Hearthpwn

This has the potential to be broken in a Tempo Rogue. Generally speaking, I can't remember a good turn 2 that didn't include coin for Rogue, so you're quite likely to just hero power yourself. Really not that big of a tempo loss for rogue.

Quote from JJSawry >>

The point in the original post is actually wrong. Renathal doesn't push aggro out and midrange in, because midrange board decks can't exist right now, control warrior is still a thing, and more annoyingly, freeze shaman package is still a thing, if you want to capitalize on boards you have to do it before turn 6, aka tribal decks.

While it's exciting for the meta that there is development, it's also so tedious to play against druid priest and warrior over and over. After a meta where scam big spell mage was actually a legitimate thing, now we have Prestor druid, game is clearly in a healthy state. Also f*ck celestial alignment and whoever came up with the idea itself, should've been slapped down from the get-go.

 

 That wasn't my point at all. What it pushes out are non-interactive face decks, basically running a bunch of damage spells and not much else. Agro still is possible with board-based decks. Indeed board based decks now may struggle a little bit, but we have a new expansion for that. The whole point of the thread is not what the card is doing (we have very few days to know the impact on the current meta xD), but instead what I personally think the card is INTENDED to do.

Quote from TheSpunYarn >>

I feel like online discussion of Hearthstone leans really heavily in favor of control -- of the entirety of Hearthstone's playerbase is likely very diverse in opinion on deck preference, but people who flock to YouTube comments or forums like this are usually Control players.  I could throw out some guesses regarding demographic; people who have more time to play longer Hearthstone games also probably have that free time to spend watching Hearthstone on YouTube etc.  I prefer playing aggro, but I see the value in a balanced meta as the best kind.  Each archetype has an important role in keeping another in check.  The classic rock>paper>scissors at a conceptual level.

I worry that Renethal may actually be the worst possible thing that could have happened to Hearthstone.  I've been wrong before, and I am a dramatic bitch, but I have reasons.

It's been mentioned here before, but if (hypothetically) 50% of the Standard meta becomes Renethal decks, that means that people need to invest into 10 more cards.  People aren't filling those slots with garbage, they're using the next best cards available to their deck.  Higher quality cards in slower decks tend to be higher rarity, the epics and legends.  Even the fun cards, the off-meta Renethal decks people will want to play, will involve like 5 Legends because those cards tend to be the most fun, impactful, and interesting to build around.  Hearthstone becomes, as a result, more expensive to play.  Somebody who wants to play Control is now highly disadvantaged unless they buy in; while Renethal may be free, the other cards in your deck most likely aren't.  Aggro was popular for a large variety of reasons.  Hearthstone is widely designed to be faster paced, to keep players attention between shorter and more exciting games that you can play on your break at work, or on the toilet.  Devs leaning into aggro made it strong, and desirable to play.  On top of this, aggro was cheap and accessible.  Commons and Rares made up a bulk of aggro decks, and games could be completed quickly for people with busy schedules.  Aggro, to the chagrin of Combo players everywhere, is the best thing for the largest demographic of Hearthstone players.  TLDR; the game becomes more expensive for anybody who wants to compete *if Renethal decks are the strongest available option*.

The effect that Renethal could have on aggro in and of itself could be a net negative for the game as a whole.  If aggro dies (and I do mean *if* it dies, Renethal has been out for all of 2 days so I won't conclude either way) I think that that's a terrible thing.  Because once Aggro decks become a non-element, Control decks are now running mostly into Control mirrors.  That might not be such a bad thing for people who like the grindy value matches, but competitive Hearthstone players are Spikes, and what I think will probably happen is that those 10 additional cards convert from Control additives to a Combo package.  Combo is the most effective way to beat Control, after all, so it makes sense that in order to combat the mirrors, all Control decks pivot into Combo/Control in order to compete.  The game then becomes two slow decks racing to see who hits their combo first.  And, in my opinion, that sounds boring as hell.  And if those changes make Aggro relevant again, the game will become a cycle of: Combo Control Mirrors > Control+ Mirrors to keep Aggro dead > Combo Control Mirrors > Next Set Release.

This is all purely speculative, and I'd own up to being wrong if I was proven wrong.  But an additional 10 Health is a hurdle I'm uncertain Aggro decks will be able to overcome as decklists become more refined.  For every draw card an Aggro deck includes so they don't run out of steam, that's a threat they have to drop.  I don't see the math working out for Aggro at all tbh.

Some people will be thrilled about this, and in fairness I'm glad Control players can get their time in the sun!  Aggro historically has been a dominant force in the game, I remember very VERY few metas where Control had the crown.  Though recently a Control deck was so strong it got like, 4 or 5 nerfs?  Let them eat cake imo.  But I think there'll need to be very relevant changes after a while, because one-third of Hearthstone vanishing will do a lot of damage to people's willingness to play it.  And why come back to Hearthstone when there're other, better TCG's and CCG's out there?

Just my thoughts.  Wanted the chance to share them on here, so I'm grateful for the thread.

I really hate that dumb feature this site has were they won't let you edit your messages sometimes lol.

Actually was trying to say that it vanquishes direct face damage decks, but not so much with agro based on board. Just wanted to say that also apart from what I said before haha.

Quote from TheSpunYarn >>

I feel like online discussion of Hearthstone leans really heavily in favor of control -- of the entirety of Hearthstone's playerbase is likely very diverse in opinion on deck preference, but people who flock to YouTube comments or forums like this are usually Control players.  I could throw out some guesses regarding demographic; people who have more time to play longer Hearthstone games also probably have that free time to spend watching Hearthstone on YouTube etc.  I prefer playing aggro, but I see the value in a balanced meta as the best kind.  Each archetype has an important role in keeping another in check.  The classic rock>paper>scissors at a conceptual level.

I worry that Renethal may actually be the worst possible thing that could have happened to Hearthstone.  I've been wrong before, and I am a dramatic bitch, but I have reasons.

It's been mentioned here before, but if (hypothetically) 50% of the Standard meta becomes Renethal decks, that means that people need to invest into 10 more cards.  People aren't filling those slots with garbage, they're using the next best cards available to their deck.  Higher quality cards in slower decks tend to be higher rarity, the epics and legends.  Even the fun cards, the off-meta Renethal decks people will want to play, will involve like 5 Legends because those cards tend to be the most fun, impactful, and interesting to build around.  Hearthstone becomes, as a result, more expensive to play.  Somebody who wants to play Control is now highly disadvantaged unless they buy in; while Renethal may be free, the other cards in your deck most likely aren't.  Aggro was popular for a large variety of reasons.  Hearthstone is widely designed to be faster paced, to keep players attention between shorter and more exciting games that you can play on your break at work, or on the toilet.  Devs leaning into aggro made it strong, and desirable to play.  On top of this, aggro was cheap and accessible.  Commons and Rares made up a bulk of aggro decks, and games could be completed quickly for people with busy schedules.  Aggro, to the chagrin of Combo players everywhere, is the best thing for the largest demographic of Hearthstone players.  TLDR; the game becomes more expensive for anybody who wants to compete *if Renethal decks are the strongest available option*.

The effect that Renethal could have on aggro in and of itself could be a net negative for the game as a whole.  If aggro dies (and I do mean *if* it dies, Renethal has been out for all of 2 days so I won't conclude either way) I think that that's a terrible thing.  Because once Aggro decks become a non-element, Control decks are now running mostly into Control mirrors.  That might not be such a bad thing for people who like the grindy value matches, but competitive Hearthstone players are Spikes, and what I think will probably happen is that those 10 additional cards convert from Control additives to a Combo package.  Combo is the most effective way to beat Control, after all, so it makes sense that in order to combat the mirrors, all Control decks pivot into Combo/Control in order to compete.  The game then becomes two slow decks racing to see who hits their combo first.  And, in my opinion, that sounds boring as hell.  And if those changes make Aggro relevant again, the game will become a cycle of: Combo Control Mirrors > Control+ Mirrors to keep Aggro dead > Combo Control Mirrors > Next Set Release.

This is all purely speculative, and I'd own up to being wrong if I was proven wrong.  But an additional 10 Health is a hurdle I'm uncertain Aggro decks will be able to overcome as decklists become more refined.  For every draw card an Aggro deck includes so they don't run out of steam, that's a threat they have to drop.  I don't see the math working out for Aggro at all tbh.

Some people will be thrilled about this, and in fairness I'm glad Control players can get their time in the sun!  Aggro historically has been a dominant force in the game, I remember very VERY few metas where Control had the crown.  Though recently a Control deck was so strong it got like, 4 or 5 nerfs?  Let them eat cake imo.  But I think there'll need to be very relevant changes after a while, because one-third of Hearthstone vanishing will do a lot of damage to people's willingness to play it.  And why come back to Hearthstone when there're other, better TCG's and CCG's out there?

Just my thoughts.  Wanted the chance to share them on here, so I'm grateful for the thread.

I disagree, Renathal indeed dismantles agro decks based solely on quick face damage like DH or Quest Hunter, having more health doesn't guarantees you're going to have removal. Yes, it makes it statistically more probable, but it doesn't. Efficient board generation decks will still be viable and will probably still kick Renathal deck asses. I do agree that agro disappearing is totally bad for the game. Agro needs to be there. I like all kind of decks, I played agro, combo, midrange, control and even meme decks with no sense lol. All serve a purpose.

What needs to be done is actually increase the ceiling of the game a little bit. Lets be honest, you can't play around an insane amount of direct damage unless you have extreme heal or dumb armor generation (which was the current strategy). That play style is toxic, we have seen it before a lot. Having more life from start is not equal to having an entire deck for generating armor and healing. So, a play style with not so many counters what finally does is lowering the ceiling of the game. How many times have you lost against a face hunter or DH that you visually saw counting poorly, making trades when he clearly didn't needed to do it so? It's something that happens. And it's to blame the abusive amount of face damage we have...

TLDR, IMO Renathal is the clean solution for the problem of too much face damage.

Quote from Cromp1990 >>

My opinion so feel free to disagree.

I liked the idea of renathal but I think a flat buff to 40hp should have been done to everyone because of the power creep. Renathal should have just given you the power to have 40 cards. 

 Yes, I also agree that anyways it could have been the same if they did that. To me it feels ok to have it standard for 2 years and leaving it to be in Wild. But having this permanently would also be nice. 

Quote from Dakhrok >>

I tell you what will happen: budget decks are dead.

When you have to include 40 cards in a deck it'll increase dramatically the use of Legendary and Epic cards.

After 2-3 meta shifts many players won't be able to keep up crafting all the needed cards. And the excitement will fade when they play 25 minute games only to lose.

 I don't think so. My point is that it isn't that everyone is playing 40 card decks. Everyone is EXPERIMENTING with 40 card decks. We didn't reached a point were agro counters appeared. An an agro deck will never EVER use 40 cards unless something VERY crazy is going on (which I'd love lol)

I really don't think also that games have gotten longer. There are the same decks. They win the same. 40 cards didn't introduced almost any variance in the time per game. Sure, now we have less agro. But as I said before, that's to blame curiosity and experimentation, and not finding out yet the right agro answer. Once some pro gets bored of 40 health and decides to counter them, things will start changing quickly. The mechanic, lets wait one or two weeks more.

Before anything, this is a serious thread, not for saltiness, and our opinions may differ. If that's the case, discuss it like an adult.

IMO, this game has fallen into a trap of face decks that are hard to counter and tend to turn the meta into a rock-paper-scissors, where if you are deck A and face deck B, you lose. Direct damage has little to no counter other than extreme healing/armoring or this. Extreme healing and endless armor are quite toxic and boring to the game. Increasing health is the only possible way (apart from deleting cards from existence, which'll never happen), plus, creating decks where that 40 cards restriction is in fact a good thing (Lady Prestor I'm looking at you lol) could be a good thing for creativity.

What do I think will happen in the end with 40 health? Agro decks will change to board/token decks, like old Zoos. And more midrange deck will start flourishing. Those agro decks can be countered in a more healthy way (board clears, building your own board, taunts), and are  A LOT more punishing. There is very little punish to face and direct damage, as I said before. I'm tired of wanting to try some deck and losing to some random folk who doesn't even knows how to play his deck (due to his mistakes), but wins anyways. Game is no fun when the opponent ignores you and throws you spells and hits you in the face. Sure, those players may think "this is fun". But eventually they'll get tired and leave the game. And us, the ones who have been here since a long time, are the only ones punished.

Right now we're on the hype train, everything is 40 cards right now (fuck, even saw a quest pirate warrior which has 0 sense lol), but eventually this'll get fixed. Either now, or either with the next expansion and future ones.

That's what I think. What do you guys think? I really hope this is a response for fixing dumb face decks and in the near future they stop printing support for that, so we don't need 40 decks forever in Standard. Agro decks were a lot more fun when you had to be cautious about board clears and maximizing the value of everything so that every little boy counts, or use fancy combos. That's fun and interactive. Playing a weapon and dealing 4890352 damage in turn 4? Nope, that's not. At least for me.

I wish Jace stopped targeting enemies only. DH already has lots of attack buff or enemy-only spells. Jace has no restriction in deck building, since you were already going to include all of these cards. I think it's stronger than Shudder or Zul'jin. Both introduced the restriction of avoiding anything that can target yourself.

Dude you sent one video that said that thing about a full character costing $110000...

Quote from Bengalaas >>

Tl;dw: the biggest problem with the game isn't it's p2w nature, it's that it uses predatory monetisation techniques designed specifically to prey upon those with addictive personalities, or kids with their mom's credit card etc.

I mean dude, from what I read, that $110000 number was some low-level math from somebody that didn't even played the game and didn't have the information...

And you can do the same analysis with almost any MMORPG game that has paid currencies or currencies that can be converted to real money in some way (like EVE Online). I mean, the last one is considered one of the best MMORPGS of the history. And you can't play it if you don't spend 12hs per day. Ships can cost up to 30k...

I think this can be reduced to 4 things:

1. Fake news, due to the misinformation and TERRIBLE communication from part of Blizzard.
2. Blizzard hate wave on which we are since the past years, and kept growing more and more due to the last issues.
3. HORRIBLE balance and testing. This is common rule for all Blizz games. If you never noticed this, you never played a Blizz game lol. Not saying this is good, but it's not as terrible as targeting on addictive persons... This game has a drop system based on your level. I think the rates are just broken and you're getting equipment that is behind your actual level. 
4. Indeed an excess of monetization, which sums to all of the previous things.

Quote from PetiteMouche >>

Did you actually played the game consistently for talking that way or are you only based on what you saw on the internet?

I saw people playing the game. I saw the microtransactions. I followed the evolution of Blizzard for more than 20 years. I don't need to play the game. I know everything I need to know.

Just watching people play the game gave me horrible raid shadow legends flashbacks, and you tell me I need to play the game consistently to form a valid opinion? Well, that's not how opinions work. Game should be voted absolute garbage of the year, this is my biased, uneducated opinion and you don't have to agree.

We can't say this is pay to win if we don't actually know what the endgame is. Blizz gave little to no information about all of this...

What does endgame have to do with any of this ? If you can pay to win more/faster/better, if you need to dedicate your life to make progress as F2P, this is a pay to win game, simple as that. "Endgame" means absolutely nothing, everyone has their own idea of what endgame is, it's not a feature, it's a state of mind, a convention. Blizzard gave us all the information we need with that "800% value" beginner's pack. They are not exactly being secret or mysterious about all of this, at this point I'm even inclined to believe you are a paid blizzard employee, because I don't understand what more do you need to have confirmation that this is a bad pay to win game.

And yes, Blizzard takes more shit from their mistake than most other gaming companies, that's true. But that's totally fair, they have a bigger, more dedicated fanbase, they have more responsibility than say Ubisoft for example who can get away with garbage game cause nobody cares. When blizzard makes garbage money grab games, this affects not only the entire world, but also the entire gaming industry. It's like, president of the USA can't say stupid shit whenever he wants, but a third world country leader can. They have the same job, not the same responsibility to the world. 

By endgame, I'll reword for you to understand what I intended to say, is the end of the campaign. It's strongly focused on faction wars and faction events. Which still didn't happened. They're going to happen in a weekly and monthly base. Some just started. And the poor information you get about them is "you get rewards". Literally. Only that. And Blizz didn't explained what the rewards are. I don't know if somebody did it already (if you know about it  and you have a sheet with the resources from it it would be nice)

IMO, a F2P game is pay to win when you can't get the same things than a paid user in a consistent way. I don't see it as a bad thing to be able to pay to speed up things. But you should be able to get it by playing. That's how HS works. If you disagree, I mean, you either don't play the game or didn't do the math, since by playing quests you can get lots of resources. Of course you won't get full collection, but you're able to play meta decks from some classes. That's ok. That's not pay to win. If you have meta decks, you can play against other persons that also have meta decks. The only thing you sacrifice by not paying is a full collection.

Based on that, given that we don't know the actual math about the rewards and resources, we can't say consistently that this game is pay to win. It has some abusive microtransactions? Sure. That's clear, just open the shop and you'll see it. But can you generate enough resources for being able to play the game at similar level than a paid user? You can't affirm it if you don't know the math and numbers.

Quote from PetiteMouche >>

Quote from fjl93 >>

 And also, WHO WOULD PAY 100K FOR FINISHING A GAME WITHOUT PLAYING IT? That's unrealistic. 

 Maybe not instantly, but over a long period of time, that is totally realistic man. Some people just have the money and don't care (streamers, etc), some can't stop themselves.

Also "without playing it" isn't really honest, as this type of predatory game makes sure what you are "playing" as F2P is total garbage, repetitve, frustrating, exhausting, tedious experience compared to spending money and making meaningful progress and having fun without dedicating your entire life to it, you know like a normal non-predatory game that has everything unlocked/unlockable at the moment you purchase the game.

Spending money DOES make your experience better in these garbage games, not worse, it's the least they can do lol, that's the whole point, that's why it works.

But dude, as we were saying, many features are level blocked or it just didn't passed the required time for knowing how they work (faction wars and faction events in general). These features are KEY for F2P Players, since they give you lots of resources that otherwise you would get them by paying or by endless grind. We can't say this is pay to win if we don't actually know what the endgame is. Blizz gave little to no information about all of this...

Did you actually played the game consistently for talking that way or are you only based on what you saw on the internet?

Not defending the monetization, it actually is bad, but as I said, I'm not entirely sure how bad it is compared to F2P.

Quote from Shipmen >>

This number, I can assure you, that it is totally wrong. And nobody is nearby, full. 

 And while also is wrong, this same exercise can be done with every MMO that has some kind of paid currency (or at least currency equivalent to money in any way). 

Let's take EVE Online for example, some people call it the biggest and best MMO of all time... AAAAND you have ships that cost 30k (of ingame currency with a value of 30k actually ) and require to spend 10 hours per day at least for the gaming experience to be enjoyable (had a friend that played it and left it because it was basically a job with the amount of work and schedule required)...

This is part of the hate wave Blizz is getting due to the abuse cases. They deserve that hate because that particular reason? Maybe. I don't know. But hate should be focused on information, not on fake news or out of context news like that 100k post that got viral. And also, WHO WOULD PAY 100K FOR FINISHING A GAME WITHOUT PLAYING IT? That's unrealistic. 

Quote from Shipmen >>

I am level 60 + 10. I finished the campaign and can confirm that it can be completed without in-game purchases. The longevity is truly impressive.  I am astonished about the quantity of contents of this game. There are a lot of things. Now that I understand it better, I can tell you this. 

Yes. There is an issue with the legendary gems that are like now only purchasable (you will find very few of them due to missions). It is anyway true that this game is truly massive. At level 60 you theoretically end the game, but there are after hell 1, hell 2 hell 3 and hell 4 (hells are the same maps and raids with stronger enemies and stronger drops). Max level is 60 + 150 (at least, if not more). 

So, is it pay-to-win? Yes, and I don't know. If you pay, you can accelerate for sure. The main issue is that this game is so massive that nobody know, like now, what it is in hell 2/3 and 4. For example. Before hell, it was nearly impossible to find normal gems (and now we can find them in inside the raids in hell 1). So I don't know if in hell 2/3 or 4 we will be able to find the legendaries gems. 

There are articles, like this one: https://gamerant.com/diablo-immortal-pay-to-win-legendary-gems/

My opinion is that it is a very stupid position. Because the reality is another, nobody knows what it is inside the levels up to hell 1. So we don't know, and for sure this estimate is dumb.

 This is exactly what I was discussing with some friends! I think there is a giant wave of hate based only on missinformation. That's also to blame to Blizz IMO. People is saying that the endgame of the game has a big pay-wall... Without even knowing what is the endgame!

I mean, we don't even unlocked faction and clan wars, which based on the vague information we have right now will give us gems, equipments and materials but we don't know how much, neither the level of the equipment we're going to get. Is it random? We don't know.

People is saying that the endgame is unplayable on a game that only has FIVE DAYS, without knowing its actual features, and, worst of all, in an unfinished version of it! Blizz should focus on clarifying what the actual endgame is. Blizz communities generally are very toxic, and their default status is indignation and hate. If somebody don't think it's like this, then that somebody is probably part of the toxic part of the community lol.

I think we need to wait. For now, the gaming experience for me is awesome. I'm at lvl 49, only payed the premium battle pass because I liked the cosmetics.

I mean... Levik was the one that commited stupid mistakes... That priest game dude, platinum level... Who throws everything in hand against a Rogue on turn 8? IMO Levik was blessed by luck. Not saying he's a bad player, he's also a beast. But between the two, Gaby played better, but sometimes it just isn't about playing good.