Honestly, I think this would have been the perfect time to introduce the first Neutral skin. Any class could be C'Thun.
THIS! I would have loved to see this as an idea. The idea of the C'thun's influence being prevalent enough to overtake any hero in the game is super cool.
2
Yep, that's right: this "event" is the height of pathos by Blizzard, in fact, it may well appear to be a private "event" created by the fanbase rather than by the game's developers themselves...
What would have to be done to make it a proper event? Instead of a simple tweet or even an in-game notification, there should be a special quest the 15th of every month (there is supposed to be a fourth slot for special quests by the way) that rewards you with extra XP if you play 5 games with Nozdormu in your deck that day.
-3
Yep, that's another interesting topic...
Will there be any reward for this new game mode or it's perhaps another battleground-thing? Are they going to somehow incentivise us to play this game mode? Or on the contrary, are they going to push us to play it?
I mean, for me, Hearthstone should be exclusively a collectible card game: all these new game modes not related with collecting and playing cards have no sense for me...
These new modes should be independent games, alien to Hearthstone completely, because you know: who grabs too much loses all. Blizzard should not bite off more than they can chew.
As another guy said: "Blizzard is spending a lot of their focus making a lot of content for casual PVE players which would be better invested in making the main game more interesting and accessible to the audience that they are trying to capture with this game mode. It also feels strange saying my favourite card game is an auto battler and a adventure game."
2
I will try to be brief and concise.
In the first place it is not a personal opinion nor is it "my" truth: it was established by Blizzard itself that the wild mode was a mixed bag where we could play with ALL the cards that we had in our collection. That "golden rule" is the premise of the very existence of that game mode and now it is broken. That is an undeniable fact.
Banning cards in a game mode whose main reason for being is that all cards can be playable is a terrible precedent, especially when it comes as a response (the laziest and easiest one) to a problem that they have created themselves. This is also an undeniable fact.
In short, banning cards is incompatible with wild mode, that's my point.
And by the way, dissatisfied customers must be demanding and must criticize and even shout their complaints, otherwise they wouldn't be dissatisfied, but conformist customers. We, as customers, have the right, and I would even say the obligation, to demand that the products we consume meet our interests, because it is the only way for companies to know and adjust to the needs of their customers. It is for the good of the companies themselves.
0
Yep It's true, perhaps I may have overstep being too "vehement".
I know that this is only a card game and that in the great scheme of things this is a meaningless thing as you say, but being relative and focusing on the game, it is a "temper tantrum" more than justified.
Obviating the thick words, it cannot be denied that I have only told the truth, it hurts whoever hurts: the approach they have chosen to solve a problem they themselves have created is the lest desirable of all, let's face it, it's the most cowardly and easiest solution for them.
The precedent that has just been created (banning cards in a collectibles card game) is very very harmful, and I am not exaggerating when I say that it destroys the concept of the wild mode completely (since it negates its basic essence: you can use whatever you have in your collection). This is not debatable, it's a fact.
And yes, I insist: team 5 should be fired, and I'm not being childish, I'm just a demanding customer. There are already many mistakes and lack of attention on their part, this is not new. They seem to be more focused on creating new ways to monetize the game than on the game itself.
I admit that I have spent several hundred bucks on the game throughout all these years, in fact I was very interested in buying the wild bundle that is currently in the in-game shop, but considering what happened, why am I going to spend money on a game mode that just broke its golden rule? And what is more, why am I going to reward these incompetent people with my money?
1
Not at all: banning cards from a format that was specifically designed to allow EVERYTHING is a mistake.
Let's not fool ourselves, banning cards in constructed modes, even temporarily, can set a very dangerous precedent indeed.
9
If I were a game developer, I wouldn't change the concept of immunity (which is quite obvious and self-explanatory) not even this specific card, because that would be a mere band-aid that would only serve to hide the real problem.
Make no mistake, the problem with this card is the same as always: the cost cheating problem. We must avoid trivializing the cost of cards, either in mana or health, as in this case.
The concept of PAYING in health instead of mana is interesting, especially in the thematic philosophy of warlocks. But paying means paying, if you don't give what is asked of you, you get nothing.
If you are immune and CANNOT lose health, then it should be impossible to make any health payments, therefore it is as when you have no mana to pay and therefore cannot play any more cards. Remember that the game already prevents you from playing cards for life if you don't have enough life to pay the cost! There is already a precedent.
Taking damage would be a different thing, since an immunity would prevent it, but if in the upper left corner of a card where its mana cost is usually shown inside a blue gem, there is now a drop of blood, that means that you have to give health as payment for playing it...
Practical example: imagine that a card is published whose text reads: "Battlecry: During the next turn, your opponent cannot spend mana". Then, even if your opponent has 10 mana crystals, or even if he has ways to recharge them, he could only play cards whose mana cost is zero on that turn, because he could not consume mana no matter how much he had.
I hope that it has been clear. Honestly, it would be the most elegant solution, and also, it would not only solve the problem of this card but it would have corrected the underlying problem at its roots, that is, it would have fixed the problem forever, even for future cards, as it would not be a simple patch or temporary solution.
0
I love how this comment of mine has been voted negatively to death, but nevertheless no one has dared to answer me trying to refute me, although I understand that that would be impossible because I have only told the truth.
-14
Really? This is already embarrassing...
It is a real shame that a company (even a small indie one) resorts to such belated, sloppy and lazy solutions ... the easiest and most absurd solution that does not fix the problem, but only hides it ("temporarily" at best ). What a lack of balls, it's pathetic.
Wild mode was promised to be that, wild, where everything is allowed and where all cards should be de-nerfed... but now it turns out that there are banned cards? Wild mode no longer has a reason to be nor serves any purpose anymore. This is clearly an insult to those of us who are exclusively wild players.
But worst of all, the most outrageous thing is that a company that does not stop monetizing the game to earn more and more money continually commits atrocities such as publishing cards that were an obvious problem for anyone with some common sense and basic knowledge of the game. Don't they check the possible negative effects of every new card before publishing them? Obviously not, since it is not the first time. For God sake, these people don't deserve to charge a single cent, because they don't do their job at all, they just continually improvise. They should all be fired.
2
And the final reminder, here is the schedule of events and rewards:
(Those marked with an * are shared rewards, i.e. you can only get 2 Year of the Phoenix packs at most from all those weeks altogether)
1
That would be PERFECT!! Great idea, all my support to this