game and demand to be on even footing with everyone else.  

This game being free to play gives people the most peculiar sense of entitlement.  

I laugh at your comment. Because it doesn't make sense.

4,000 gold a month? Don't know what you're smoking..

People have a sense of entitlement because the game's F2P? Is it entitlement or general frustration at legendary-massing noobs who spend money to win, when the game markets itself as free-to-play? You tell me.

No one said anything's wrong with spending money on the game. It's the fact that you have to do it in order to win. Nearly all legend rankers use legendary cards. They're overpowered. That's why tournaments like Managrind sometimes ban them. Because, despite popular belief - legendaries are overpowered. 

f2p player here, never spent a cent on the game and ive just hited top 200 on eu  this last season.Mine experience and of others who did that proved that the game isnt p2w, yes legendary cards can be good but they arent most importnat thing. For example 2 most anoying deck to figth against nowadays dont run legendary cards AT ALL. truth is all those thigns were said xy times so not sure if its even worth mentioning, if u want the cards u have 2 choices basicly : pump up the money or get good in arena.  DOnt forget opne thing all real TCGS are p2w in desing its just how they are, on the other hand in HS u can get everything just by playing the game...

There are numerous examples that prove the "You must have numerous legendaries to win" argument wrong. That argument is dead. Anyone who continues to repeat this is just making noise.

(Plus, at a pure absolute flat minimum of 1200 gold a month, with no bonus gold from laddering and only getting 40 gold quests, and being an efficient crafter, stuff piles up quickly. Laddering at all, or 60/100 gold quests (which you /should/ mulligan for), or arenaing will accelerate that rather consistently. 2000 gold a month is very reasonable. A pack a day from good play is very easy to maintain, even with trump's pure basic decks. That's a guaranteed legendary after a month of play! And you get about half of that from all the freebies. For cards that are often sub par and replaced anyway? Yeah, no, shit's relatively fine.)

"Nearly all legend rankers use legendary cards." Trump got to Legend with decks that had 0-2 epics and no legends. Three times. On new accounts. The epics were purely a response to the meta, were not entirely necessary, and one could get to legend without them. 

Quote from ArchimedesvonNova »

"Nearly all legend rankers use legendary cards." Trump got to Legend with decks that had 0-2 epics and no legends. Three times. On new accounts. The epics were purely a response to the meta, were not entirely necessary, and one could get to legend without them. 

Reynad can still get to legend using a Tempo Rogue that uses nothing more but basics, commons and rares. More salt in OP's wound.

Quote from Christonya »

Quote from heyitsmiro »

Playing to cap and doing quests gets you over 4000 gold a month.  That's a load of free packs every month.  You can't not have cards if you actually try, and if you aren't trying then what exactly do you want?  What's wrong with spending money on this game anyways?  The people buying cards are keeping the game going, not the f2p crowd.  Why treat supporting a game as some kind of dirty act?  Buying cards isn't paying to win, it's just how games work.  

Zoo and Hunter were already given as examples of viable free-to-play decks, and the response was a cry for help about being pigeon holed.  I don't understand how you can refuse to spend money or time on a game and demand to be on even footing with everyone else.  

This game being free to play gives people the most peculiar sense of entitlement.  

Imagine if golden heros / golden cards were bought via IRL cash.... And all other cards were not instead however you generated alot of them by grinding (Say a pack every 3 wins) The game would self sustain easily by those who want all the shiny stuff that gives them no advantage in the actual player vs player gameplay, suddenly, you cant just pay to win, instead you pay for a certainly level of flare / cosmetic bonuses, keeping the game alive and from a competitive point of view, every one is equal.

It's not a sense of entitlement its using a proper monetization plan.

I have never seen an online TCG that was able to sustain itself without selling card packs. A golden card is not a skin like it is in LoL were your average person would be will to spend X-amount. 

Seriouse post time lolz!

These threads always hurt my head when they pop up. It happens in every f2p games forums where someone who is unwilling to spend money on game that they get enjoyment out of and expects the same experiance as those who does. Two things to consider when looking at Hearthstone.

First, Hearthstone is a F2P game that means it keeps itself in busness by forcing you to chose between your patience and your wallet. Ie would I rather spend $10 on nine packs or wait ten days.

Second, Hearthstone is a TCG. THEY ARE ALL PAY TO WIN. In reality where you have to buy the cards or digitly were you have to buy the cards like Hearthstone, Duel of Champions ect.

If you can not handle these two things then do not play the game.

Quote from xadrox »

f2p player here, never spent a cent on the game and ive just hited top 200 on eu  this last season.Mine experience and of others who did that proved that the game isnt p2w, yes legendary cards can be good but they arent most importnat thing. For example 2 most anoying deck to figth against nowadays dont run legendary cards AT ALL. truth is all those thigns were said xy times so not sure if its even worth mentioning, if u want the cards u have 2 choices basicly : pump up the money or get good in arena.  DOnt forget opne thing all real TCGS are p2w in desing its just how they are, on the other hand in HS u can get everything just by playing the game...

Let me take a wild guess and say you are playing zoo or UTH hunter.   

Quote from hodyniak »

There are numerous examples that prove the "You must have numerous legendaries to win" argument wrong. That argument is dead. Anyone who continues to repeat this is just making noise.

Why dont you simply approach the discussion from a purely analytical perspective.   Let's break it down so its easy to understand as an example.  We will try to remove as many variables as possible simply to make a point.

We have two Pally decks controlled by equally intelligent computers.  All 28 cards are identical.  Let's assume the obvious card removals and silences are already in the decks.  One computer must choose the last 2 cards from the base pally deck, the other can choose literally any two cards in the game(any legendary's it wants).   Which has an adherent advantage?  I didn't say which would win or lose, simply statistically which would have the better deck?    

Now you have your empirical proof.  How you weigh that proof and what it means to you as a player are subjective and different for each person and different as it relates to each of your opponents.  The baseline fact can not be disputed.  I actually don't understand what is so difficult to understand.  

Quote from johntonyrob »

Quote from hodyniak »

There are numerous examples that prove the "You must have numerous legendaries to win" argument wrong. That argument is dead. Anyone who continues to repeat this is just making noise.

Why dont you simply approach the discussion from a purely analytical perspective.   Let's break it down so its easy to understand as an example.  We will try to remove as many variables as possible simply to make a point.

We have two Pally decks controlled by equally intelligent computers.  All 28 cards are identical.  Let's assume the obvious card removals and silences are already in the decks.  One computer must choose the last 2 cards from the base pally deck, the other can choose literally any two cards in the game(any legendary's it wants).   Which has an adherent advantage?  I didn't say which would win or lose, simply statistically which would have the better deck?    

Now you have your empirical proof.  How you weigh that proof and what it means to you as a player are subjective and different for each person and different as it relates to each of your opponents.  The baseline fact can not be disputed.  I actually don't understand what is so difficult to understand.  

Cherry Picking. Breaking down the problem to a simple, yet unrealistic, test case, and asking us to apply this to a system that is far more complex and varied.

I have no where near 1000 wins and have been fortunate enough to get a few legendaries in packs, I agree that trying to buy packs with the 10 gold per 3 wins is ridicuolous and a waste of time.  Thats why I just log in the morning each day to get a quest, mulligan the quest if I dont like the classes, and wait three days.  In about an hour I can complete the 3 quests and usually have enough for arena.  I buy the arena and rinse and repeat.  It takes patience, but It works and seems like a viable solution to your problem.

Quote from heyitsmiro »

Playing to cap and doing quests gets you over 4000 gold a month.  That's a load of free packs every month.  You can't not have cards if you actually try, and if you aren't trying then what exactly do you want?  What's wrong with spending money on this game anyways?  The people buying cards are keeping the game going, not the f2p crowd.  Why treat supporting a game as some kind of dirty act?  Buying cards isn't paying to win, it's just how games work.  

Zoo and Hunter were already given as examples of viable free-to-play decks, and the response was a cry for help about being pigeon holed.  I don't understand how you can refuse to spend money or time on a game and demand to be on even footing with everyone else.  

This game being free to play gives people the most peculiar sense of entitlement.  

Do people have the time to play to cap every day of the month . . . ?

Quote from johntonyrob »

 

Quote from xadrox »

f2p player here, never spent a cent on the game and ive just hited top 200 on eu  this last season.Mine experience and of others who did that proved that the game isnt p2w, yes legendary cards can be good but they arent most importnat thing. For example 2 most anoying deck to figth against nowadays dont run legendary cards AT ALL. truth is all those thigns were said xy times so not sure if its even worth mentioning, if u want the cards u have 2 choices basicly : pump up the money or get good in arena.  DOnt forget opne thing all real TCGS are p2w in desing its just how they are, on the other hand in HS u can get everything just by playing the game...

Let me take a wild guess and say you are playing zoo or UTH hunter.   

i am actualy playing p2w warrior, yup i am that good in arena ;)

terrible thread. you don't want to deal with the age old ccg aspect? please quit. instead of whining. seriously. everything you've said has been refuted sensibly and you just stick your head in the sand and say "NUH UH YOU USE HUNTER OR WARLOCK" which are 2 of 9 choices of heroes in the game. anyone who thinks this game is completely p2w needs to practice a lot more, study arena deck construction, and simply play more. that's it. that's what it comes down to. /thread

What he said has some truth in it. The fact that there's not many good 6 mana+ common/rare cards makes F2P control deck impossible to succeed. Try making a F2P control deck yourself, what are your late game finisher? Boulderfish Orge? Or Ravenholdt Assassin? Those are terrible and usually quickly removed the moment they hit the board easily. Now compare that to Cairne, Rag, Ysera and you will see a big difference. They apply pressure on the board immediately and often win you games if opponent does not have resources to deal with.

Thus as almost all 7+ mana cards are either Legendary or Epic, the control archetype practically belongs to P2W players or players who had been grinding for a very looooooooooong time. Your only option as a casual player actually limited to only 1 archetype, aggro. That's why you see sooooo many people playing Zoo/Hunter, not necessarily because they like them but mostly because that's the only viable way for them to compete. If given the choice, I think lots of people would switch to mid-range/control since it's way moooore fun.

ravenholdt assassin is removed by what immediately? malygos boosted fan of knives? not flamestrike, that's only 4 dmg. molten giant shadow flame if they're already that low. you'll get beefy cards from packs. simply knowing how to get gold from achievements, you'll have like 5 packs in the first day.

Quote from flexr »

What he said has some truth in it. The fact that there's not many good 6 mana+ common/rare cards makes F2P control deck impossible to succeed. Try making a F2P control deck yourself, what are your late game finisher? Boulderfish Orge? Or Ravenholdt Assassin? Those are terrible and usually quickly removed the moment they hit the board easily. Now compare that to Cairne, Rag, Ysera and you will see a big difference. They apply pressure on the board immediately and often win you games if opponent does not have resources to deal with.

Thus as almost all 7+ mana cards are either Legendary or Epic, the control archetype practically belongs to P2W players or players who had been grinding for a very looooooooooong time. Your only option as a casual player actually limited to only 1 archetype, aggro. That's why you see sooooo many people playing Zoo/Hunter, not necessarily because they like them but mostly because that's the only viable way for them to compete. If given the choice, I think lots of people would switch to mid-range/control since it's way moooore fun.

Handlock borders on a control-like deck build, and all you need are the giants. Granted, they are epics, but they are a lot cheaper to craft than legendaries.

Also Tempo Rogue is deck type, specifically mid-game, that can be played successfully without legendaries or epics.