Hearthpwn

Quote from tcipps >>

just last night went 6-3 took about 2 hours 15min, got 1 pack + 75g + 45g. so I bascically bought a pack for  30gold and played for 2 hours. I'd say that average expectation for most players. rewards strongly need to be adjusted IMO

Quote from Dunscot >>

Quote from w88w8w8 >>

Hi, I'm speaking as a newcomer to the game 1~2 months in.

You're spot on about 5. and 6. I can speak less for standard/wild and power creep, but with everything you said about the ladder and the newcomer experience, I completely agree with you. Going from the tutorial to "ranked" mode was a pretty rough transition, and it sort of felt like I either had to immediately sink $60 on packs to play a viable deck, or use my crocolisks and yetis against all these opponents with golden portraits. I bought the starter pack and dusted all of my cards so I could get myself a playable deck (a budget one at that), and now I can sort of hop on the gold grind. I've spent some money on packs since then, but it's not nearly enough to get enough cards from classic + the 4(!) expansion packs. It really does feel like a $100 entry fee to have fun. 

I'm interested in how the ladder experience could be improved. Or casual mode?

First of all, congratulations for surviving the first two months! It can only get better from here. ;)
As for your experience so far, I really feel with you. I know all too well how frustrating it can be to struggle with low quality cards and decks, and my impression is it only got worse over the years.

Just recently, a change to the ladder system was announced, largely as I expected (less of a reset/less grind), but with the perhaps important change that the lower ranks will also consist of 5 stars each. Ideally, this would mean that players will more commonly meet opponents on the same level of play. With "bigger" low ranks, there is more space to spread out, with a bigger difference between rank 21, 20 and 19. Whether it will work out or not, remains to be seen. I am actually not all that optimistic because I oftentimes get the impression there are just not all that many "new players" around to make the lower ranks adequately new-player friendly, but maybe it will make things a little better.

Unfortunately, there is nothing good to be said about costs and so far, nothing has been announced in that direction either. If we wanted to come up with a number, I'm not even sure if 100$ is covering it. Of course, there are different opinions about what would be a good starting point, but considering that you want to have at least "some" cards from all non-rotating expansions in Standard plus a few more from Classic, you'd have to spend 3-4x30$+. So, 100$ is actually somewhat optimistic. I personally also consider it an issue if you can only play one or two classes somewhat decently. I can see why some people like to specialize, but to me it feels like not having access to a large portion of the game, and it certainly makes completing daily quests harder.

An issue I haven't even addressed is the "catching up". Not only is the reward system insufficient to keep up, it's entirely impossible to catch up when you just jump into the game or took a break or just were unlucky in previous expansions. The gold you can realistically make between expansions is barely enough to get started on the new set, and all the gold you make after release goes into the next set. You can't really spend gold between expansions on older sets without falling behind when the new one comes out. Naturally, this hurts new players even more.

Quote from Neon2015 >>

3. In addition to the last point, I think we will also see yet another change in the release schedule. I think the developers are generally pretty happy with how the Year of the Mammoth has been going. And I have to agree, three full expansions per year really help to spice things up. But on the other hand, and I think many will agree with me, it's still not quite enough. The metagame is usually set about a month after the release of a new expansion, and in the 3rd and 4th month of a meta, it really starts getting painful to see the same decks over and over and over again. I think the game would be better off with content being added a bit more frequently, maybe every 2 or 3 months, and I think the developers would like to see these big changes happening more frequently as well. Question is, if they even have the resources to pull that off.

The current release shedule is already a lot to keep up for not paying players, so please no

I suggest this purely from the game-perspective. It would be better for the game if more cards were released per year. But of course, it should also be good for the players. If Blizzard wants to release more content per year, an update of the reward system would be even more necessary, which I strongly advocate. As I said, the gold you can make per day nowadays is barely enough to keep you in the game. This actually should have already been addressed well over a year ago.

I had maybe 60-70% of collection and bought it, no regrets.

I think it's Blizzard, but that option needs to be more specific.  But first to dispatch the other three:

Players: People play games according to how they're incentivized.  Maybe we're not "forced", but the path to make progress in any game is what players generally take.

Sites like this: Not to be too esoteric, but websites provide what they're incentivized to provide, which in the case of this site is the best tools available for players to use to make progress in the game, which, see above.

RNG: We know it's reality.  You can't really have a game without it.  Tuning it is a very difficult burden for Blizzard, but the existence of RNG in the game is not to blame.

So when it comes to Blizzard, there are multiple things that can be going wrong.  One is in card design -- some may argue, but I think they're ok-to-good on this.  Another is speed and effectiveness at making changes -- I think they're weak at this, and yet I think there are reasons we don't appreciate on why they can't react too fast without making it worse.  I lay the lion's share of the blame and at the Ranked game modes design.  It's the heart of what incentivizes us to play how we play.  It demands grinding and meta-decking.

I'll admit I don't have a great answer to how the primary game mode should be.  But if I spent a day job's worth of time, I think I might come up with something good.  I've always thought that the quality of the game execution, art, and even card design is producing some of the best game assets around, but that the game modes are squandering too much of it.

I roll every quest that has to do with winning (except 7 in any mode).  I think it has more to do with getting players more active.  This is one of the most cynical posts I've seen here, and that's saying something.

Me and everyone else don’t know who the crap you are, but your self-agrandizing all-caps hissy fit is making me laugh at you right now.

Quote from FirePalyHSplayer >>

Quote from MandelbrotorblednaM >>

I've posted this on this site so many times, it's sad.  But I STILL don't get why newbs think they simply deserve to have meta decks just because they downloaded the game.  OP....you're an idiot.  Just like everybody else that has played this game since it started...you either 1) pay to get cards or 2) play for some time, get better at the game, and eventually get your cards.  It's been that way since the start.  I played for a LONG time before I could get the cards to play anything other than mech or tempo mage (two very cheap decks)...probably more than a year.  I really cannot comprehend WHY you think people should just be handed cards just for downloading the game.  You cite Gwent and Shadowverse....guess what....those games are up against HEARTHSTONE, by far the biggest game in the genre.  They basically HAVE TO offer free stuff, otherwise NOBODY would play their games, and they would fail.  Blizzard, obviously, does not need to do that.  So it's not the same and you can't compare the two approaches...they are not comparable.

Last year, I spent exactly $0 on HS.  In fact, I think I've spent a TOTAL of $40 on the game (2 adventures) since GvG, when I started.  Yet, I still get to play every single deck I want to play, I get to craft any card I want to craft, and I enjoy doing it that way.  You know why?  Because I learned how to play the game, both on the board and managing my in game gold and dust.  I got good enough at arena.  I'm not great at it...but I'm good enough that I come out ahead overall.  And how did I do this?  I played the effing game.  I lost a lot of games.  And you learn FAR more from a loss than from a win as long as you are paying attention.  So your idea that Blizzard needs to be more generous is patently FALSE.  

And believe me...Blizzard knows all of this already.  So stop your WHINING...they are only laughing at you.  As am I. 

 Another insulting smartass. I just love these types of people who think that their opinion is superrior and that they are always right. Its not even funny anymore, its sad. After replying to you post Im just going to ignore posts like this. 1. Im not newb Im experienced TCG player 2. Im F2P and I have decent collection 3. Its not only about F2P part,but also about evergreen sets. 4. If you start as a F2P now and not since beta or lets say 2015 as me you will have no chance of building a decent deck even in Standart at for least a few months. 5. Yes I realise that F2P is grind,you dont have to tell me that. Making some changes towards the F2P players wont eliminate the grind,it will make grind a little bit easier. But just a little bit. It will attract more players tho.

Quote from MProdigy >>

Quote from Killzun >>

The problem is mostly the player base. No solving that.

 This is all too true.  Players want an easy win, so they can grind, and get easier wins.  BORING! I want creative decks that have unique win conditions.  The fact that you spent all your dust on one T1 deck does not in any way mean you are a better player. I make a bunch (10+) decks so I can maximize my fun, and I still have a great win rate.

Like Priest because it's bright (and Mage and Paladin) and dislike Shaman (and Warlock and Warrior) because they seem dark, dirty, or otherwise yucky.  And I'm not really kidding.  It was my gut reaction to the theme and even card borders, dumb as it sounds, and subconsciously I'm still sort of bound to it.

I consistently feel like more creativity in game modes would help.   So many problems are inherent to Ranked, as in, constructed decks from your own collection only, and winning is the only thing rewarded.  Find more interesting ways to do limited, and ways to make progress that aren't just win-win-win.

Really like it.  I think there shouldn't be too much stopping them from offering a pick list of all the different brawl modes, if you play a friend.

What they always shy away from, and there's merit to it, is fragmenting the player base into too many modes.  The wait queue for each mode would get longer and that's a serious threat to the game -- having a big enough player base to queue into a game almost instantly, all the time, is a massive asset.

For all the assets they've created and are capable of creating, 10/10.  For Ranked being the primary way offered to people to try and use those assets to play and have fun, 1/10.

Quote from og0 >>

Quote from robo_hs >>

A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?

 I wonder what Hearthstone would be like if you could set the number of players to 0 and make it play itself.

Perhaps it would conclude "Hmmm, this seems to be an RNG fest!" :)

A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?

Sounds reasonable, I guess, some of that went over my head.  We're not supposed to use that word though.