-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Hearthstone |OT2| Created by Unstable Portal
- Thread starter ZealousD
- Start date
- Status
This game is unplayable if you don't have mech or early taunts.
Playing as a paladin with no cards bought. So difficult to clear the table with any of the new cards.
Looking at streams, I see people seem to run same popular decks.
Is this game turning into Starcraft 2 for strategy?
Playing as a paladin with no cards bought. So difficult to clear the table with any of the new cards.
Looking at streams, I see people seem to run same popular decks.
Is this game turning into Starcraft 2 for strategy?
CarbonatedFalcon
Member
Probably not worth. Cenarius is good and highly playable. You'll probably regret it later if you dust him.
No,but they should nerf Boom.
No less that 8 mana. Comparison to Dr Balanced is always unfair.
I don't know man, I see top players stream with Oil Rogue online and they still get crushed. Then they proceed to go back to their Mech Mages, Hunters and Druids...
partyphone
Banned
this is a really good article about the scrub mentality and the irrational hatred of cheap decks: http://hearthstoneplayers.com/playing-win-part-one-defeating-scrub-mentality/
The other armor cards are pretty cheep to craft.
I was nodding with everything in the article until I came to this comment:
Calling someone a scrub because they haven't put down money on packs is unfair.
There is also some analysis of Face Hunter which says something like "I see no over powered cards in the Face Hunter deck" which is false if that deck runs Mad Scientist which is for sure an "over powered" card.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
The articles is basically just regurgitating some book people on the forums spout around as gospel.
It's a good mindset to have.
Any excuse you make for losses just prevents you from improving faster, or blinds you from what you need to do to win.
A lot of people simply don't realize this. Regardless of which game I play, I see this "scrub" attitude everywhere.
Any excuse you make for losses just prevents you from improving faster, or blinds you from what you need to do to win.
A lot of people simply don't realize this. Regardless of which game I play, I see this "scrub" attitude everywhere.
datz me, I love face Hunter now
thx to the poster who showed me the link recently in this thread lol
This actually makes sense given the usage of scrub in the article. Basically, someone who's "playing to win" won't allow any artificial barriers to winning. While it may not come from the typical scrub mentality, not acquiring access to all of the cards right away is an artificial burden that affects the player's ability to win. Someone who's really playing to win would eliminate this barrier by buying packs.
I wish I could've recorded this game I just had.
I don't know if it was the connection or the guy was using the hack...
But basically I was unable to use any of my cards while my opponent could use cards. He not only could use cards but he was able to use them on the turn they were played. He played a Toshley, Sylvanas and Belcher all on Turn 6 and they all had Charge. I on the other hand kept getting roped and it wasn't the normal rope either it was like a 5 second rope. Not that it would've mattered because if I even managed to put a card down it magically just bounced back to my hand.
Anyway paying to buy packs is not an artificial barrier, it's a financial barrier.
I don't know if it was the connection or the guy was using the hack...
But basically I was unable to use any of my cards while my opponent could use cards. He not only could use cards but he was able to use them on the turn they were played. He played a Toshley, Sylvanas and Belcher all on Turn 6 and they all had Charge. I on the other hand kept getting roped and it wasn't the normal rope either it was like a 5 second rope. Not that it would've mattered because if I even managed to put a card down it magically just bounced back to my hand.
Hearthstone pay to win confirmed.
Anyway paying to buy packs is not an artificial barrier, it's a financial barrier.
The article said "refuses", not "cannot afford". The scrub could buy packs for a better chance of winning, but refuses. And a financial barrier is an artificial barrier.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
I guess not trying to stream snipe and then ghost makes someone a scrub too. Arbitrary rules and all. It isn't against any stated rules or anything by blizzard.
I guess I should rope out every single turn. Cause roping out might get me more wins from people who quit. It isn't a rule that I can't and not doing so is an arbitrary rule preventing me from "playing to win".
What a load of crap. Not doing every possible thing to further your chance to win in a video game doesn't make you a scrub. Not playing face decks because you think they are cheap, doesn't make you a scrub.
There are "scrubs" out there. But simply having principles doesn't make you one of them.
I guess I should rope out every single turn. Cause roping out might get me more wins from people who quit. It isn't a rule that I can't and not doing so is an arbitrary rule preventing me from "playing to win".
What a load of crap. Not doing every possible thing to further your chance to win in a video game doesn't make you a scrub. Not playing face decks because you think they are cheap, doesn't make you a scrub.
There are "scrubs" out there. But simply having principles doesn't make you one of them.
"Scrub" is a bad term for it, I don't see anything wrong with prioritizing fun over win percentage, or even just not prioritizing wins over everything. I dislike that toxic scrub attitude that those who do show a lack of skill, when they're really just want to win more.
Other than using some Amazon coins that I got from promos, I haven't put any money into this game. Do my decks have all of the right cards? Nope. Would I win more often if I dumped money and just crafted everything? Yes. Do I think that makes me more skilled than a player who bought the best netdeck? No, it just means that he wanted to win badly enough to spend the money.
If I have a complaint about the article, it's that it treats "Play to win" vs "scrub" as an all or nothing position, when I think very few people actually hit those extremes.
Other than using some Amazon coins that I got from promos, I haven't put any money into this game. Do my decks have all of the right cards? Nope. Would I win more often if I dumped money and just crafted everything? Yes. Do I think that makes me more skilled than a player who bought the best netdeck? No, it just means that he wanted to win badly enough to spend the money.
If I have a complaint about the article, it's that it treats "Play to win" vs "scrub" as an all or nothing position, when I think very few people actually hit those extremes.
I don't think not playing face decks is a particularly worthwhile or noble principle.
Behind it, and other similar statements, is the underlying assumption of "I could be doing well too if I just went face", but how many people really put that to the test?
"I won't pick Juggernaut because I have principles" - some Dota scrubs somewhere
"I won't MMM ball because I have principles" - some SC2 scrubs somewhere (out of date I know, I haven't played this game for years)
"I won't main Fox because I have principles" - some Melee scrubs somewhere
And so on, and so forth. The idea of "principles" very quickly becomes an easy out/crutch/consolation.
"I'm losing to face decks? At least I have actual principles unlike those mindless face bots."
"I'm having a rough time getting to Rank 5 with a control shell? At least I have my principles."
"My homebrew deck is fairing poorly on the ladder? At least I'm not copying braindead face decks like everyone else."
"I'm getting crushed by Legendaries at rank 18. At least I'm not paying to win."
Keep in mind the point of this article is to help those suffering from this mindset identify it in themselves and hopefully move past it, not to piss everyone off. If you're not falling into the scrub mentality, why does it matter what he says?
Behind it, and other similar statements, is the underlying assumption of "I could be doing well too if I just went face", but how many people really put that to the test?
"I won't pick Juggernaut because I have principles" - some Dota scrubs somewhere
"I won't MMM ball because I have principles" - some SC2 scrubs somewhere (out of date I know, I haven't played this game for years)
"I won't main Fox because I have principles" - some Melee scrubs somewhere
And so on, and so forth. The idea of "principles" very quickly becomes an easy out/crutch/consolation.
"I'm losing to face decks? At least I have actual principles unlike those mindless face bots."
"I'm having a rough time getting to Rank 5 with a control shell? At least I have my principles."
"My homebrew deck is fairing poorly on the ladder? At least I'm not copying braindead face decks like everyone else."
"I'm getting crushed by Legendaries at rank 18. At least I'm not paying to win."
Keep in mind the point of this article is to help those suffering from this mindset identify it in themselves and hopefully move past it, not to piss everyone off. If you're not falling into the scrub mentality, why does it matter what he says?
That's exactly what's happening, so it's poor game design from a consumer standpoint, and you know that.
In the end, I guess that's how Blizzard makes money. After all, it's publicly traded, and that's what a business needs to do to survive.
It's a fucking trading card game. This isn't a new, unheard of genre Blizzard is blindly innovating, tripping over themselves along the way with poor design choices. This isn't Duels of the Planeswalker either, with a carefuly curated environment that puts a hard cap on the amount of potential "pay2win" but kills the collection aspect almost entirely. Nor is it a living card game like Dominion and Ascension where every player in every game has access to the exact same pool of cards for all eternity.
Hearthstone never claimed, nor presented itself as any of these alternatives with weaker to nonexistent pay2win elements.
The kid sitting across your lunchroom table with that $50 foil Charizard he bought at the local card shop was doing the exact same thing 15 years ago.
And you managed to miss the point of that "quote" exactly the way I expect newcomers to, which is that there have been people playing this game for a much longer time than you have, grinding cards for the past year. Yes, shock! Hearthstone is grind2win, but they never said it wasn't, and it was obvious it would be like this if you took two seconds to think about the progression model.
Amount of Legendaries I got from packs I paid for with money: 1
Amount of Legendaries I actually have: 13, not including promotionals or Naxx Legendaries, which I also grinded for in its entirety
Hearthstone never claimed, nor presented itself as any of these alternatives with weaker to nonexistent pay2win elements.
The kid sitting across your lunchroom table with that $50 foil Charizard he bought at the local card shop was doing the exact same thing 15 years ago.
And you managed to miss the point of that "quote" exactly the way I expect newcomers to, which is that there have been people playing this game for a much longer time than you have, grinding cards for the past year. Yes, shock! Hearthstone is grind2win, but they never said it wasn't, and it was obvious it would be like this if you took two seconds to think about the progression model.
Amount of Legendaries I got from packs I paid for with money: 1
Amount of Legendaries I actually have: 13, not including promotionals or Naxx Legendaries, which I also grinded for in its entirety
I think that article is actually pretty pointless. The problem is that there's actually very little incentive to "play to win" in ranked. After you hit legend once, you really don't get anything out of winning other than the enjoyment of winning. If you get more enjoyment by playing decks that win less often, then that's the way to go. It's not like you're losing anything by it.
Arena is where this actually could apply. If you're purposefully skipping mage because you think flamestrikes and pyroblasts are cheap, then you're not going to be making as much gold or gaining as many cards. That's what most people play arena for, and also why I don't actually know of anyone who does skip mage in arena. Even Kripp (the Scrub King going by that list) takes mage every chance he gets these days.
If there's enough incentive to win, people do tend to play to win to matter how cheap or dishonorable it is.
Arena is where this actually could apply. If you're purposefully skipping mage because you think flamestrikes and pyroblasts are cheap, then you're not going to be making as much gold or gaining as many cards. That's what most people play arena for, and also why I don't actually know of anyone who does skip mage in arena. Even Kripp (the Scrub King going by that list) takes mage every chance he gets these days.
If there's enough incentive to win, people do tend to play to win to matter how cheap or dishonorable it is.
tylerf
Member
I've always though refusing to play a cheap aggro deck is probably just way for people to feed their cognitive dissonance about being a poor player. If they couldn't win with proven effective cheap decks then they couldn't complain about pay2win anymore. That might be a bit too much armchair psychology though.
I think you underestimate how much people care about their rank. At least, that's the impression I get from the few times I browsed r/Hearthstone or the official forums or LiquidHearth. The number really is important to them, even if they don't "get" anything out of it.
And this is true of every game I can think of with a ladder. People like seeing a big number near their name that's bigger than everyone else's number.
His quote applies more to arena. You definitely need to throw money down to climb ladder.
You just needed to pay more cards and craft their value by trading in other cards. If someone throws down huge bucks on $ on card decks, the more that person can indirectly afford the legendaries. Not to mention, there are even cards exclusive to a campaign.
In the end, the game is what it is for free. Blizzard could help popularize it by adding packs for owners of their other games.
Legendaries I have (bolded I got from packs I purchased, the rest from gold purchased packs or Arena packs):
Nat Pagle
Baron Rivendare
Old Murk Eye
Captain Greenskin
Fuegen
Harrison Jones
Loatheb
Stallagg
Gelbin Mekkatorque
Maexxna
The Beast
Bloodmage Thalnos (my first ever Legendary)
King Crush
Dr Balanced
Foe Reaper
Malganis
Ragnaros
Ysera
Malygos
Grinded all the Gold for Naraxxamus. Talk about one to two weeks per quarter to unlock, mostly from dailies plus Arena.
Spent around $40 total ($20 classic, $20 on GvG). I guess I consider myself lucky because people have gotten far less for the same amount of money spent. Comes out to be exactly 3 Legendaries per $20 spent. I didn't disenchant any Legendary either.
Nat Pagle
Baron Rivendare
Old Murk Eye
Captain Greenskin
Fuegen
Harrison Jones
Loatheb
Stallagg
Gelbin Mekkatorque
Maexxna
The Beast
Bloodmage Thalnos (my first ever Legendary)
King Crush
Dr Balanced
Foe Reaper
Malganis
Ragnaros
Ysera
Malygos
Grinded all the Gold for Naraxxamus. Talk about one to two weeks per quarter to unlock, mostly from dailies plus Arena.
Spent around $40 total ($20 classic, $20 on GvG). I guess I consider myself lucky because people have gotten far less for the same amount of money spent. Comes out to be exactly 3 Legendaries per $20 spent. I didn't disenchant any Legendary either.
Sure, there are plenty of people who do care about winning the most. I'm just saying that this is the reason why there are also so many who don't when it comes to ranked play.
Personally, I mainly play double bloodlust shaman in ranked. It's likely even more "dishonorable" than face decks, likely wins less than face decks, but I have a lot more fun playing it. If I actually gained something from winning in ranked I'd probably change my tune and max out my win rate in any way possible like I do for arena.
I... am not sure how you arrived at that when:
1) The article primarily talks about people complaining about face decks because face decks actually perform on the ladder
2) There has always been one or two face decks dominating the ladder for the last year
3) Face decks are all cheap as hell to craft, whether indirectly through packs or directly through grinding
4) Popular streamers have made it to Legend with all kinds of decks, control, face, weird unique brews, sometimes even F2P decks, although perhaps this is no longer possible
Fair enough. But this article isn't really concerned with those people who aren't desperate for wins. It's addressing, particularly, the "OMG MUH RANK" crowd in Hearthstone, and is, of course, useless for anyone else.
Professor Lich
Member
Hearthstone just won best Design! Pretty awesome.
So you got 7 legendaries from 30 packs? That is extremely lucky.
call_kotaku
Member
A cheap (financially, not scrub-wise) deck like face hunter can pretty much be acquired by the gold bonuses you get for first starting the game or grinding a week's worth of dailies, and theoretically it will be strong enough to carry you to any level of success on ladder. Even so, the average competitive meta deck is around 5k dust or less, and the only standouts in terms of expense are things like control warrior or handlock.
I'm having a hard time thinking of a period in the meta where there wasn't atleast one sub-3k dust deck that was considered top-tier. Hearthstone isn't strictly pay to win, but more like pay for instant gratification; there are enough hooks built into the game where buying and opening 20 packs, or paying 2 dollars to get a second chance after a bad arena run, etc., that feel slightly exploitative, and it has nothing to do with the core gameplay.
I'm having a hard time thinking of a period in the meta where there wasn't atleast one sub-3k dust deck that was considered top-tier. Hearthstone isn't strictly pay to win, but more like pay for instant gratification; there are enough hooks built into the game where buying and opening 20 packs, or paying 2 dollars to get a second chance after a bad arena run, etc., that feel slightly exploitative, and it has nothing to do with the core gameplay.
Golgo 13
The Man With The Golden Dong
I sense a lot of frustration in this thread, and you guys aren't alone. The mech situation is out of control, and I don't blame the players, I wholly blame Blizzard. It makes it nearly impossible to be competitive, much less survive to round 7, without a very mech-heavy deck.
I think out of my last 10 Ranked games, the first play of my opponents' was Mech Warper in about 8 of those matches. To be honest, I feel like the game is borderline broken right now. I don't want to play a fucking Mech Mage to be competitive, I want to play the classes I want to play and still have a chance, without a mech deck and that's just not where the metagame is at right now.
And warrior and Shaman are absolutely left out in the cold right now, not even worth playing whatsoever.
I think out of my last 10 Ranked games, the first play of my opponents' was Mech Warper in about 8 of those matches. To be honest, I feel like the game is borderline broken right now. I don't want to play a fucking Mech Mage to be competitive, I want to play the classes I want to play and still have a chance, without a mech deck and that's just not where the metagame is at right now.
And warrior and Shaman are absolutely left out in the cold right now, not even worth playing whatsoever.
6, the 7th is basically an automatical Legendary for using the shop.
Must be your rank. I'm seeing lots of variety. People generally tend to favor playing aggro at the beginning of seasons. If you have a good deck and play it well, there are many options. I'm loving the game right now.
call_kotaku
Member
Mech mage also seems fairly poor for laddering at the moment. Face hunter is a really tough matchup and the decks meant to beat it also usually beat mech mage as well. A lot of decks can keep board control long enough to really punish you for not having silences in your deck.
Golgo 13
The Man With The Golden Dong
Actually, Warrior and Shaman are ranked in the bottom 3, nationally. Sorry.
Where is this ranking and what is the criteria? I see plenty of control Warriors on Ladder and the occasional Shaman. Much more so than Priest.
And rankings change a lot in addition to getting out dated in a week. People used to say that Demon Warlock was pretty bad a couple of weeks ago, now it is actually performing on Ladder.
Yup its a fairly silly article. Then again I doubt the author plays any other game competetively.
Going by his standards the players that cheat in sports are the only real winners, since if you dont do anything you can get away with to win then your a scrub.
broski just buy one 50-pack, it will help a lot with your card collection
Golgo 13
The Man With The Golden Dong
Site bases class rankings on tournament performance. Great site for Hearthstone, really good stuff. http://www.liquidhearth.com/forum/hearthstone/478662-power-rank-february-2015
Unrelated but.... So I guess Grommash Hellscream is Garrosh's father? So Garrosh summons his dad? Kinda crazy! I don't know anything about WoW lore, just happened upon that info.
- Status