Support NeoGAF

[Mobius and pet octopus]

I'm pretty sure they've already stated they aren't going to do limited formats.

 

[Ocho]

It's the only way. When the game reaches something like dozens of sets, it would be impossible for new players to enter the game at that point. The oldest sets have to exit the standard game at some point.


You remove entire sets. The result is weaker decks overall for everyone, which usually results in longer games and a completely different meta.

I don't think this applies to Hearthstone since you can virtually get any card from any set by only buying packs from the new set and dusting stuff that's not used. This ain't Magic were you had to buy a physical card (with limited availability). Also I guess Magic had to deal with shelf space and their 320302 sets.

In the end it's only 30 cards you need to get to craft a deck, and there's not much card getting needed to be done thanks to crafting, imo.

 

[Phawx]

I love when I go on a losing streak and then change decks to combat what I'm facing and then lose to that.

 

[Emerson]

Then all you are doing is increasing the barrier of entry for new players. The game needs a steady stream of fresh blood. The card pool cannot get out of control.

Give away old adventures, introduce old expansion cards as new basic/free cards, that's all fine and will help with the barrier to entry.

I don't see how splitting into Legacy and Standard helps anything. Why would any player currently playing decide to go into Standard when they can just play Legacy and play like they always have. It just leaves you with a weird divide of experienced players and new or F2P players in two different pools, without any way for the newer players to ever build their way into playing with the others.

 

[crazygambit]

I don't think this applies to Hearthstone since you can virtually get any card from any set by only buying packs from the new set and dusting stuff that's not used. This ain't Magic were you had to buy a physical card (with limited availability). Also I guess Magic had to deal with shelf space and their 320302 sets.

In the end it's only 30 cards you need to get to craft a deck, and there's not much card getting needed to be done thanks to crafting, imo.

You guys forget that for new players it's not only the 30 cards they have to get, but they have to get to know total pool of available cards they have to play against.

I've been playing Hearthstone for about 2 months and it took me way longer to learn the cards that each deck was playing than to build a competitive deck (face hunter is pretty cheap).

Plus making people buy cards from potentially dozens of sets to get the base cards of each seems like too much (plus you won't be getting any dust). Imagine 10 sets had just come out. How much money would you have had to spend to just be competitive? That's what new players will be facing down the road.

I think it's good for the game to shift sets out of rotation after a while. You all complain how stale the meta is. Imagine if 10 years from now, every deck is still running Dr. Balanced. You need to change things up.

 

[Haunted]

Finally got my first golden legendary after 2 years of playing! ^_^





It was Hogger, from a Tavern Brawl pack.

 

[Phawx]

Give away old adventures, introduce old expansion cards as new basic/free cards, that's all fine and will help with the barrier to entry.

I don't see how splitting into Legacy and Standard helps anything. Why would any player currently playing decide to go into Standard when they can just play Legacy and play like they always have. It just leaves you with a weird divide of experienced players and new or F2P players in two different pools, without any way for the newer players to ever build their way into playing with the others.

I think the only thing we will see is discounts on wings or legacy packs. But just via $$$ not gold. ingame gold price will stay the same

 

[Emerson]

Honestly the only reason we're talking about this at all is that every class has one or two decks which are considered "correct" and are the most viable way to play them, so we assume that a new player has to manage to get those specific cards in order to play competitively.

If the game was 1) Better balanced, and 2) Had way more cards, this would be less of an issue. If you have a large, balanced card base, then new players can make a decent deck with whatever packs they get. The problem we have right now is that there aren't all that many cards and there's not as much room to be creative as there might be, and there are simply a number of strategies that are way stronger objectively.

I really wish Blizzard would embrace the digital nature of this game and make more frequent balance changes. Currently they seem terrified to change anything. They are not stuck with whatever adjustments they make. If they overnerf something, they can buff it back. If the argument is "Dr. Boom, while maybe not completely broken and requiring a nerf, is so good that new players have to get that specific card," then maybe rather than talking about how we can enable players to get every card, or get rid of good cards from the format, we should be talking about how we can make those cards less obligatory.

We can have good, very strong cards, without having a meta so dominated by a handful of specific cards that you can't even compete without owning them.

 

[clav]

Honestly the only reason we're talking about this at all is that every class has one or two decks which are considered "correct" and are the most viable way to play them, so we assume that a new player has to manage to get those specific cards in order to play competitively.

If the game was 1) Better balanced, and 2) Had way more cards, this would be less of an issue. If you have a large, balanced card base, then new players can make a decent deck with whatever packs they get. The problem we have right now is that there aren't all that many cards and there's not as much room to be creative as there might be, and there are simply a number of strategies that are way stronger objectively.

I really wish Blizzard would embrace the digital nature of this game and make more frequent balance changes. Currently they seem terrified to change anything. They are not stuck with whatever adjustments they make. If they overnerf something, they can buff it back. If the argument is "Dr. Boom, while maybe not completely broken and requiring a nerf, is so good that new players have to get that specific card," then maybe rather than talking about how we can enable players to get every card, or get rid of good cards from the format, we should be talking about how we can make those cards less obligatory.

We can have good, very strong cards, without having a meta so dominated by a handful of specific cards that you can't even compete without owning them.

If you were into Starcraft 2, you would know Blizzard's stances on balancing things in games.

Maybe in 3-5 years things will change. By then, I think you know what the end result is.

In the economics of microtransactions, I see no reason why Blizzard would want to change. You can grind out gold or you can use real money.

I think if Blizzard were to keep Tavern Brawl to preselected cards rather than a user's card collection, that's enough for newcomers to appreciate the game for what it is.

 

[Dahbomb]

Another thing I'd like them to do at some point is introduce an alternative hero power for each class that you choose during deck creation, to allow for some variety in viability of play styles. Right now, for example, control hunter can never be a thing if their power is just SMOrc for 2 (or face warrior or shaman anything).

Now this is interesting.

Breh but let's be real here... Hunters are still going to pick 2 damage to face and play aggro.

I think it was during ValueTown podcast? One of the guests said Blizzard saying patron has like 40 percent winrate on ladder.

It was Reynad and it was all across Ladder, not just higher ranks.

So at lower ranks Grim Patron had an abysmal win rate, below average winrate around 10ish rank, a bit higher in the 5s and then much higher in Legend. That pretty much tells you that Grim Patron is a skill dependent deck if the win rate is equivalent to the skill level.

 

[scoot3r]

So I'm playing a midrange riddler but I gots no Tirion. Should I dust golden nexus champ saraad for the ashbringer? What say you gaf?

 

[Raxus]

So I'm playing a midrange riddler but I gots no Tirion. Should I dust golden nexus champ saraad for the ashbringer? What say you gaf?

Never dust legendaries unless you are desperate for critical legendaries. You clearly aren't. Wait it out.

 

[TetraxShards]

So I'm playing a midrange riddler but I gots no Tirion. Should I dust golden nexus champ saraad for the ashbringer? What say you gaf?

"Let's negotiate. You don't dust Saraad, and I'll let you live."

What I would give for a gold Saraad. It's like having every gold spell in the game!

 

[Santiako]

Now this is interesting.

Breh but let's be real here... Hunters are still going to pick 2 damage to face and play aggro.

Yeah, probably, but it would be cool to have the option.

I can't really think of balanced new hero powers either.

 

[Leezard]

Yeah, probably, but it would be cool to have the option.

I can't really think of balanced new hero powers either.

Just make them swap hero powers.

So we get stuff like HandHunter and FacePriest. But it would probably be broken and not balanced at all like you say.

 

[Santiako]

Just make them swap hero powers.

So we get stuff like HandHunter and FacePriest. But it would probably be broken and not balanced at all like you say.

Every single deck would probably use the warlock's hero power if that were the case lol

 

[crazygambit]

Just make them swap hero powers.

So we get stuff like HandHunter and FacePriest. But it would probably be broken.

They could be more specific. Like for Hunter, something like give a beast +2/+2 for 2 mana. I could see some people building decks around that and using it instead of the regular hero power.

Maybe they don't even have to cost 2 mana. That opens up a lot of different possibilities. But to keep it manageable they should be different heroes with the different hero powers. Instead of choosing the power, you choose the hero.

 

[Santiako]

Off the top of my head (so they are neither balanced nor thought out ):

Mage: The next spell you play costs (2) less. (Doesn't stack)
Rogue: Return a minion you control to your hand.
Priest: +0+2 to a minion.
Warrior: Give a minion charge.
Warlock: Doesn't matter you'll play Life Tap anyway.
Hunter: Give a minion you control taunt.
Druid: The next minion you play costs (2) less. (Doesn't stack)
Shaman: Draw a card. Overload 1
Paladin: Give a minion +1+0.

 

[MetroidPrimeRib]

Warrior one is busted because of Molten Giants and the like, they could do that before

 

[BananasWithGuns]

The fact that Freeze Mage is still allowed to exist just shows Blizzard has no fucking clue what they're doing.

 

[toddhunter]

Warrior one is busted because of Molten Giants and the like, they could do that before

Fencer into death wing with charge. The warrior dream.

 

[Moonlight]

Off the top of my head (so they are neither balanced nor thought out ):

Mage: The next spell you play costs (2) less. (Doesn't stack)
Rogue: Return a minion you control to your hand.
Priest: +0+2 to a minion.
Warrior: Give a minion charge.
Warlock: Doesn't matter you'll play Life Tap anyway.
Hunter: Give a minion you control taunt.
Druid: The next minion you play costs (2) less. (Doesn't stack)
Shaman: Draw a card. Overload 1
Paladin: Give a minion +1+0.

Giving a minion taunt makes more sense with Warrior given all the synergy cards, I think. Could make Bolster legit playable!

Maybe a Rogue alt power could be giving a minion Stealth.

EDIT: Warlock should definitely, definitely get a hero power Discard mechanic. Not sure how that'd manifest, but it'd legit enable a Discard Warlock.

 

[Dahbomb]

Off the top of my head (so they are neither balanced nor thought out ):

Mage: The next spell you play costs (2) less. (Doesn't stack)
Rogue: Return a minion you control to your hand.
Priest: +0+2 to a minion.
Warrior: Give a minion charge.
Warlock: Doesn't matter you'll play Life Tap anyway.
Hunter: Give a minion you control taunt.
Druid: The next minion you play costs (2) less. (Doesn't stack)
Shaman: Draw a card. Overload 1
Paladin: Give a minion +1+0.

The Warrior one is 100% busted.

The Druid one is also pretty insane.

I like the other ones even if they would be imbalanced.

 

[ZealousD]

I don't see how splitting into Legacy and Standard helps anything. Why would any player currently playing decide to go into Standard when they can just play Legacy and play like they always have. It just leaves you with a weird divide of experienced players and new or F2P players in two different pools, without any way for the newer players to ever build their way into playing with the others.

It works in Magic. Why wouldn't it work in Hearthstone? Having a legacy format also means you can essentially eliminate problematic cards from the pool. Imagine a format where Unleash the Hounds, Mad Scientist, and Implosion are banned. I'd play the shit out of that.

 

[Haunted]

It depends, if you had a secret keeper or a shielded minibot, you can gain a huge board advantage depending of which secret you had

In the end the idea of Secret Paladin is having such a good board that at turn 6 your opponent has no chance but buff one minion of yours.

Now the problem is when you play 2 times the same secret without MC, then it loses some of the value


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqFf67aJ4p4&feature=youtu.be

Look at the insane ending of this video

NEXT LEVEL COMBOS

 

[Lupercal]

WoW expansions become free after a time. There's no reason Hearthstone adventures can't become free.

Yup, I hate the fact that some of the best cards in the game are lockes behind huge paywalls (700 gold) is prettu big.
Especially for new players.

I've been playing since beta and spent 50$ on the packs for the extra golden legendary. I still don't have mad scientist.

 

[Loomba]

Both Savage Roars the last 2 cards of my deck, I was cycling like crazy to find them then got my board cleared the turn before I drew it.

Never lucky BabyRage

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

Yup, I hate the fact that some of the best cards in the game are lockes behind huge paywalls (700 gold) is prettu big.
Especially for new players.

I've been playing since beta and spent 50$ on the packs for the extra golden legendary. I still don't have mad scientist.

I've unlocked both naxx and BRM using gold only. I don't think the price is an excuse. It doesn't even take that much effort to earn even 100g a day.

 

[Santiako]

Yup, I hate the fact that some of the best cards in the game are lockes behind huge paywalls (700 gold) is prettu big.
Especially for new players.

I've been playing since beta and spent 50$ on the packs for the extra golden legendary. I still don't have mad scientist.

You can easily get 700 gold per week, so it's not insurmountable. I caved in after saving for the first wing of BRM and bought the rest and Naxx with money

 

[shira]

Finally got my first golden legendary after 2 years of playing! ^_^





It was Hogger, from a Tavern Brawl pack.

Improve your

scrub

 

[Sande]

I'm currently playing a more "for fun" version of patron warrior with cards like gurubashi berserker and bouncing blade. I gotta say, it's a fun deck to play, not to mention effective.


It's just hilarious when someone simply leaves the game instead of conceding. Do they really get that pissed off about losing or do they think they're going to get to me by doing that?

 

[MetroidPrimeRib]

It's just hilarious when someone simply leaves the game instead of conceding. Do they really get that pissed off about losing or do they think they're going to get to me by doing that?

I don't know why either especially now that concede is instant

 

[ragevvorks]

After refusing to play PLD for a while I discovered the Christmas Tree cancer... send halp. This is addictive.

 

[Emerson]

It works in Magic. Why wouldn't it work in Hearthstone? Having a legacy format also means you can essentially eliminate problematic cards from the pool. Imagine a format where Unleash the Hounds, Mad Scientist, and Implosion are banned. I'd play the shit out of that.

Or just change cards which are an issue? This isn't Magic. Take advantage of the differences and stop trying to force a paper TCG format onto this.

 

[MetroidPrimeRib]

Ugh, so tempted to replace Ysera with Nefarian in my Dragon Priest deck. Ysera just draws useless shit most of the time and never what I need.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

Wow, both my shredders dropped thalnos vs a druid. This was hilarious. Would have been better vs a priest or something that can't easily remove it, but still. After I played my thalnos, and got a third one... funny as fuck.

Or just change cards which are an issue? This isn't Magic. Take advantage of the differences and stop trying to force a paper TCG format onto this.

Really both changing cards or limiting cards share the same problems.

 

[MetroidPrimeRib]

lol, finally got the dream match of victory via fatigue in Priest vs Priest from the other guy going Full Northshire when he had 8 cards in his hand and a lightwell, no idea what he was doing

 

[ZealousD]

Or just change cards which are an issue? This isn't Magic. Take advantage of the differences and stop trying to force a paper TCG format onto this.

I intentionally said "problematic" cards and not "overpowered" cards to make a distinction. Cards like Unleash the Hounds and Implosion are "problematic" but not "overpowered". The problem is in their design. Implosion is horribly designed RNG (as opposed to well designed RNG). Unleash the Hounds limits Blizzard's design space for beast synergy cards, hence why cards lke Starving Buzzard and King of Beasts are so bad, plus it also limits minon-based comebacks against aggressive hunter decks.

"Just change it" for a card that's rotten to its very core is really bad. Then all you're doing is inventing a brand new card and attaching the old name to it, which is really just sloppy and poor. Not to mention confusing for lapsed players who may return to the game later.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

After 3-4 days hiatus from ladder, 7 win streak to rank 5 feels good. Even taking down 2 control warriors as rogue feels nice.

 

[TheBez]

After 3-4 days hiatus from ladder, 7 win streak to rank 5 feels good. Even taking down 2 control warriors as rogue feels nice.

What's your Rogue list if you don't mind sharing?

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

What's your Rogue list if you don't mind sharing?

Just standard-ish oil rogue.

AC = anti-control
AA = anti-aggro

You can mess around with a couple cards. But most of the cards are set in stone. I've seen lists cut both healbots for sludge belchers and run double earthen ring farseers, for example.

What I like the most about double healbot is that it allows you to wait that extra turn or two before blade flurrying to get the most out of one of your strongest cards in the deck.

 

[MetroidPrimeRib]

I got really excited for a moment but I went back down to 12 ):

 

[BananasWithGuns]

I really like Nexus-Champion Saraad in control Warrior.

I got Feral Spirit and Duplicate off him. Druid used Swipe to kill my Saraad duplicating him.

"I concede to you."

 

[Mulgrok]

I intentionally said "problematic" cards and not "overpowered" cards to make a distinction. Cards like Unleash the Hounds and Implosion are "problematic" but not "overpowered". The problem is in their design. Implosion is horribly designed RNG (as opposed to well designed RNG). Unleash the Hounds limits Blizzard's design space for beast synergy cards, hence why cards lke Starving Buzzard and King of Beasts are so bad, plus it also limits minon-based comebacks against aggressive hunter decks.

"Just change it" for a card that's rotten to its very core is really bad. Then all you're doing is inventing a brand new card and attaching the old name to it, which is really just sloppy and poor. Not to mention confusing for lapsed players who may return to the game later.

I do not see how changing a card is any different from banning it and making a new one. I guess banning and making a new one sells more packs since it adds more cards to the game. Not sure how that would benefit players though.

 

[Minsc]

I do not see how changing a card is any different from banning it and making a new one. I guess banning and making a new one sells more packs since it adds more cards to the game. Not sure how that would benefit players though.

More ways to play is better. A limited format and an unlimited format allow you to have different ways to play the game.

 

[WesternHeretic]

Gotta love playing Esports Portal on an empty board turn 2 and it giving you mistcaller in arena.

 

[Owzers]

You can easily get 700 gold per week, so it's not insurmountable. I caved in after saving for the first wing of BRM and bought the rest and Naxx with money

So far i've spent $30 on TGT packs and $25 for Naxx. I've used my gold mainly for packs so far, i might get Black Rock Mountain eventually. I get about 50-80 gold a day, usually 40 daily quest that isn't awful and then 10 or 20 from victories. I think the wall is quite high when getting into this game and everyone is dropping Dr. Boom at rank 20.

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

They need to make the old wings cheaper with the next expansion. Or even free

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

So far i've spent $30 on TGT packs and $25 for Naxx. I've used my gold mainly for packs so far, i might get Black Rock Mountain eventually. I get about 50-80 gold a day, usually 40 daily quest that isn't awful and then 10 or 20 from victories. I think the wall is quite high when getting into this game and everyone is dropping Dr. Boom at rank 20.

To be really fair about this whole new player experience debate... back in beta it was very similar except instead of dr. boom it was ragnaros being the commonly played big drop. And despite that I still hit legend during season 2 of the ladder with a f2p deck running 0 legendaries or maybe I had thalnos or van cleef at that point but still all earned on my own.

So even back then it was fairly hard to start in the game imo. You still needed to get high amounts of dust to make competitive decks or you could go with zoo or hunter which were cheaper and still played at high ranks. You still have those cheaper decks, like even oil rogue can be built with a budget. The only cards that really absolutely must be there are 2 epics (preparation x2).

What has changed? I think just the amount of cards that are available makes it seem like it is harder to join in now. I don't think it is a collection issue though. Back in beta/classic and even gvg there was no tavern brawl or ranked ladder rewards, which only make collecting cards a little bit easier.

 

[dimb]

Ugh, so tempted to replace Ysera with Nefarian in my Dragon Priest deck. Ysera just draws useless shit most of the time and never what I need.

My Nefarian experience is 2x Sense Demons or the equivalent. Really dislike the card. By comparison almost any Ysera draw feels worth it, and a 4/12 is more valuable than an 8/8.