• 3

    posted a message on What does a balanced meta look like?

    We now know that, later this month, Blizzard will be releasing some balance changes. There have also been countless threads here about the need to nerf this deck/ card. But, what never seems to be addressed is what we mean by a "balanced" meta? In most cases, the poster calling for a nerf completely fails to address what will happen AFTER that nerf takes effect. What will that change do to other decks? What deck will then be the new top dog? (For example, many are calling for nerfs to Miracle Rogue and Quest DH. Will that, as seems likely, make Spitter Hunter the dominant deck?)

    So, let me ask you all, is a balanced meta:

    a) one in which every class has a viable deck to ladder? If so, how high? Legend? Diamond? Platinum?; OR

    b) one in which every type of deck (aggro, midrange, control, combo) has a viable deck?; OR

    c) one in which both minion-based and spell-based decks are viable?; OR

    d) some other condition I can't think of.

    I, speaking for myself, lean towards b), but could be convinced otherwise. Would love to hear some real thoughts and analysis, vice bile. (May be asking too much!)

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Druid is turning meta toxic
    Quote from emkarab >>

     Quest Rogue was in the same spot - beatable, but still toxic and preventing meta diversity.

     As I recall, Quest Rogue was only nerfed because it was a "feel bad to play against" type deck. There were no balance issues with it, and it certainly wasn't a high winrate deck. (That said, it's been a while and my memory on this is fuzzy, so I could be wrong.)

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Druid is turning meta toxic
    Quote from olestuga >>
    Quote from TallStranger >>
    Quote from olestuga >>

    Who doesn't know that you can use an equally or more busted deck to beat another busted deck?

    'No deck has 100% win rate' does not equate to 'nothing is broken or OP'.

     As was pointed out in a different thread, "busted" or "OP" only has meaning in relation to other decks. So if there are multiple "busted" decks, there are, in fact, none.

     By that logic, balance changes shouldn't be necessary, because no card is busted or OP if there are multiple busted cards. 

     No. Not even remotely accurate. Cards are judged by different criteria, for obvious reasons. Decks can only be judged by winrate, by definition relative to one another. (Let me play an off-meta Standard deck against the best decks in Classic, and my winrate will be obscene.) Cards, however, must be judged not only by winrate when played, but also by the classes/ decks it can be played in and the synergies it has with other cards. For example, if a player could put Purified Shard in his opening deck, it would be horribly broken. But, given the class it's limited to and the hoops one has to jump through to get and play the card, only a nutjob would call it OP. Similarly, Stealer of Souls isn't a good card without The Demon Seed. But the synergy between the two made it utterly broken and got it banned in Wild.

    Balance changes are typically done because either a) a specific card has an unforeseen but massive impact (usually as a result of pairing it with another card) that renders the overall deck too strong (see, for example, Wretched Tiller when paired with Deathspeaker and the unnerfed Hysteria); or b) a deck's overall winrate (i.e., RELATIVE strength) is too high and Blizzard believes that a particular card or cards in the deck are primarily responsible. Since it is virtually impossible to have 3-4 decks with too high a winrate (I think Blizzard starts getting worried when it hits the high 50s, but don't quote me on that), you probably cannot realistically have more than 2 "broken" decks at any given point in the meta.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Druid is turning meta toxic
    Quote from olestuga >>

    Who doesn't know that you can use an equally or more busted deck to beat another busted deck?

    'No deck has 100% win rate' does not equate to 'nothing is broken or OP'.

     As was pointed out in a different thread, "busted" or "OP" only has meaning in relation to other decks. So if there are multiple "busted" decks, there are, in fact, none.

    It sounds to me like you have a preferred class or deck that simply does not perform well in the current meta. Guess what: everyone who's played this game a while has been there. In this situation, you have two choices: play a deck that performs well in the current meta, or play the decks you enjoy and don't worry about climbing the ladder. (I do this all the time. Seriously, laddering is not that important.) Instead, however, you seem insistent on demanding changes to the game so that YOU can have more fun. You're free to do so, of course, but you can't offer a rational (vice personal) argument for it.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on DK Isn't Weak, The Old Meta Is Too Strong
    Quote from BroF1sT >>
    Quote from Scorpyon >>
    Quote from BroF1sT >>
    Quote from Scorpyon >>

    Have to disagree. Of all the decks I am currently running, my Blood DK deck is the only one (barring Celestial Druid) that remains almost unbeaten. In fact, when I test a new deck, like OTK Hunter, etc, and it fails miserably, DK is the deck I go back o to cheer myself up again! Haha!

    I did try a Full Hybrid DK (one of each Rune - it was bad), and an UnHoly DK (it was average), so it may be that the other DK decks are lacking in power a little, but Blood DK is definitely uber-strong in the right hands.

    Cool story, bro. I didn't even have to buy (Gold) any new expansion packs to realize how smoothly I was gliding through Ranked with all those fancy new decks trying (and failing) to be as unfair as Imp-Curselock.

    Quick glance at HSreplay confirmed, the DK Class is actually unplayable competitively, the "strongest" list roaming barely around 50% . Extra Miserable stats against Imp-Curselock (My Top 200 Legend deck of last month) as well as vs Ramp Druid.

    Then again you are probably a Diamond ranked dude (at best) so your fancy Blood DK is getting you somewhere in Silver/Gold.

    Hearthstone Decks - HSReplay.net

    Blood DK at 60%+ winrate... seems pretty playable to me...

    Please someone tell me, this 🤡 is not for real ?

    So ur showing us a example with 300 Games Samplesize, but not enough you didn't even bother to specify which rank, just the general / all ranks setting.

    How did this Amateur who doesn't even know how to navigate HSreplay properly become a Moderator in here ? Yuck.

    Blood DK is unplayable, let me repeat. Un-play-able at Legend if you want to climb, without having to amass enough sample size that would require like 12 hours a day in front of your computer, trying to break even.

    Warlock and Druid are the only playable classes right now if you plan to rank really high. But why listen to someone who was among the best 200 Hearthstone players in Europe just last month, when you can just troll and defend your nons as a Moderator, right ?

    Instead of attempting to reach Legend rank for the first time, why don't you just go ahead, make good use of those pOwErS - ban me, because I'am obviously mocking you... and having a BLAST with it. lul. 

     And this, boys and girls, is why you NEVER post while high.

    Seriously, dude. I'm not sure what's sadder: your pathetic effort to bait him or the fact that you think your argument makes an ounce of sense.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on TECH cards are USELESS...and heres why(my humble opinion -- MHO)
    Quote from Zizka >>

    It’s not the same thing, however.

    When you’re gambling, you do win sometimes and the stakes are much higher as you’re risking your own money. Without going too much into it, the psychological dynamic isn’t the same. Also, gambling often doesn’t pit you against another player in a duel, that’s another key difference for the reasons discussed below.

    In this user’s opinion, everything is rigged. Honestly I’ve read so many of those conspiracies that it’s hard to keep track of it all as they range from “players who pay win automatically” to “matching someone on the same skill level is rigging the game”. It’s hard to get a definite answer as to how the game is rigged exactly as when you provide a counter argument, they suddenly stop responding (until they bring it back up a while later in a different thread). 

    If everything is rigged, none of your decisions matter, you are “rigged” to win or lose. You could always play your left side card on each turn and you’d win because it rigged and you’re playing against a f2p player. Of course, this whole theory crumbles under a modicum of scrutiny but faith is something which you can’t reason with. 

    Q. How do you explain that there’s a winner when two f2p players face each other? A. Oh that never happens, based on my nonexistent data, the loser is always whoever doesn’t pay as much as the winner. 

    Another recurring argument is that the winner was rigged to draw “perfectly”, as if the player agency had *nothing* to do with the victory. Anyway, the list goes on but there’s just no way for putting those absurdities to rest, they just keep popping up. There’s always someone to blame (or something) one key character is always innocent: the proponent of the conspiracy. They never misplay, a defeat on their part is always caused by some unseen algorithm they have no control over. If this isn’t some kind of mental disorder, I don’t know what is.

     

     Well said, especially the final para. Too many of these guys fail to realize how often their own mistakes (rather than a rigged game) lead to their defeat. A while back one of the guys on my friend list was spectating one of my games. I was playing a deck that was somewhat new to me (can't recall anymore what it was) but which I thought I knew pretty well. After I lost the first game he watched, he proceeded (very politely) to point out 3-4 major mistakes I made, ones I didn't even realize I was making. And I'm a pretty good player (I think).

    If these guys spent half as much time reviewing their previous games as they do complaining about secret algorithms and Blizzard patents, they'd start seeing that they're more responsible for their losses than they realize.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 4

    posted a message on TECH cards are USELESS...and heres why(my humble opinion -- MHO)
    Quote from Zizka >>

    3nn1: surely you’ve quit playing the game a long time ago once you discovered that the game was “rigged” right?

     Don't be silly: that would be way too rational. Sadly, it appears that ship sailed a long time ago.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Reporting players??

    Huh? That makes no sense. The only reason these guys try to friend you is to flame you. If they know that doing so could get them banned, they'll sulk away after the game and never bother you again. The entire purpose of the report function is to prevent a) inappropriate/ obscene player names; and b) abusive chat. All I'm saying is that people should take advantage of this capability.

    It's not like Facebook/ Twitter/ etc. where speech is being monitored and censored.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Reporting players??

    Best thing you can do is keep reporting these losers. I've personally probably reported 10-12 people for friending and then flaming me. (The most recent suggesting that I kill myself for the good of the human race!) If Scorpyon is right that it's based on number of reports and the severity of behavior (and I'd bet he is), the more frequently you report these guys, the more likely it is that they will (eventually) learn their lesson.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • -1

    posted a message on Patchnotes Coming Thursday - Changes to Theotar, Wildseeds and Harpoon Gun Teased

    I have zero confidence that Blizzard won't nerf Theotar so badly that it becomes unplayable. Maybe they could do something like "Steal a copy of a card in your opponent's deck. Shuffle their copy back into their deck." That would still be a quasi-disrupt (which is the whole point of the card) without the whiners necessarily complaining (though they'll just move on to another "broken" card).

    Posted in: News
  • 1

    posted a message on Returning Player Questions
    Quote from Palindas >>

    If you want to know my opinion, keep away from this hot garbage. Hearthstone had it's prime in 2015. Now it's just an unbalanced and frustrating cash grab. The most talented developers left this game a long time ago. This game should die already but unfortunately many people are still paying and keep this abomination alive.

     I find these types of comments amusing. Either you are still playing a game that you apparently hate (which makes me question your sanity) or you are hanging around and posting on a forum dedicated to a game that you no longer play (in which case, you have no idea if the game is good or not).

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on a conversation about RNG

    To answer OP's question, if I were Blizzard, I wouldn't "make money" through my RNG. Period. I'd make money by producing content that my current players want and by attracting new customers to the game.

    Having made repeated public statements that I do NOT scan players' cards or decks when matching them with opponents, I would do what I say I do. Not because I'm a nice guy/ company run by saints, but because to lie to the public about my RNG is stupid and dangerous. Given how cutthroat the gaming industry is and how many game designers move from company to company every year, I would know that this lie would be made public, sooner or later, which could be devastating. Individual and institutional investors rely on these statements when determining the value of shares of my company, and they get very nasty and litigious when they're misled. Given that Microsoft is buying me, the very last thing I want to do is attract negative attention. Words like "securities fraud" don't make parent companies happy.

    If, because I apparently don't know how to playtest, I discovered that one or more decks was too strong, I would simply nerf said decks rather than manipulate the RNG to reduce their winrate. It's safer, easier and legal.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Standard Balance Changes Coming Soon - Might Include Neutral Cards!

    I fail to understand why people insist on destroying this card. Making it random or only stealing a copy of a card makes it unplayable. Period.

    Here's a crazy idea: don't create a deck with only one wincon. As you said, druid and mage have multiple win conditions. If demon hunter or paladin players insist on playing decks that rely on a single card to win, that's a risk they should have to take.

    Posted in: News
  • 5

    posted a message on Hearthstone is 2022

    Dear God, you've been saying "you're done with constructed Hearthstone" for months/ years now. But you keep coming back with the same tedious BS you've been spewing out for years. Maybe you should see a therapist. Seriously.

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Fire festival is SO BAD NOW

    His point is that the "pain" is virtually non-existent. I despise Battlegrounds: find it insipid and pointless. I always re-roll when I get a BG quest. But, for this chain, I literally started BG, selected some hero, bought a single minion, and walked away. Then repeated. It took zero effort and very little time.

    As for Mercenaries, you can literally do an entire bounty in about 3 minutes using only the mercs they provide you.

    You could complete this quest easily, but you'd rather stroke your ego by making a big show about how much you hate these modes. Congrats, dude. You've made your point. You're sooooooo principled!

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