I find it very annoying that card draw is not completely RNG based. Obviously, cards needed for lethal are computed after each move and it's okay, but when it affects the top-deck or discover results I think that's not good. I think there's even a punish/reward algorithm that triggers this effect. You will start feeling it after a couple thousand games.
Opinion: If there's RNG, let it be pure RNG.
Before my kids were born i used to play physical MTG. I played competively, even made to 100 in the world at one point. Thousands of games over years. So I had a pretty good sense of what random felt like.
When I first found hearthstone, I was overjoyed. Sure the game was simpler, but it was fun, it was deep enough and I decided to take it up. First I was limited by my collection, so I would not get past rank 8-10 in a given season. But then I crafted Dr. Boom and soon was knocking on the door of legend.
But around that time I started really noticing funky things going on. The game giving me the worst possible hands and topdecks it could find time after time if I played too long. I would have a rush deck and get my 3 high casting cost cards in my opening hand, mulligan them away and then have them come back like boomerangs.
I actually came on here years ago and asked the same question you were asking and I was met with a storm of insults, tinfoil hat memes, recommendations to git gud etc. At that point I did a lot of research into game design, reading about frustration plateaus and how they increase spending (candy crush is famous for this). I was also playing a phone game called clash Royale that had a card collecting mechanic. I could see how gaining cards in that game was not random, which made me question whether it was random here.
What I came to realize is that hearthstone is engineered like all the other micro transaction games. Activision has patented methods that have proven successful to inspire spending. Blizzard gives symposiums on how to tinker the matchmaker to maximize 'player engagement'. What that really means is that they want to keep as many players playing and spending as possible. All parts of their game are built around this.
With the discover mechanic in general, and zephry's in particular. You can see they are perfectly capable of manipulating the results in a myriad of ways. And if you wanted to take a fair look at it, as a corporation with a responsibilty to their stockholders, they would be fired if they were not doing these things. So to me, it is simply common sense to assume that they do. And it is their right.
The only part of it that bothers me, are the people here and on reddit etc. who will just act insanely aggressive if you talk about this stuff. They will try to get mods to ban it, they will try to engage you in a flame war simply for asking a legitimate question.
Now i am sure you will see a bunch of answers in this thread about perception bias, you will see some answers saying that you cannot assume that hearthsone isn't random because you have not spent thousands of hours running tests, you will see all kinds of attempts to shut down the discussion. Which is really troubling because kids play this game, and they should know the reason that they are having such insanely bad luck is that the game is trying to make them buy cards.
1
Care to elaborate which deck can deal with it then?
1
In the middle of the endless war between warlocks and Demon hunters, there's Druid.
The ability to consistently reach their 7+ minions on turn 4 has become a problem now that there's a lot of good high mana minions for them to play. All these minions have Either taunt, can't be targeted, rush, or a combination of these stats. Making them untouchable if they reach this point.
The amount of deck that can deal with the constant big threats starting turn 4 are slim to none.
A simple fix to this I propose is to nerf Overgrowth to 5 mana. At this point its still better for ramping than nourish, and it breaks this powerful flow of breath of dreams > overgrowth > 7 mana minions on turn 4.
Thoughts?
9
upvoted for perfect solution.
1
I honestly don't know what's with the arguments going on right now. all I know is that I was facing diamond players, decided to lose a bunch of games, and now I'm facing silvers. That's what I recommend to others facing similar frustrations, and that's my experience.
Good day to everyone else.
1
Because I add people after the match to check their league? That part of my argument is actually a fact.
Honestly, this mob mentality of just wanting to belittle others is getting old. At least read things properly.
1
55 packs. 5 legendaries.
Kayn, Msshi'fn, Kanrethad, Bulwark and Golden The Lurker Below.
Way higher than the average so pretty satisfied. I just wish it included a legendary I had interest in.
27
I'm on bronze league yet all I am fighting are players with tier 1 decks that play like robots. No fun decks at all, no funny mistakes, endless amount of galakrond Rogues and highlander mages with 6+ legendaries.
If this new system was supposed to make it more fair, I honestly don't see it, my experience has been the absolute worse. I had way more fun back in rank 5 matches than this lower league bullshit.
Edit: I found a workaround, just auto-concede a bunch to get your "MMR" down. After about 30 games of mostly doing it, I am mostly fighting fair decks now and I'm enjoying being in Silver. Its quite sad that it had to come to this but gotta do the workarounds for such a feel bad system.
1
Leagues might as well be useless if a bronze is put agaisn't a diamond or legend or platinum. There should be a limit of how far the leagues are paired up agaisn't each other.
9
I just played agaisn't a diamond player, I added them just to see what rank they were... why is bronze players playing agaisn't diamond players? jesus christ.
5
The fact that there's a lot of nerfed cards on both decks really doesn't help :/