• 0

    posted a message on How does Hearthstone stack up to other card games?

    There are quite a few issues with HS I have, and then I recently saw CGPGrey play MtG and it seemed interesting enough, so it made me curious about if maybe another card game might be worth checking out. Plus it might be interesting to all here to see the pros and cons of different cardgames laid out, maybe we even walk away with newfound appreciation for HS who knows :P

    The criteria:

    1. How diverse is the game? Seems to me Blizzard wants all games to be some midrange minion trading snoozefest. I meanwhile like exciting new decks, with novel mechanics and ways to win. So it is a bonus if the game has many kinds of decks and win conditions. The primary criteria is diversity in the way games go and the decks that can be played. But secondarily I guess this is also about how fun and exciting the game is, as hard as that is to quantify.

    2. How F2P friendly is it? I don't really have a lot of money to spend on a CCG atm, and tbh I don't like the idea of spending much money on something so immaterial period. So it is an important criteria that the game be readily accessible for free. I do not care if it charges outrageous sums for cosmetic things as long as the actual gameplay is easily available. Bonus points to the game if the prices for cards (and to a lesser extent cosmetics) are affordable in the case I do choose to spend money on the game.

    3. How popular is it? Tbh I don't need a huge crowd, but having enough people for easy matchmaking sure is nice. And ofc if there is a ton of people then there is more content about it online, ways to learn to play, people to talk to or even just to meme. It is also about the longevity of the game, if it has few players and is barely breathing that is maybe not a game to get into. OTOH maybe it has few people but the cost to run it is low and the business model works. Primarily though this is about the ease of finding matches in the game.

    I'd love to hear from as many people as care to answer and about any online card game you can think of. Tell me your thoughts people!

    PS. Not sure if this kind of thread is kosher, I know some places have weird hangups about discussing other games and if that is the case mods can close this thread I suppose. Still I am curious about your opinions so feel free to PM me with your thoughts if you want.

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Design direction i'd like to see for combo decks
    Quote from Pythonproduct >>
    Quote from Neko_Tamo >>

    I've said this before but in short disruption and mill are not problems in of themselves. The problem is that there is no counterplay to them. Obviously since combo is the most dependent on having all their cards to work it feels like it targets them in particular, but in truth it sprays wide. Combo has to have a way to regain lost pieces fairly reliably. But regaining what you had does not boost your ultimate goal, on the contrary it is an expensive fix. This way disruption weakens combo without killing it outright. As is if Antonidas or Ill'gynoth get milled it is a virtual insta-loss.

     Tell me, how is there supposed to be counterplay to them? Even if there was, then you'd go back to rock paper scissors meta with combo beating control since they can beat disruption, control beating aggro, and aggro beating combo. If combo decks are uninteractable and don't care whatsoever what's on the board, the only way to stop them is with disruption. As you alluded to, disruption is also uninteractable,  which makes it unfun to play against, but if combo could circumvent it, there would be no point to it

     Because getting back what you already had does not further your win condition, it just fixes damage. If you were sure you won't face disruption you'd never run those graveyard recovery cards would you? You would streamline your deck further to have more removal, survival, draw or redundancy to boost the odds of the combo happening. So including disruption becomes a tech choice to combat combo, and they respond with anti-disruption measures. The disruption cards help raise the winrate against combo but weaken it against other matchups, meanwhile the recovery cards combo starts to run dilute their deck and lower their overall winrate but prevent auto-loss situations. Through trial and error the two sides will find an acceptable middleground between adding more tech to boost that matchup and cutting tech to boost overall matchups. It is a push and pull. Kind of like how slower decks run taunt, which they don't want, to counter face decks. Who in turn run cards like Hunter's Mark, which they don't want, since they know they will run into taunt and other big things that must die before smorc. Make sense?

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Most hated Meta ever?

    I think this is just the new normal, didn't Blizzard say they don't like super long matches. That pretty much kills control, the slowest decks will be control-combo hybrids or so I interpret their "we want all decks to have a win condition" comment. And the majority of decks will be aggro/midrange. Indeed they always have since such decks are cheap to make and most players are F2P or close to it. I don't things will change soon or ever.

    That is why pretty much any meta has something annoying, usually some fast deck which hits less skilled players especially bad. I know that was especially true for me since while fairly good even in the beginning I liked slow, meme decks and you can guess how well those did against zoo and face hunter. Especially undertaker hunter /shudders. Weirdly enough I was not as bothered by mech mage and tempo mage, maybe because by that point I was usually having fun on higher ranks with meme decks, only going to lower ranks at the end of the season for rewards? I guess early highlander decks were also annoying given how disgustingly op they were with Reno, Kazakus, Raza in a meta that was much lower power than modern one.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Design direction i'd like to see for combo decks

    I've said this before but in short disruption and mill are not problems in of themselves. The problem is that there is no counterplay to them. Obviously since combo is the most dependent on having all their cards to work it feels like it targets them in particular, but in truth it sprays wide. Combo has to have a way to regain lost pieces fairly reliably. But regaining what you had does not boost your ultimate goal, on the contrary it is an expensive fix. This way disruption weakens combo without killing it outright. As is if Antonidas or Ill'gynoth get milled it is a virtual insta-loss.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Can you remember your 1st day in HS?

    It was fun for sure, I was new to cardgames (not counting that old single-player Yu-gi-oh game). The intro was entertaining enough and the matchmaking good enough that I was not bullied out of the game. I quickly discovered on my own a ramp/combo druid that worked really well, Cenarius was my first ever legendary so it kind of pushed me that way.

    I climbed to Diamond League, this was way back in closed beta. I thought I was such hot shit but later I learned anyone who was good got that far, and best players were all in Platinum or Masters (I think there was Masters league, it copied SC basically). To my defense I was pretty fresh and I also did not have much time to climb since days after I popped in they introduced the original Ranked system.

    Good times, being a noob is at the same time the best and worst thing.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Dissatisfied with the nerfs...

    @P4dge but that is a clear copout. It is possible to make interesting cards on budget, especially when you have Standard rotations to serve as artificial sources of scarcity to make those new cards playable compared to golden oldies. Indeed that was pretty much the excuse used to introduce Standard, which I also found a copout since it is an implicit admission by the devs that they are not clever enough to make cards that are both balanced and interesting. It shows incompetence and greed, because now newer packs are more worthwhile than old ones forcing you to constantly grow your collection aggressively, little to no advantage to old players. Powercreep does the same thing, so now we are doubly fucked for same reasons, incompetence and greed by Blizzard. Plus it is just aesthetically unpleasing, seeing how much worse old cards are than contemporary ones.

    I don't know about other games as I don't play them, so someone else will have to either challenge you or back you that all card games powercreep over time. But I do know that I find this practice very disgusting and scummy and it is a big part of why Blizz won't see a dime from me.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Hysteria Nerf

    Some of those are broken some not so much, if they ever get too out of hand they will be nerfed hopefully. Note Tickatus wasn't nerfed despite being OP and hated, so the blade cuts both ways. Neither were some other OP warlock tools. Anyway I don't see much point in further debate, I look at individual cards and I see Warlock ones are considerably bonkers, probably most OP class pound for pound. It is just that currently the other pieces of the meta work against Warlock, if you buffed it to overcome those then there would be nothing to stop it, it would be T0. That is my read of the situation and seemingly Blizzard agrees.

    I hope things work out for you m8, consider trying out some other class for a bit.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Dissatisfied with the nerfs...
    Quote from FortyDust >>
    Quote from thebitterfig >>

    I posit the key lesson: it's often ineffective to use targeted nerfs to fix widespread and determined power creep.

     I counterpose that that was never the intent, nor it is a desirable, achievable or realistic goal.

     Why would you be pro-powercreep? At the very least it long-term devalues your collection since the newest cards will be more powerful and hence more desirable. Only the newest players benefit from it and only while they are new. And ofc Blizzard which through this inflation of cards forces you to buy more new packs to stay ahead. And if I wanted to list the bad sides of powercreep I could write pages. Really makes no sense to me. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Hysteria Nerf

    Obviously, but the point of that is not that Warlock, esp. control Warlock, deserves buffs but other classes deserve nerfs, and for Blizz to reverse the gear on powercreeping cards. Just compare classic cards and the ones from last 1-2 years, it's crazy.

    You are heavily invested in Warlock, and I get that, we all have our favorite class. But you would probably be well served if you branched out to other classes so that you are not so hard hit when Warlock is not strong in the meta. I agree with PetiteMouche (I think) that Warlock is ridiculously strong, just not strong in this meta. Eventually the meta will shift and Warlock will have its day. If we did what you want and just buffed it buffed it buffed it until it broke to the top it would be absolutely insane because then it would be strong despite the meta and that would make it broken on a level we haven't seen maybe ever. It would be strong in the presence of things that are meant to keep it down, classes which aren't would just die, I am not sure if meta could even compensate for such a buffed up Warlock. It's not fair and it should not happen.

    Consider all the ridiculous tools available to Warlock, soul shard cards, corrupt cards (including hated Tickatus), Jaraxxus and a ton of others. Warlock has so many potentially bonkers cards is hard to list them all. This deck is 100% poised to take over the meta, it will almost certainly happen, just not yet. And indeed Blizz is aware of this and has to make sure when it happens it's not too disgusting.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Tavern Brawl ideas

    As I said you can give players decent decks, which will be more than enough to get their 1win (or a few) after a couple games. Just don't give the best decks since that way you will ruin the mini-meta before it even begins. People will either use those decks or work off of them to make great ones of their own. Skipping that best part when people are experimenting and many decks are being played before clear winners emerge. Besides having a big collection of old cards should be useful for something.

    Ultimately both our issues should be solved by better matchmaking. Players lacking cards or skill would be matched together after a few games, as would players running more memey decks like me who likewise would not have high winrate. But sadly Blizz probably does not care enough to put in a lot of work for TB matchmaking.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Hysteria Nerf

    The issue with Hysteria is that it's a double whammy. Because if I play around Hysteria by having equalish minions so none can gobble up all the others then you get hit hard by AoE. If you play around AoE by having some stronger minions who will survive it you get hit hard by Hysteria. It is just an exceedingly annoying card to face, especially against Priest. It definitely deserved the nerf and I'd be quite happy if I never saw it again. Sadly it is too good to cut, which ofc just further shows the nerf was very much deserved.

    As for the debate going on, warlock has some beyond bust cards imo. If it can't win with those then it is not warlock that is weak but everything else that is nuts. Powercreep really fucked this game hard since I left.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Make generated cards known to both players

    Yeah Discover was fun during League of Explorers or however that adventure that added it was called exactly. By the time of Un'goro a year and a bit later it was very old. Now endless card generation is so old it coughs out dust when it speaks.

    I am so tired of having to fend off infinite solutions, especially from priests. If you ask me I'd stop printing Discover cards and then in two years we can finally be free of this menace. So yeah pretty much anything that hurts that annoying playstyle is good in my book. This would at least warn us what to watch out for, fourth Hysteria? Grrr, ok, I guess if I play this it won't be so bad... you get the idea. Or maybe add a further limitation that each card can only be Discovered or randomly generated once per game, so you know 3 is the max you will ever face in one match, well unless they use more obvious duplication methods like Felosophy, Echo, etc.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Tavern Brawl ideas

    Love some of these ideas. I am a big brawl fan too. Can't really spend time trying to brainstorm ideas of my own but I wish there were more high quality premade brawls like the very first Ragnaros vs Nefarian, I think I played like 130 games of that or something nuts like that. Good times, first I preferred Nefarian strongly like everyone, might have even instaquit with Rag. But then after getting bored of Nef, focused on Rag, realized Rag is actually better most of the time if you know what you are doing. Farmed clueless Nefarians who would often quit fast in frustration once their initial aggression bogged down. Or clueless Rags who instaquit wanting Nef. Had 100g from 3wins from the brawl every day ez mode.

    Premade decks may be offered, but definitely not the best ones Blizz can think of or the best from last time if a repeat brawl. Already too quickly things degenerate to cookie cutter decks, just recall the "use three cards brawl" meta it was overwhelmingly Patches druid, followed by fireball spam mage, with some overload shaman and pogo rogues sprinkled in. That was 99% of the meta. We don't need more of that we need less. Ideally you could fix that with better matchmaking but we know that won't happen.

    Hope this thread is very active and we hear many cool brawl ideas.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Annoyed by hiding nerf targets?
    Quote from RepoMan0077 >>
    Quote from lv426a11 >>

    I think they should just announce the changes and push them out at the same time with no prior warning. Why do we need a warning?  What does it change knowing that a thing will happen in a couple of weeks instead of now? 

    There's nothing I hate more than playing against OP cards which Blizzard themselves have decided are too good for their mana cost during the two weeks (or more) between the announcement and the nerf. It just feels like the opponent is cheating!

    As for why they do it they way they do, I'm sure they have their reasons.   Some may be cynical and some may be practical, but at the end of the day only Blizzard knows.

     

     

     It’s always about money. They’re purposely vague on which cards will be nerfed so people will still spend money on packs and battle ready decks, then they pull the rug out from under us.

     Sadly I see no other way than to agree with this. I see no good reason not to be more upfront about what they will do, even if it comes with qualifiers like "maybe."

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Annoyed by hiding nerf targets?

    They are doing it again! So stupid and pathetic.

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