• 0

    posted a message on Since hearthstone has given up the gold economy, are f2p players now unable to compete in standard?
    Quote from Nargacuga15 >>
    Quote from Daulphas >>

    @Nargacuga15
    Free legendary every expansion – F2P and P2P

    Ever changing pack economics - F2P and P2P

    No duplicate epics/legendaries - F2P and P2P

    10 pack feel good legendary - F2P and P2P

    Classic cards - F2P and P2P

    You spent a great deal to show how both F2P and P2P are equal on many terms, which is great.
    My curiosity is this, can you show how P2P is privileged compared to F2P?

    -

    I am an F2P player, have been, will always be.

    My only complaint I have about this thread is this:

    F2P community has a large quantity of entitled, “I should get this for free because I showed up” mentality.
    and
    P2P community has a large quantity of elitest, “I spent money so I am better than you, just quit if you don't like it” mentality.

    -

    For all of the F2P players out there, ask yourself this:
    if you go to the store and purchase a brand new computer with the latest hardware and software for $2000, how would you feel if the person who only ever comes into the store to ‘shop around’ and test all of the equipment, then gets the same computer for free?

    That is what you are asking for when you come on here and complain about F2P v P2P equality.

    Again, I AM AN F2P PLAYER, and I agree that there should be a separation of value for those who pay and those who don’t.

    -

    However, I DO NOT believe that the P2P players should be given an advantage in game play or win rate because they spend money.

    F2P and P2P NEED to be able to play the game on EQUAL footing and have an EQUAL chance of winning their matches. This is achieved (for the most part) by understanding your class, card mechanics, the meta, card play value, and personal skill.

    Blizzard has tried to enforce an ELO of sorts but I still feel (no proof) that it is glitchy…

    There are things that need to be improved for sure, but making a monetary decision to separate F2P v P2P is normal business practice.

    So…

    TL;DR: for those who have short attention spans and want to feel justified for not reading, Blizzard needs to work on game still, P2P and F2P are not the same, equality should come in game play not value, you get back what you put in.

     It’s hard to tackle everything you said and not make this thread an essay. I’ll keep it short, but please feel free to reach back out to keep discussing:

    The only privilege I see of P2P over F2P is faster access to the meta and the ability to go wider with decks. It’s a pretty sizable advantage, but really just a time sink bypass. I feel that’s fair. My points were to show F2P players that we ALL get pretty good handouts from the game. 

    As far as your points, the problem is the fair value you’re looking for can’t exist. There is no way to equate the value of F2P vs P2P otherwise no one would be paying. The balance of spending money vs not is as close as it’s going to get to “value balanced”. You’ll have to offer some ideas to balance the value if you think there are decent answers. 

     

     I agree completely, it would be quite the essay.

    When it comes to 'value' it is a broad spectrum, and though I don't think there needs to be any specificity in that respect.

    It's quite right that the largest value a P2P individual gets is the time freedom instead of having to grind nearly as much.

    What I can see so far from the new structure is that the P2P individuals will be getting customizability and cosmetic bonuses in addition to the time freedom.

    This doesn't give an unfair advantage to winning, however, it can feel like an unfair game-play advantage. But again, that is the benefit of paying.

    The largest QOL that can be put into effect to limit the gap between the 2 player bases is to fix the ELO/Match making system to be more intuitive and accurate.

    Until the new structure is available (or I get a chance to test it personally) I will not be able to accurately give feed back or ideas on improvements.

    So currently it's speculation on the future vs current "feelings".

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Since hearthstone has given up the gold economy, are f2p players now unable to compete in standard?

    @Nargacuga15
    Free legendary every expansion – F2P and P2P

    Ever changing pack economics - F2P and P2P

    No duplicate epics/legendaries - F2P and P2P

    10 pack feel good legendary - F2P and P2P

    Classic cards - F2P and P2P

    You spent a great deal to show how both F2P and P2P are equal on many terms, which is great.
    My curiosity is this, can you show how P2P is privileged compared to F2P?

    -

    I am an F2P player, have been, will always be.

    My only complaint I have about this thread is this:

    F2P community has a large quantity of entitled, “I should get this for free because I showed up” mentality.
    and
    P2P community has a large quantity of elitest, “I spent money so I am better than you, just quit if you don't like it” mentality.

    -

    For all of the F2P players out there, ask yourself this:
    if you go to the store and purchase a brand new computer with the latest hardware and software for $2000, how would you feel if the person who only ever comes into the store to ‘shop around’ and test all of the equipment, then gets the same computer for free?

    That is what you are asking for when you come on here and complain about F2P v P2P equality.

    Again, I AM AN F2P PLAYER, and I agree that there should be a separation of value for those who pay and those who don’t.

    -

    However, I DO NOT believe that the P2P players should be given an advantage in game play or win rate because they spend money.

    F2P and P2P NEED to be able to play the game on EQUAL footing and have an EQUAL chance of winning their matches. This is achieved (for the most part) by understanding your class, card mechanics, the meta, card play value, and personal skill.

    Blizzard has tried to enforce an ELO of sorts but I still feel (no proof) that it is glitchy…

    There are things that need to be improved for sure, but making a monetary decision to separate F2P v P2P is normal business practice.

    So…

    TL;DR: for those who have short attention spans and want to feel justified for not reading, Blizzard needs to work on game still, P2P and F2P are not the same, equality should come in game play not value, you get back what you put in.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • -1

    posted a message on Fall Reveal Stream - New Cards!
    Quote from CookieFamous >>
    Quote from Pukistan >>

    What if one of Cthun spell countered is? Like from Counterspell. No battlecry?

     I haven't seen the stream so i don't know the exact works, but wouldn't it be that he would "assemble" when all four have been played. If one is not played (countered) then I doubt C'thun will appear in your hand.

     It doesn't state Battlecry nor does it state When Drawn, so the wording is misleading.
    I would presume this is a "When Drawn" effect for the bolded text but when the card is played it can be countered and the spell effect is negated.

    This is of course hypothetical until actual game play can be seen.

    Posted in: News
  • 6

    posted a message on Evocation & Solarian Prime Nerf!
    Quote from nexit1337 >>

    well, if the problem is the apprentice, then nerf the apprentice,
    blame the root of the problem, not the result

     

    I agree with the Apprentice nerf - I addressed this on a different thread.

    Apprentice should follow the same philosophy as more recent nerfs - change it's text to read:

    "reduce the cost of spells in your hand by 1. (Spells can not go below 1 cost)"

    Posted in: News
  • 0

    posted a message on Evocation & Solarian Prime Nerf!

    ...

    Posted in: News
  • 0

    posted a message on I have an issue with the game and...

    @Hooghout
    I have posted this same thing on the Blizzard forums in an attempt to bring it forward as well there.

    And indeed Blizzard has made the game politicized, targets specific audiences, and it's overall inaction to limit the BM capabilities of players.

    However, the larger fact here is that as players, we hold their paycheck in our hands.

    "IF" the player base were to unite (or at least a large portion of it) then there would be a better chance of our collective voices being heard.

    I also appreciate the use of my signature in your response :)

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 5

    posted a message on I have an issue with the game and...

    There it is again, you have an issue with something in hearthstone and decide to go to the forums and comment on it. Perhaps you are looking for feedback, perhaps you are just curious to see if you aren't alone with the issue, or perhaps it's a legitimate concern.

    You make your post and then the same old troll comments come out:

         - Go to the salt threads with this!
         - Stop playing if you don't like it!

    Follow this up with the typical responses of:

         - I do fine why can't you
         - Play XYZ deck if you are having issues
         - The meta/deck/class is fine - learn to play

    It's rather sad the feedback from players in the community.
    In an online community and game where it's the players who are the arbiters of what's fun, broken, fair, and obnoxious.

    Yet here you come 'Player - I know more than you', 'Player - righteous indignation', and 'Player - I think your post is pointless'. With no regard to understanding or common decency you throw your disdain and criticism at the OP. Your computer screen or phone screen as your shield and armor protecting you from having to be a decent person and giving you false pretense and permission to spew verbal vomit.

    If a player suggests a plausible change to the game, it's ignored the majority of the time, or shunned.

    If a player gathers as much data as they are capable of, they are told it's not bi-partisan or biased.

    If a player put's forth both sides of an issue, they are met with highly polarized or highly focused retorts on a single topic in the post.

    I understand that we all have the right to state our peace, but that is the part that the majority of this community are missing out on, stating our "PEACE" - you bring so much venom, chaos, and selfishness to these threads.

    It's no wonder Blizzard hardly reacts to community involvement...

    Be civilized, be constructive, work together to create a better play experience. Let's show blizzard that the community has the power to affect change and bring about the game-play that is deserved.

    Stop tearing each other down just because you need to feel better about yourself. This isn't a High school popularity contest...

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • -9

    posted a message on Micro Mummy Hotfix & Freezing Trap Bug

    HS Community:

    Dang I can't complain about the fact they actually fixed bugs... my life is incomplete.

    (moment of contemplation)

    I got it! I'm going to complain about the patch size which downloads automatically in the background without any effort on my part while I scroll through forums finding something to complain about!!

    I'm a genius!

    Posted in: News
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone Developer Alec Dawson Discusses Upcoming Changes

    @Colbault: Take away or nerf - Rez and Healing, what should they get in return? What is their archetype

    @BlackGoatPC: and even with they are on the lower end of the classes in win rates people complain and call for nerfs. One of the reasons they do is because of 20-min games. But if the class were to get some tools to do anything BUT gimmick/survival deck the games wouldn't last that long.
    But the last time blizzard tried that the community went all up in arms and called for nerfs because priest went aggro.

    Posted in: News
  • 5

    posted a message on Hearthstone Developer Alec Dawson Discusses Upcoming Changes
    Quote from Alec Dawson

    Moving on to Cabal Acolyte, going to 4 Health will tone down some of its defensive capabilities on turn 4 and post-Spellburst effect. Acolyte was one of the best performing cards in Priest and we want these sort of effects (mind control-esque) to be a deckbuilding choice.

    ::Priest was working, we nerfed it::

    Posted in: News
  • 3

    posted a message on My Priest is cursed

    I can't help but laugh at the people who claim "priests deserve this" - "you did it to your self" - "priest players (you) just suck"

    If that's the way you feel then, well, when you get irritated because of a certain deck, mechanic, losing streak or class - then just suck it up because:

    You deserve it, you did it to yourself, and (insert class (you)) just suck.

    As for the OP - I've had the same issue a couple of times in the past, my simple fix was to just log off and not touch HS for a day.
    Come back to it fresh another day and start up again. I usually start to see some forward momentum then.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Which Deck Can Process Without Losing

    This is a common question for beginners.

    The answer comes in 2 parts.

    Part 1 - choose 1 or 2 decks to build and play.

    Part 2 - there is no single deck that will always win.

    The more you play a deck, the more you understand how and when to play cards. There is still some skill needed to play an aggro deck, just as much as there is some skill to play a highlander deck.

    Patience, practice, and perseverance.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Archmage Velen OTK

    You can run it without Malygos, however, it reduces the power output by a lot.

    Some alternatives are:
    Evolved Kobold
    Azerite Elemental
    Spellweaver
    Darkmire Moonkin

    If you don't want to choose a creature you could also run Velen's Chosen - the fun with this, if you cast it while Archmage Vargoth is on the table it can be cast multiple times giving an additive stat + spell damage bonus.

    Posted in: Archmage Velen OTK
  • 0

    posted a message on Time to Hall of Fame Sorcerer's Apprentice
    Quote from ShadowAldrius >>

    Maybe instead something like...

    Sorcerer's Apprentice
    2 mana
    3/2
    The next 3 spells you play cost (1) less.

     This would work considering it limits the number of spells affected.
    If it works like other effects in the game (unless my understanding is flawed) it would only stack with the next 3 spells and only those 3 spells would be reduced to 0.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Why Does Everyone Get Off On Being a Douche Bag?

    I'm just impressed this topic got 3 pages of responses...

    Though to repeat previous comments:
    1: Quests are a primary reason to play more cards
    2: If you know you lost and this tilts you, concede and avoid it
    3: Take the opportunity to learn what cards are in the decks so you can prepare better next time

    And my favorite: sometimes when they have lethal and decide to "flex" they make a mistake I can capitalize on and potentially win.

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