Hearthpwn

Quote from parishbishop >>

Quote from Scorpyon >>

 It's skill when I pull off a cool 200-IQ play out of nowhere.
Obviously, it's just RnG bald-faced luck when my opponent does it. :-)

 LOL 200 IQ gets used way too much for this game IMO. Yes there is skill involved, but finding  the simple math equation to clear a board is not even close to even 140 IQ! As a guy who used to play tournament level chess, the amount of comparable skill between the games is not even close, yet, in the chess community, we dont say "wow, that was a 200 IQ move you just made" very often, or at all. 

So, why is this phrase used so much in HS? Do players really feel that playing a game where 4 beats 3, and 3 beats 2 is that complicated and warrant such a saying? Or is more copy pasta going on, where he said it, so I say it too?

Your discussion about Grit really is appropriate, and is a totally different skill than pure intellect! The Grit you talk about is what is needed to climb the ladder with home brew decks especially because most others are using top tier decks. I  admit to crumbling into a salty guy, when i get on a losing streak, and having more Grit helps alot for sure. 

 

I think the dumbing down of western society is prob one of the reasons why the 200 IQ saying gets used in regards to simple HS plays. Kids today, generally, just arent as intelligent, as kids who grew up 60 years ago, playing Chess.

 Making conclusions about the (maybe not even existent) dumbing down of western society because of HS is a bold 200-IQ move dude.

Maybe this helps you understand in what situations this saying is generally used.

this undermines any thoughts or skill going into deck building, setting up turns, or following any kind of gameplan. 

this card ultimately killed HS.

Well, i didn't read every reply because too many just didn't hit the topic but instead told people/me how stupid we are.

Ive been playing hearthstone for quite some years now and I'm totally aware of the real definition of the word inflation.

My actual point was you could craft decent and fun meta decks for way less than the average 10-14k dust we have these days. Sure the dust value per card stays the same, however when epics and legendaries become more mandatory it is some sort of inflation. You must be stupid to not see this.

Also my other point was: either change the reward system or change rarity of legendaries and epics. Right now it feels terrible to buy packs/pre orders within reasonable spending ranges (like 50-100 bucks per expansion maybe).

So this actually discourages players WILLING to spend money on the game to do so. The middle ground they had before is gone and instead has become a super greedy strategy of more expansions per year,  more mandatory legendaries and adventures you have to pay for.

PS: Please stop telling people Blizzard is a company and needs to make money. Jesus christ we are not retarded... Given how much Blizzard invests into HS this point is a fucking joke though. HS is a holy cashcow for them.

I used to buy every pre-Order + some extra packs every now and then. I actually stopped spending money because of how bad the reward system HAS BECOME. Dust inflation is real and its a shame that most fun/meta decks these days cost around 10k dust  if you don't wanna play the most straightforward aggro deck. 

Given how bad the rewards from playing the game itself are and how much most decks cost now it does not feel good to spend 50 bucks as it doesn't provide as much of a decent start into a new expansion as it used to do. Might as well stop spending completely then 

the most pathetic posts are those who say "no one cares you're gone" but also feel the urge to post a freaking WALL OF ARROGANT BS to the guy.

seems you care a lot and you should be made fun of lol

people are so stupid for still hating on CW. most decks beat it right now. might not be an easy (decided before mulligan matchup) w/e..

lol new bundle already... really shows how bad the recent expansion sold.

game is a sinking ship gg

why is everyone still crying about control warrior? it gets annihilated by every not-trash-tier deck in this meta. mage, shaman, pally, hunter all beat warrior easily.

the game dies so the forums just go along

Quote from Synthetikmisery >>

Stingy?? Hey, here is a game to play that you don't even need to pay for. On top of that here are lots of free packs too. We have brawls. Win once and you get a free pack each and every week. Need gold to buy more packs.. well here is a quest each and every day and some are even worth 100 gold on top of the gold you get for winning matches.

Stop asking for more free stuff.

 sToP aSkInG For MoRe FrEe sTuFF

as others said other card games give away a lot more free stuff but besides that this is a forum to discuss such game topics. OP isn't exactly asking for free stuff anyway.

youre acting like some kind of greater jurisdiction who can tell people what to do and what not, I've noticed that in other threads too. its really cringey

Boo hoo hoo. Whiner. Here is a tissue for your tears!

Quote from Wingdude22 >>

Quote from Danjo >>

I would only argue luck or an unfair card in one instance.  

I recently navigated a very hard game against a hunter.  I made no misplays, got both lucky and unlucky with card draw, but was able to play a very competitive game.  I had the hunter to 1 hp, myself at 7hp.  The hunter had blown their resources and had no cards in hand and only two left in their deck.

On their turn, they drew and played Zephrys.  One Gorehowl later, and I've lost.  Their win was not skillful.

 Yes, but that’s why a lot of weaker players find interest in cardgames . Even tho they have less skill, experience and so on, eventually they win. Thats  how a lot of mediocre poker players make money, they farm even weaker players . And those weaker players get hooked because they also have a shot at beating the best. This is the nature of cardgames. 

Winning or losing a single game has nothing to do with skill. But over a large sample size the more skilled player is simply more successful.

You could say the outcome of a single game between a Rank 5 and a Top 100 Legend player is pure luck, and you are probably right. Since even percentage rates are working with 100 as nominal number. Like the Legend player should beat the Rank 5 guy 62% of the time. Since we don’t know exactly their skill it’s probably pretty save to say both have a decent shot at winning a single game. But over 1000 game for example the better player should always be dominant. And there is actually no luck or rng involved whatsoever.

 I can see where you are coming from, but your logic is cray-cray.

If no single game were ever determined by skill, every player would have a win rate of about 50 percent, no matter how big the sample size. In fact, the Law of Averages ensures that the more games you played, the closer your win rate would get to 50 percent.

In order for a skilled player to pull ahead in the rankings, a significant number of games must be determined by skill. Period.

Is there any point in trying to explain color to a blind person?

Those who rant about RNG are clearly incapable of grasping the skill component, so there's actually no way to convince them. What's more, they NEED to believe it's RNG to keep their egos intact.

Until a person says, "I'm ready to stop blaming the universe for my mistakes," there's just no point in having this conversation.

RNG versus skill is such a terrible, wrong-headed false dichotomy.

Anticipating and dealing with random outcomes is one of the primary skills required to succeed in Hearthstone.

No 

Quote from TardisGreen >>

Quote from TwistedCardmaster >>

Quote from Moop547 >>

People have to understand that blizzard is a company though. They employ a lot of people and they need to make money. They probably started doing that and making epics and legendaries more powerful as the expacs went on solely to make money. If anyone remembers back in the day, it was actually a meme how bad most legendaries and epics were. In the classic set, only a couple still see play, and it's loaded with worthless cards like Cho, Millhouse, and The Beast. It's no coincedence that they upped the power level of legendaries over the years. People are way too harsh on blizz for wanting to make money though. Remember the days when it cost 50$ (in 1990s money) to buy an N64 game? Games have way higher quality now, and are a lot cheaper. Look at games like Subnautica. That game cost 19.99$ and it would've been the greatest and most played game ever if it came out in 1999. The video game industry is struggling now because of things like piracy, and companies need to make money.

Sorry, but that is huge BS. To get full expansion you need to spend $450-500 on packs (135 virtual cards!). That is the equivalent of a new PS4 Pro! To get 4 full expansions per year, you have to spend $1800-2000. A normal game, with a budget usually exceeding $300 million, costs $60. Poor Blizzard indeed...

There are only THREE expansions per year.  Learn to count before you whine.

Sure, my bad and that completely changes the perspective! Instead of $1800-2000 you have to spend "only" $1350-1500. So it turns out that everything is fine, Blizzard is great and there is basically no problem, right? Why would you pay $60 for, I don't know, game like Cyberpunk 2077 or God of War, if you can have 135 virtual cards (half of which are rubbish) for $500? Only moron would do that!

Yeah I’ve decided not to buy the expansions anymore. I feel like this expansion was a waste of money and it feels like it isn’t getting better 

Quote from Moop547 >>

People have to understand that blizzard is a company though. They employ a lot of people and they need to make money. They probably started doing that and making epics and legendaries more powerful as the expacs went on solely to make money. If anyone remembers back in the day, it was actually a meme how bad most legendaries and epics were. In the classic set, only a couple still see play, and it's loaded with worthless cards like Cho, Millhouse, and The Beast. It's no coincedence that they upped the power level of legendaries over the years. People are way too harsh on blizz for wanting to make money though. Remember the days when it cost 50$ (in 1990s money) to buy an N64 game? Games have way higher quality now, and are a lot cheaper. Look at games like Subnautica. That game cost 19.99$ and it would've been the greatest and most played game ever if it came out in 1999. The video game industry is struggling now because of things like piracy, and companies need to make money.

Sorry, but that is huge BS. To get full expansion you need to spend $450-500 on packs (135 virtual cards!). That is the equivalent of a new PS4 Pro! To get 4 full expansions per year, you have to spend $1800-2000. A normal game, with a budget usually exceeding $300 million, costs $60. Poor Blizzard indeed...

Quote from Aegis24 >>

Quote from Pepe9028 >>

Say what you want, but revard system is a complete shit in HS

 Yeah a potential 3000-3100 gold a month via wins along with 1500+ gold from quests plus at least 4 free packs a month via tavern brawls along with a potential 600 or so dust in cards at rank 5+ is total garbage.

 You play too much.