Hearthpwn

Aren't three of the expansions in that bundle rotating out soon?

Seems like a bad deal to get, if you aren't planning to play in Wild.

Battletag: Alpha#1486
Region: NA
Trade Only?: Yes

Done

How decent of a curve is that?

Quote from Galean >>

Quote from Maximal18 >>

Overrated (1-50):

 

Immortal Prelate (21) - Situational greedy card in a class with weak card draw, horrible 2nd drop, can be easily silenced.

 

 I would not dismiss the card so easily, the fact that requires a silence already makes it a good card as it means that you just made your opponent waste one, possibly protecting another valuable asset in the future.  The cost is pretty low, the stats are ok as well. The fact that it shuffles back into your deck while keeping the buffs is amazing. You could pair it with Da Undatakah and just one Spikeridged Steed for huge bonuses (basically meaning infinite value).

Having this alongside with Lynessa Sunsorrow means 3 threats that must be silenced. 

 How is the opponent wasting a silence on it? It won't be silenced until a buff lands on it. 

Quote from TardisGreen >>

Quote from Dorrian >>

Quote from Bwomsambi >>

Quote from Dorrian >>

Quote from Bwomsambi >>

Quote from Dorrian >>

Quote from OverholtNA >>

It would be worse and have a much smaller player base if they cut out RNG effects.

 Proof of that being true?

 There is another digital card game that have much less RNG than magic, HS and artifact, even so the game is not really that much popular besides Japan.

 The fact its still popular in japan disproves you.

 

Second, there are more variables in a card game than just RNG. You didn't state what the game was (Which means you could be outright lying) nor link it or provide literally ANY context.

A LOT of DCGs have failed. And it wasn't because of them having or not having abundance of RNG. Its more to do with the fact that there are already popular DCGs established. Card games aren't something you can really just jump into due to how much of a difference having a collection of cards makes.  If someone is already well established in games like Hearthstone or MTG:A, why should they play some no-name DGC?

 Pokemon TCG also have less RNG than the big ones and a lot of players agree that the game is in a bad spot because is sooo easy to fix your hands so the match is just "my deck can win against his deck?" there is not "he will draw his finisher?" because they will always draw what they need. In fact without RNG every card games would be: how many answers and wincon i can put in one deck and still make it playable.

 Magic the Gathering has A LOT less RNG than Hearthstone and is still insanely popular. Despite its age, which is mindblowing.

Yugioh is still popular (Though I'm not a fan of it anymore) and has a lot less RNG than Hearthstone. I will say that it has actual cards that use coin flips and dice rolls in their effects, but these cards are practically never played due to those reasons. The cards that DO see play and are often meta, are the cards with literally no RNG-based effects. They're often ones that nuke the field, tutor specific cards, negate activations and so on.

Those two prove that a card game can be popular without RNG being so prevalent like it is in Hearthstone.

Some card games have more RNG than others.  So what?  What is your point?  I take you don't like like the RNG of HS.  K.

Play one of the other games you mention.

HS follows a certain model.  It's working.  It doesn't have to imitate other games.  It is what it is.

RNG does not preclude skill.  That is why the best players consistently make top 8's and 16's in tournaments.  Poker is a very popular game of skill and luck.

 My point is that those games prove that having less or no RNG won't cause a game's player base to tank.

You really jumped into a conversation without reading any of it? This string of quotes was caused due to Over's comment of "It would be worse and have a much smaller player base if they cut out RNG effects."

Its baffling that you're asking me what my point is.

Quote from DelireMan7 >>

Quote from Dorrian >>

Quote from DelireMan7 >>

 

The fact you can T2 Cloning Device to steal is 1 mana Lord Jaraxxus and Coin it ;)

 That literally can't happen. Rogue would not get Lord J off of Academic when its played against Priest.

The situation I listed, T1 > Prep + Academic into T2 > Warlock DK can and has happened.

 That's true didn't think about that :)

But you see my point ? Of course this crazy situation can be felt like "unfun" or "cheated" when you face it but still you can deny it's what make this game "crazy".

If you face the situation you describe of course you'll probably lose and can instaconcede but as there is no consequences for losing (or winning) in HS it's not a problem. Losing star is not a problem since climbing the ladder is almost rewardless (some dust/ 1 golden card once a month)

 Your point that you tried to make became void due to your impossible situation. And this discussion isn't about whether or not RNG makes the game 'crazy'. Its about whether or not the abundance of RNG in this game is unfun or not.

As for there being no consequences for losing, I have to disagree. Ranked alone, already means you're going to not advance in rank as well as lose rank. If you're running a Quest that -requires- you to win, then losing due to an insane Academic from rogue stops you from completing said quest. This can amount to frustration. People do not like to lose. If they did, they would just queue up into games then concede on the spot.

Quote from Bwomsambi >>

Quote from Dorrian >>

Quote from Bwomsambi >>

Quote from Dorrian >>

Quote from OverholtNA >>

It would be worse and have a much smaller player base if they cut out RNG effects.

 Proof of that being true?

 There is another digital card game that have much less RNG than magic, HS and artifact, even so the game is not really that much popular besides Japan.

 The fact its still popular in japan disproves you.

 

Second, there are more variables in a card game than just RNG. You didn't state what the game was (Which means you could be outright lying) nor link it or provide literally ANY context.

A LOT of DCGs have failed. And it wasn't because of them having or not having abundance of RNG. Its more to do with the fact that there are already popular DCGs established. Card games aren't something you can really just jump into due to how much of a difference having a collection of cards makes.  If someone is already well established in games like Hearthstone or MTG:A, why should they play some no-name DGC?

 Pokemon TCG also have less RNG than the big ones and a lot of players agree that the game is in a bad spot because is sooo easy to fix your hands so the match is just "my deck can win against his deck?" there is not "he will draw his finisher?" because they will always draw what they need. In fact without RNG every card games would be: how many answers and wincon i can put in one deck and still make it playable.

 Magic the Gathering has A LOT less RNG than Hearthstone and is still insanely popular. Despite its age, which is mindblowing.

Yugioh is still popular (Though I'm not a fan of it anymore) and has a lot less RNG than Hearthstone. I will say that it has actual cards that use coin flips and dice rolls in their effects, but these cards are practically never played due to those reasons. The cards that DO see play and are often meta, are the cards with literally no RNG-based effects. They're often ones that nuke the field, tutor specific cards, negate activations and so on.

Those two prove that a card game can be popular without RNG being so prevalent like it is in Hearthstone.

Quote from Synthetikmisery >>

Any card game has RNG - You can't stack your cards in the order you think is best for a winning outcome. Discover isn't so much RNG as just another facet in the game. They can find the perfect answer, as why it is there, or they can turn up three cards that do absolutely nothing. 
Take Lich King as an example. You can get a great pull from him or you can get one that won't be played and is useless to you. When I get the draw 5 cards one I never use it as it takes away battlecries and disposes of spells that I may need. 

It is balanced as in it either gives you something useful or gives you utter crap. Play cauldron and get +2 health to your totems. Well that's a dead card to everyone other than Shaman but get Healing Rain and well that's pretty good.

If you are losing to RNG then it isn't the fault of HS, it is the fault of your skill level.

 People complaining about RNG have often stated they accept that there is baked-in RNG in card games due to the Drawing/shuffle mechanic.

Discover IS RNG. Literally is. To say it isn't or to try and play down how much RNG it is, is disingenuous at best. Willful ignorance at worst.

Also if someone loses to RNG, then how is it their fault? Look at the situation I listed above and answer that. How is it anyone's fault for losing if a Rogue plays the Warlock DK on turn 2?

Quote from DelireMan7 >>

 I love HS for its RNG so I can’t agree with you. As many have already said, if you don’t like RNG and prefer when your decision and skill matter you should look for another game (card game or not).

HS is a fun card game and in my opinion not design to be competitive (having a Ranked mode does not make a game competitive). I know Blizzard push the “Esport” scene for HS but I think it’s more for economical reason.

Quote from Dorrian >>

Quote from PneumaPilot >>

 It’s also the spice that makes the game really fun over the long haul.  Don’t agree?

 What's fun about facing a rogue that goes T1 > Prep + Academic into T2 > Warlock DK?

The fact you can T2 Cloning Device to steal is 1 mana Lord Jaraxxus and Coin it ;)

 That literally can't happen. Rogue would not get Lord J off of Academic when its played against Priest.

The situation I listed, T1 > Prep + Academic into T2 > Warlock DK can and has happened.

Quote from Bwomsambi >>

Quote from Dorrian >>

Quote from OverholtNA >>

It would be worse and have a much smaller player base if they cut out RNG effects.

 Proof of that being true?

 There is another digital card game that have much less RNG than magic, HS and artifact, even so the game is not really that much popular besides Japan.

 The fact its still popular in japan disproves you.

Second, there are more variables in a card game than just RNG. You didn't state what the game was (Which means you could be outright lying) nor link it or provide literally ANY context.

A LOT of DCGs have failed. And it wasn't because of them having or not having abundance of RNG. Its more to do with the fact that there are already popular DCGs established. Card games aren't something you can really just jump into due to how much of a difference having a collection of cards makes.  If someone is already well established in games like Hearthstone or MTG:A, why should they play some no-name DGC?

Quote from OverholtNA >>

It would be worse and have a much smaller player base if they cut out RNG effects.

 Proof of that being true?

Quote from PneumaPilot >>

 It’s also the spice that makes the game really fun over the long haul.  Don’t agree?

 What's fun about facing a rogue that goes T1 > Prep + Academic into T2 > Warlock DK?

Quote from Mercynary9 >>

There are some people like me that loves RNG, because it can create a great moment.

You may argue with me about it, but I'll not change. For competitive meta, yeah it does hurt.

 For every great moment someone has with RNG, the person on the receiving end is cheated.

Quote from scorpyon >>

And look at branching paths - it wasn't nerfed but it should have been.

That's your subjective opinion, not a fact. Sure it's better than Healing Potion, (an old and outdated card that has no bearing on the current meta), but that means literally nothing. Obviously it wasnt "broken" enough for Blizzard to consider it warranted a nerf.

 Blizzard is hardly a reliable source as to what is or isn't too strong. Look at the situation with Patches. Within the first month, the community knew 100% that he was completely busted.

But how long did it take for Blizzard to FINALLY address him? Them not touching Branching Paths doesn't change the fact that its grossly overpowered.

Quote from _bbZ_ >>

Quote from ArcanoHS >>

Might be because you play it wrong more than the deck.

Also sample size matters. 4 games doesnt mean much.

 Never tell a player he could be playing a deck wrong... ^^

 That's a good way to never improve. I wish I had s9mebods to lambast me about how I play a certain deck wrong, so that I can learn and improve.