• 2

    posted a message on What is a mechanic you underderstand is part of the game, but also truely hate?

    Cost reduction.

    Emperor Thaurissan - Totally fine

    Octo-Bot - Could also be fine with fewer card draw options and 1-mana cards

    Lady Anacondra and Celestial Alignment - Wtf are you doin, Blizzard?

    Also, Lightning Bloom is still a mistake.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Has the Mercenaries gameplay changed your mind?

    It's just weird from Blizzard that they aren't more transparent with the numbers and the costs. Like I get it, there is this FOMO concept, but if people don't know what they might be missing out on, chances increase that they just don't really care about it.

    Not giving more info about the costs, both in terms of money and gold, and the rewards (especially in terms of a "dusting" system) will make people (me included) think that it's just going to be very expensive, even if that won't be the case ever. That's one way to kill a hype, if there ever was one.

    The gameplay is quite interesting but these boar fights at the beginning of bounties are boring. I can see pretty difficult close matches in PvP, though, where both players have to think hard what the opponent will do to ruin their gameplan. So there is some sort of interaction at least, which standard has been lacking recently.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Has the Mercenaries gameplay changed your mind?

    Did we get any more info on the costs of the mode?

    I have only seen a 200 gold upgrade to unlock heroic mode, I guess?

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on HUGE nerfs and buffs coming soon!!!!

    "Brilliant!" - Tyrande

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Why we can't complete achievements on Tavern brawl?

    Because you are supposed to play the most unbalanced, most expensive game mode to spend more money on the illusion that it will be more fun after you spent money.

    Nobody in the community ever understood why.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on All Mercenaries by role and rarity

    Thank you for the overview.

    To add to this, I think someone from Blizzard mentioned that you can get coins from legendary mercenaries in packs and unlock the mercenary if you have enough of these tokens. So, this might help a little bit because you have quite a lot of packs to open, but it's probably like 2-3 legendaries with all bundles.

    I am just wondering if it is necessary to have all cards on day for any reason, though. I will certainly not even attempt to get there at some point.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on How about we buff the quest cards instead of nerf

    I am always happy to discuss new ideas in this field, but there is a massive problem with this suggestion and that is the "Prince Keleseth" problem where you just auto-win when you happen to draw the quest very early and lose because you didn't.

    Also, speaking of quest decks in general and not necessarily wild alone, this would improve the win rate of questlock and quest priest relative to the other quests because they already have huge draw/tutor cards. Dh could do something similar as warlock, but would be a lot less consistent. If you add more tutor cards, they would either need to have a very big downside in deckbuilding or cost 3+ mana and do nothing else at the very least.

    I also think that your argument with the Un'Goro quests doesn't work because quest rogue did, in fact, build a deck of 29 cards to finish the quest as early as possible, and could quite consistenly do it.

    To sum up my thoughts: This sounds like an idea that might just increase the gap between some quests and others AND the importance of early game draws increases even more while not solving the no-control meta problem. The best counter to these new quests would, unsurprisingly, be aggro.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Mercenaries Mode looks like Trouble
    Quote from AntonydusWurm >>

    the only thing that pisses me off to say it mildly is that you need ingame gold to use in this mode when they should rather fix their stupid "real" game first. meaning you have to decide if you pay gold on this or the supercool real one, no irony included

    this mode and battlegrounds being aggressively monetized just makes me immediately have no interest in it

     I hope you mean duels instead of battlegrounds or else I can't believe what I am reading. I have played Battlegrounds for months as f2p, even at medium to high ranks, and I haven't spent a single cent/gold, so this was a pure 100% gold grab for me.

    Regarding mercenaries mode, I am actually quite hyped for this. I have quit when Stormwind released because I couldn't stand standard and wild anymore and lost all motivation. However, I think that, if the progress is quite fine, this mode will be very playable for f2p. You will apparently get 8 of 50 mercenaries for free and as far as I am aware, there is no entry cost. Sure, these mercenaries aren't crazy good legendaries, but you can probably still progress in the game mode. Can someone confirm this or do we have to pay like 1k gold to enter? I might have missed that then. The PvE part will probably also be quite challenging, so this is a great thing. Since upgrading mercenaries will likely take some time, even those who spend some money will not be able to bring a full legendary super broken combo to PvP on day 1 of release, so even in PvP, f2p players will probably not start with a huge disadvantage.

    It's also quite fair that they are charging gold for packs and stuff because it looked like you can progress on your rewards track playing mercenaries. Otherwise there would be 0 incentive to spend any resource on the game because you also don't need any dust as far as I understood this. I also wonder what happens when you fully upgrade all heroes of the same rarity and open another pack. Do you get dust or some refund? I am not sure.

    My only complaint so far is that the cheapest bundle should be 33% cheaper and contain like 5 packs less so that more players can enter more easily.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on WTF BLIZZARD !?!
    Quote from CoKrokToPrd >>
    Quote from HatShapedHat >>

    Maybe just don't play that mode?  I dunno, just spit ballin' ideas.

     Can the mode be played without buying these bundles?

     You get 8 free mercenaries for completeing the prologue of the mode...

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Blanket Change to Questline Mechanics
    Quote from Deezedvc >>

    This would make people have to hold onto the  5 mama 7/7 lol mutantus would be run in every deck until quests stop being played

    I don't know what's so bad about giving the worst archtype in the game a win condition against their weakest matchups, but ok. There is still a lot of counterplay to Mutanus, but I agree that this could be detrimental to a deck like spell quest mage.

    However, you can often just finish the last part of the questline and play the reward on the same turn. That's also why I liked this idea more than most of the other solutions I have read about. You only can't progress two different parts of the questline, which will make these decks slower by approximately 2-4 turns. That's a difference.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Blanket Change to Questline Mechanics

    The logic behind this change came from watching the Grandmasters. The only reason why warlock and mage quests were so strong there was because they could easily be done and provided a very early win condition with little to no downside.

    If you change all quests this way, Stealer of Souls can no longer do it by itself, for instance. This would also be more impactful for warlock questline than for the other ones, because I also wrote that you just couldn't progress the new questline part on the same turn AT ALL. This means that, once you finish the first part, dealing damage to yourself will not progress the second part on the same turn, which will make it harder for you to make the correct plays. Do you want to damage yourself to get rid of an opposing minion after one part of your questline is done, or do you want to keep it alive, risking that it connects to your face but keeping your 2-mana self-damage removal spell in hand for questline progression next turn? Even tapping becomes a more difficult decision. This will delay but not outright kill the questline and it also means that, due to the rather high and increasing amount of damage each step of the warlock questline requires, it becomes a lot less likely that you finish this before turn 7. The same is true with Mage with all it's cost reduction and card draw. You want to progress your questline, but you need to remove things or spend your mana efficiently? Well, make a decision.

    Regarding concerns about the other quests, this change wouldn't affect the other questlines that much. Dh works similarly already, druid (lol), progression for priest wouldn't change at all, you would sometimes make a different play in rogue, but the class is flexible enough to make up for it, warrior doesn't really matter/change much, and shaman gets a little weaker due to Bloom losing flexibility and tempo, but that's basically it. Paladin would not change much, you might lose 1 turn from time to time, but that doesn't matter in this meta anyway. Hunter, well, that card shouldn't be that explosive anyway. But in general, it would be a good idea to tone down the power level of all questlines.

    Just to add to what someone here wrote about the priest questline: The priest questline would actually get buffed by this change in the current meta because the meta slows down overall. Still probably a little too slow, but certainly ot as hopeless as today. It's not like priest can realistically finish its questline step and progress the next step anyway in the first place.

    In the end, if the devs actually do what Iksar said in his AMA (they consider heavily nerfing this year's expansions and adding a much weaker core set to reduce overall power level in standard when the new year starts), there need to be drastic nerfs to these questlines or nothing will change. This one is just a first step that would probably not even be enough in such a future meta environment.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on For those who want Warlock Questline changed/reworked, how would you do it?

    I would change the entire questline mechanic in such a way that whenever you finish one part of your questline, you can no longer interact with your questline that turn. None of the selt-damage (warlock), cards you play (mage), cards you draw (dh) etc. will then count towards your questline progression.

    That way, you will need at least 3 turns to finish your questline and 1 Stealer cannot do it all in one turn.

    Posted in: General Chat
  • 3

    posted a message on Nerfs are in - what do we think?
    Quote from FortyDust >>

    Once again, they've mostly nerfed Tier 2 decks because they care more about community perception than actual facts. At least they did hit Paladin where it hurts -- though to be fair, Battlemaster was problematic in a number of classes.

    As for their claim that this will slow the meta enough for slower strategies to succeed, color me skeptical.

     Depends on what you consider a "slower strategy". For quest priest to be any good, you would have to nerf around 15 cards functionally, which they would never dare to do. It was predictable that this is going to be rather soft except for maybe for paladin. Leaving Stealer of Souls unnerfed is nothing but a terrible joke at this point tbh.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Nerfs are in - what do we think?
    Quote from Finalstan >>

    Balance Changes Coming Tomorrow - 8 Changes In Total! - News - HearthPwn

    My takes (I mostly ignore stat changes on minions):
    - Incanter's Flow for Mage to 3 mana - this is NOT enough! Should have changed it to only hit specific spells (discover fire/arcane/frost and reduce all spells of the chosen spell school; or reduce only arcane spells; or reduce to 1 or more mana)
    - Darkglare in Warlock to 3 Mana - Ok change
    - Flesh Giant to 9 Mana - NOT enough. 10 Mana at minimum
    - Battleground Battlemaster to 6 Mana - I agree with you, seems like a good nerf.
    - Conviction to 2 Mana for Paladin - I think +2 Attack would be better, maybe even +1 Attack because Battlemaster exists
    - Kolkar Pack Runner to 3 mana for Hunter but stickier at 4 mana - This seems fine
    - Granite Forgeborn health down to 4 from 5 (Shaman, it's Battlecry reduces the cost of elementals in hand and deck by 1) - Totally irrelevant change, as you put it. They should have at the very least reverted the buff to the 5/6 Hex Elemental for 5 in addition. But honestly, Doomhammer to 1/8 for 6 mana
    - Il'gynoth from 4 to 6 mana to hit DH - This nerf is an exageration imo. 5 mana would have been fine. If that's not enough, reduce the cost reduction of other cards (e.g. remove it from the Sigil)

    Notable absentees:
    - Demon Seed - The quest is actually not the problem. If anything, +1 damage per phase or -1 healing per phase reward.
    - Stealer of SoulsTHIS is the actual problem. THIS is the card that should be moved to 6 mana over Ilgynoth. Well, maybe that's too much, but you get my point. This card is just awful on so many levels, it should be nerfed into the ground.

    What are your thoughts?

     Since you were asking...Also, why on freaking earth is Lightning Bloom still unnerfed? That's just dumb (not that it's particularly broken in this meta, just a general remark).

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on I wonder if Im done with Hearthstone.

    Your post could have been made by me except for the first sentence, so I understand how you feel.

    I have taken a break and it feels quite good so far. Watching HS Grandmasters is a lot more fun than playing the game at this point. I don't miss playing it at all, I just do some other stuff and realise how much time and energy I dedicated to this game that gave me a lot of great moments, but nothing really important for my real life. So I don't regret leaving the game and now that I have seen the nerfs, I am even more convinced that this was the right choice.

    Whatever you do, don't forget that it's your time, energy, and money and that you have the responsibility to spend your time wisely. If you don't enjoy the game, try a 3-day break without missing your quests and see if at day 3, you feel the urge to play or if it's more like a work that you "have to" do in order to not miss the quest rewards. If the latter is the case, I would highly recommend quitting the game.

    I am biased, though.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.