Hearthpwn

Quote from Karatevaterr »

Wait, wait, wait, username. So you're telling me that MtG was as RNG-heavy as Hearthstone?

...........

Now, you claim this was an environment that allowed new players to compete? What if I tell you that my competetive reanimator deck cost $600+? What if I tell you that most decks you see at the world championships cost way more than $600?

I am sorry you didn't understand my post. It would seem, from your comments of course, that we agree on the same things. I stated JtMS's price tag to explain why MTG's casual and core customer base fell off a cliff; the game was not only frustrating with him dominating it but extremely cost prohibitive. You have numerous references to how costly the cards are, so I assume you unknowingly agree with me. You also have numerous examples of how people would thin their deck of RNG, a topic I addressed as well. Assuming I've read your post correctly and understand it's defensive tone, you agree with me here again but with the caveat of you not knowing it.

Wait, wait, wait, username. So you're telling me that MtG was as RNG-heavy as Hearthstone?

This is simply not true, in MtG the ultimate goal of a skilled deckbuilder is to ELIMINATE RNG.

You are, in a way, contradicting yourself here. There are also references later on to counterspells and tutors as ways to eliminate RNG. These in addition to lands are all perfect examples as to how MTG is as RNG heavy if not more so than Hearthstone. Furthermore, they do the game developers credit in these attempts to make the game more fun and easier to play.

When next you are responding to someone's post, it will benefit us all when your valuable input is not laced with contempt and disdain.

Lastly, I do apologize for the misstep in stating lands are the only RNG in MTG. My intent was to illustrate the significance of the game's resource management and its relevance to the original topic. I believe Tinkmaster Overspark, Nat Pagle and the majority of the remaining RNG cards are essential to this game's survival and development. If "pros" don't want them in their private tournaments, who am I to disagree. But this game was not created for the tiny fraction of "pros" who play against themselves. It was created to make money, and it will continue to do just that, with it's limited but not limiting nail-biting random number generating glory.

I think Windspeaker is perfectly costed, considering how heavy the shaman 3-drops are. I would like to see him adjusted to 3/4 though. As it stands he trades with a lot of 2-drops and some 1-drops, which is why he isn't played competitively.

Someone posted a great comment on <p>http://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/1y0qi7/loss_aversion_and_why_pagle_feels_so_bad_but_is/&lt;.p&gt; not too long ago addressing RNG in card games. I highly suggest everyone read it as it speaks directly about the topic.

RNG in this game, as well as in many others, is essential to not only the game's popularity, but the diversity in its meta as well. The OP argues that with zero variance (or zero RNG) players would have no choice but to play the best cards in the best decks so as not to "nerf" themselves out of competition.  I believe this true, having played MTG competitively in the past where the only RNG is its resource management. Nothing sucked more than being locked out of a game, with your finely tuned deck, because your draw produced far too many or far too few land. The best decks were those which manipulated draw steps on both sides of the table in the attempts to control the sole source of RNG, lands.

Imagine if the same were true in this game. Imagine they release a card that allows your opponent to look at the top card of your deck, of which you can not see, and either let you keep it or send it to the bottom of your deck. Now imagine they can do this every turn until you expend resources to destroy it. Now imagine they still have three of these cards left in their deck. This card was Magic: The Gathering's Jace, The Mind Sculpter. He allowed players to manipulate their opponent's RNG and was infuriating to play against. His aftermarket value was no less than $400 for a full set of four, which completely barred the majority of players from owning copies. This resulted in a steep decline in player base and the game suffered. The developers had no choice but to ban him from just about every competitive format.

So why is RNG like Tinkmaster Overspark and Nat Pagle essential to Hearhtstone? Because they give everyone a chance to play, whether they have them or not. It forces players who list other legendaries to consider synergy over sheer power. Have a look at deck lists from six months ago. They were jam packed with every legendary they could afford and boasted high win percentages. Now players are making legendary with F2P decks. I don't personally have Pagle, but I very much enjoy answering him with Crazed Alchemist, Ironbeak Owl, Ancient Watcher, etc.

No, I believe 'luck' in this game is what GUARANTEES its appeal and playability. It is only the "Jace, The Mindsculpters" who want to eliminate RNG.

Remember that "Pros" like Artosis support banning these cards because it helps them. If a Pro believes they are better than their opponent, they don't want their opponent to have tools that let pull out a lucky win. But the reality is that without a chance at luck then Hearthstone won't have enough players to support future development, and the game will die off.

I don't like Ragnaros the Firelord like a lot of people do. I've watched people play him tons (don't have him myself). Aside from the occasional perfect RNG, he feels win-more and redundant. Deck synergy is always better IMO. Coincidentally, synergy is why the priest rng card draw cards aren't worth playing in their current state. Don't take my observations for granted though. You should always test things yourself. That being said I don't like Nat Pagle either. Novice Engineer outshines him all day long. She is just as easily removed, but can contribute to board control where Pagle can not, and she will always get you that card. Priests are answering Mages right now so Shadow Word: Pain is everywhere, which makes Fen Creeper a dead card at the moment. You loose too much tempo to such an efficient answer during mid-game. I don't understand Amani Berserker for priest. Maybe you've had different experience with him than I.

Just my two cents. Your best bet is to evaluate what is lacking and figure out how to make up for it. Keep brewing! >8-)

Seriously, every one in this thread needs to take a pill ... to chill. Ihmo said it perfectly; Mages are very straight forward compared to the rest of the heroes. It just so happens that Mages answer swarm quite handily. So stop playing swarm. And when mages get tired of loosing to whatever is next, they'll play whatever hero most handily beats that. It's a cycle that doesn't abide the calling of nerfs every time the meta shifts.

The whole point of an interactive card game is for decks to evolve and change. If you, the player, do not change and evolve with them you will quickly fall by the wayside or quit playing. There are plenty of ways to counter Mages right now. Just because the cards we want to play aren't as effective as we want them to be doesn't mean Mages need a nerf.

Also, as you begin climbing the brackets the popular decks will change since mages are shooting right to the upper tiers. If you don't alter your decks or play different heroes to meet the different strategies along the way you're doing yourself a disservice. Mage is just taking advantage of the meta's inability and unwillingness to adapt to them.

I don't touch mage personally. I stick to Priest, Warlock, and Shaman primarily.  I haven't found the exact answers to Mages for any of my three decks yet, but I'm getting there ... myself. Try doing the same yourselves, only please stop crying about not having the answers written out for you.

Finally, this is Beta. Our observations are being heard by Blizzard, but our complaints are moot and tiresome. We sound like sniveling babies who need Mommy to cut our hotdogs into neatly bite-sized pieces.

Argent Commander got nerfed and is now correctly susceptible to more creatures. This is a late-game deck and I like Sunwalker a lot more for that reason. I do like the Abominations due to the heavy aggro meta right now. I don't have him yet so I run Defender of Argus. Twilight Drake is a great target for removal baiting and usually doesn't cost you much. Consider finding a place for him. Chillwind Yetis are the drakes baby brother, but we really need some draw power right now.

Card advantage and draw power of the priest; Where are Northshire Cleric, Azure Drake or Novice Engineer? You don't have to have all of these but I think for a priest they are overall better than Loot Hoarder and Acolyte of Pain. The hoarder is an offensive creature where the engineer is more defensive, and Priests live for turns 8+.

TL:DR? -1 Wild Pyromancer -1 Temple Enforcer + 2 Northshire Cleric (or engineer if you really don't want her).

I think cards like Mass Dispell, Holy Nova, Holy Smite and Holy Fire are auto 2-ofs in this deck. Most priests go with Shadow Word: Pain x2 Shadow Word: Death x1 and I think you should here as well. I love Shadow Madness and Raid Leader here. Mind Control and Sen'jin Shieldmasta feel out of place being defensive cards that are relevant to late-game decks. The only other card I like for this is Mind Control Tech although I'm not sure where you would fit him in.

If you want completely balanced tried and true gaming with zero variance where all the pieces are 1/1 and strategy is developed based on the pieces varied abilities enabling infinite possibilities, go play chess.

The game's in Beta. FFS.

All card games are RNG. Hearthstone is even more so due to it's high speed and frequency of dice rolling. Cards like Knife Juggler and Mad Bomber aren't good because of their solid math, but for the RNG they bring. Whereas dice rolling mechanics in games like D&D and MTG have been done before, Blizzard has brought us a game that does it quickly, smartly and fun. Just as well, they capitalized on their extensive library of lore to bring new and old gamers themes and characters to explore, familiar or not. Their reputation as a gaming titan makes this kind of nerdmanship accessible to a new generation of gamers, new people for older more seasoned nerds to interact with. Essentially, they've made the tedium of role playing and trading card games autonomous for those who never considered something like this in the first place.

Why is this relevant? OP is comparing this game to others of relative production and allowing them to influence his experience. Others are complaining about cards being overpowered and the meta being stale. Sorry, it's BETA, and you can't make an entertaining card game with nothing but 2/2s. We are all playing with a very small card pool that is still developing and "unreleased". There are so many ways to deal with popular cards like Argent Commander and Azure Drake without having to run them into each other. Creative solutions may not be of pristine effectiveness but as the game develops we will see more diversification. Creativity is what makes the game fun.

Take this deck for example. It's a Warlock deck that I've been developing for the past few days that utilizes the spell power mechanic to make it's hard damage and removal less sh***y and it's low cost demons to grind the opponent down:

TL:DR - The game's in BETA. Go play Chess until release if you can't be creative enough to have fun with it now.

I've just started playing with this deck and it's working quite well for me. I'd love to have Bloodmage Thalnos, but Kobold Geomancer fills the role quite well.