Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
Did someone compile a complete lit of strifecro's shaman? And decklists in general.
-
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 |OT7/7| _ Give Tyrande | _ Blizzard: Give Amazon Money
- Thread starter ZealousD
- Start date
- Status
Azure Drake is used in more decks than Owl or BGH ever was.
I think that has more to do with lack of good spell damage minions, Midrange dragons and lack of good 5 drops. Azure Drake kinda does too much at once on top of being a draw, it always did. I don't think they will nerf it because after a rotation most of the dragons will be leaving anyway.
As far as features go... replay system is long, long overdue.
I think that has more to do with lack of good spell damage minions, Midrange dragons and lack of good 5 drops. Azure Drake kinda does too much at once on top of being a draw, it always did. I don't think they will nerf it because after a rotation most of the dragons will be leaving anyway.
As far as features go... replay system is long, long overdue.
Yeah "Trick Rogue" is such a crazy concept can't blame them for taking two and a half years to understand what has defined one of their game's classes since classic
Making the distinction between minion-based curve and spell-based reactive decks has been troubling ccg designers for decades, truly a tough nut to crack
Yeah, I don't know. I don't have any numbers, but looking back, I think BGH was in every deck I had back in the day (Handlock, Fatigue Warrior, Combo Druid, midrange Paladin were my old go-tos).
Of the 11 decks in my current rotation, only two have Azure Drakes. (Token Druid and Beast Druid, I deleted my Dragon Warrior decklist). I don't even think I have Azure drake in any decks on my EU or Asia accounts (I don't even own the card on Asia, so I'm cheating there.)
Regardless, maybe it's too universal of a tech card, but again, I don't see why we can't have useful neutrals in general. Maybe not that particular one, I don't really have any strong feeling for that card one way or the other.
Azure Drake is used because 5 slot is just bad and it's the only other spell power minion that doesn't suck. When dragon synergy rotates out there is a lot less reason to play Azure Drake.
It is easy to kill, it's never felt oppressive, it's just a good card. You can't nerf a card because it sees plays. It's the prime example of them needing to print better minions to compete with it and they can avoid power creep while doing so, Azure Drake isn't exactly pushing the power curve. It's not even close. When Belcher and Loatheb were around there were a lot less drakes being played. Druids didn't even play it until living roots was released. It was a maybe in mage, rogue always used it because it's good with backstab and spellpower in general and you need the cycling. That was about it.
It is easy to kill, it's never felt oppressive, it's just a good card. You can't nerf a card because it sees plays. It's the prime example of them needing to print better minions to compete with it and they can avoid power creep while doing so, Azure Drake isn't exactly pushing the power curve. It's not even close. When Belcher and Loatheb were around there were a lot less drakes being played. Druids didn't even play it until living roots was released. It was a maybe in mage, rogue always used it because it's good with backstab and spellpower in general and you need the cycling. That was about it.
what's the problem of having a card constantly used? Just because Azure Drake is used a lot it doesn't mean it has a problem, it is just that it is an all around good card for many decks, but just because it is much used it doesn't need to be nerfed at all.
cards that need to be nerfed are the ones breaking the game, like Yogg, I would argue that even Tuskarr Totemic needs it, but those are cards that have much more going on that deserves to be changed than just being good.
Azure Drake doesn't win games by itself.
EDIT: also, this game needs more modes, I don't see why mobile users (I'm one of them, too) should be holding back the overall progress of the game.
cards that need to be nerfed are the ones breaking the game, like Yogg, I would argue that even Tuskarr Totemic needs it, but those are cards that have much more going on that deserves to be changed than just being good.
Azure Drake doesn't win games by itself.
EDIT: also, this game needs more modes, I don't see why mobile users (I'm one of them, too) should be holding back the overall progress of the game.
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
Make Tuskarr only summon Totem Golem
Karsticles
Member
Yeah, there's a difference between a card that is omnipresent (Dr. Boom, or "Dr." Kron in Duelyst right now), and a card that is in all decks of a certain type. It is expected that Argent Horserider would be in all aggro decks, just like Healbot was in almost all control decks, Thaurissan is in almost all combo decks, etc. Instead of nerfing Azure Drake, the solution is to give players MORE similar options so that decks differentiate themselves even more. For example, if you lowered Azure Drake's stats and gave it Charge, which decks would want that over the current version?
That's a pretty specific list of control decks when BGH wasn't used in the following decks in the previous rotation:
Mech Shaman/Midrange Shaman/Aggro Shaman
Mech Shaman/Tempo Mage/Freeze Mage
Zoolock/Demon Zoo
Aggro Druid
Secret Paladin
Grim Patron Warrior
Dragon Priest/Control Priest
Miracle Rogue/Oil Rogue
Midrange Hunted/Aggro Hunter
Compared to the current decks running Azure Drake:
Midrange Shaman/Aggro Shaman (as tech)/Control Shaman
Tempo Mage/Control Mage
Dragon Priest
Dragon Warrior (Tempo and Control)
Token Druid/Malygos Druid/Beast Druid
Miracle Rogue/Thief Rogue
Dragon Paladin
Statistically Azure Drake is not only the most used card right now but it's also far more commonly used than BGH ever was. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Azure Drake right now gets used more than Owl and BGH combined.
Though I am not directly calling for an Azure Drake nerf.. I am talking about raw stats. Azure Drake is the most commonly used card in HS right now, which means it's probably on Blizzard's mythical "radar". If I had to make a list of 15 cards on their radar, then based on stats Azure Drake would be on there.
http://www.vicioussyndicate.com/25-frequently-played-hearthstone-cards/
These stats were taken quite a while back and back then Azure Drake wasn't even as common as it is now. This is back when Warrior was dominating, now with more dragon cards, Midrange Shaman, more Druids, more Tempo Mage... wouldn't be surprised if that number doubled.
Mech Shaman/Midrange Shaman/Aggro Shaman
Mech Shaman/Tempo Mage/Freeze Mage
Zoolock/Demon Zoo
Aggro Druid
Secret Paladin
Grim Patron Warrior
Dragon Priest/Control Priest
Miracle Rogue/Oil Rogue
Midrange Hunted/Aggro Hunter
Compared to the current decks running Azure Drake:
Midrange Shaman/Aggro Shaman (as tech)/Control Shaman
Tempo Mage/Control Mage
Dragon Priest
Dragon Warrior (Tempo and Control)
Token Druid/Malygos Druid/Beast Druid
Miracle Rogue/Thief Rogue
Dragon Paladin
Statistically Azure Drake is not only the most used card right now but it's also far more commonly used than BGH ever was. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Azure Drake right now gets used more than Owl and BGH combined.
Though I am not directly calling for an Azure Drake nerf.. I am talking about raw stats. Azure Drake is the most commonly used card in HS right now, which means it's probably on Blizzard's mythical "radar". If I had to make a list of 15 cards on their radar, then based on stats Azure Drake would be on there.
http://www.vicioussyndicate.com/25-frequently-played-hearthstone-cards/
These stats were taken quite a while back and back then Azure Drake wasn't even as common as it is now. This is back when Warrior was dominating, now with more dragon cards, Midrange Shaman, more Druids, more Tempo Mage... wouldn't be surprised if that number doubled.
They've previously discussed the possibilities of having two mobile clients - Full and Lite Version. One of the main issues they haven't opted for it yet is because it would confuse people. Something that's hard to argue against.
It would be nice to have those 2 options, I like them. However, if it is so scary for them, it can be as simple as keeping the mobile version a lite client with the PC client a more robust one with more modes to play. That can work since the mobile users could only play certain modes that won't let play mode or tavern brawl starve.
Mobile users could keep the play/tavern/arena modes evergreen while the PC have more options for those of us who are in real need of new modes to play this limited game
Karsticles
Member
I really like cards that say "You better remove me". One thing I like in Duelyst is that there are a lot of cards like that - cards with a big impact if you let them run rampant. It creates intense scenarios where you have to figure out the best way to manage the threat. Though I'm not hugely fond of those threats being extremely hard to remove (Nimbus in Duelyst, Ragnaros in Hearthstone). I think Azure Drake hits that sweet spot, and I would rather more cards be brought up to Azure Drake's level than see it get nerfed. Not that that would ever happen, lol.
Azure Drake has always been slightly OP. If you cut the spellpower it is still better than a "fair" card like Gnomish Inventor because it has a Dragon tag on it. Any stat nerf like making it a 4/3 or a 3/4 probably pushes it out of Constructed, though. I think people don't perceive it as a problem because the thing it does is very "fair". It can't swing a game by itself. It can't be abused. But in terms of raw value on neutral midrange minions it can't be beat.
Come on, they have yearly tournaments, 50 million players, release updates and content regularly. This is a pretty ridiculous example, it shouldn't have taken that long to implement a feature like that. Perhaps it was a code problem or client file size issue?
Either way, I'm tired of hearing this talking point. They care about the game, they just aren't into listening to every armchair developer that wants to police how poor the game is doing in their eyes. This interview showed they are taciturn to say things that don't come to fruition. We learned a lot from it.
Constructive criticism and thoughtful feedback? By all means, this is always good. The Hearthstone subreddit is just straight trash at this moment. Total disrespect for the devs that read and post there. It's kinda embarrassing that one of the most vocal communities is that volatile and unreasonable. It's Diablo III launch all over again.
HS already has enough cards that win more on the spot if they survive for more than a turn. Flamewaker, Sorc Apprentice, Antonidas, Councilman, Malch Imp, Fandral, Violet Teacher, Lightlord, Mana Tide, Emperor, Malygos, Trogg, Mana Wyrm etc. Some people may argue that the game has too many cards like these but that's a different topic.
Thing about Azure Drake is that it gets value as soon as its played because it draws a card. So even if Drake does absolutely nothing on the board, it still cycled itself. And you can't keep it alive on board either because of spell damage tag. In dragon decks Azure Drake gives value from just being in hand or provides Curator value.
I checked out some old stats and Azure Drake was used about as much as Belcher and Loatheb, the two other obscenely strong 5 drop cards. So it's probably more than just we don't have enough good 5 drops though that is certainly a major reason why Drake gets used so much.
Not only was Diablo 3 at launch one of the worst products Blizzard had ever released but the hate was completely warranted. And it eventually gave us a much better game in the long term.
Personal attacks on developers and calling them names is never right but sometimes feedback/criticism has to be over the top for it to reach developer ears.
Saw this linked on twitter: Kibler: (Hearthstone) The State of Competitive Play
Karsticles
Member
That's true. You rarely see Azure Drake in Wild.
Totally agree with you on the state of Diablo III at launch. Just awful. However, I think we disagree on ways to give feedback. If I was a dev, I wouldn't want somebody to sugarcoat feedback or criticism, but I also wouldn't A) Listen as intently, and B) Feel very good about myself if every attempt I made to correct a problem or give a statement was met with the kinda negativity and defiance of a 12 year old. It wouldn't compel me to want to fix it for people that hated me.
Now, it's not our jobs to make the devs feel good, but it's also ridiculous to condemn and the game to hell them for making mistakes.
Most of team 5's work is spent on making cards. Their output on cards especially for this year is high. Blizzard will be printing roughly 310+ cards this year, that comes to around 1 card a day.
That means they have to create the artwork, code it, do the effects work, do the sound design and VA then balance it within a day. That's a lot of work and balance becomes even more complicated when you are testing cards WHILE new cards are being made at the same time.
So comments about lazy developers is completely off base. Hell I even think the balance division is doing its job as well as they possibly can minus gross errors like Firelands Portal (which I chalk it up to them not having Arena as top priority). For every card that creeps out as over powered, they probably balanced like 20 other cards just right. Hell some cars don't show their true strength months after release so it's unreasonable to expect Blizzard to fully balance cards at a rate of one per day. It's unfeasible and it's an unrealistic expectation.
The frustration with Blizzard comes down to two things:
1) Lack of consistent communication.
2) Slow response to obvious, egregious problems.
When there's some problem in the game, Blizzard remains quiet on it until at least the next expansion (so we are stuck with the problem for 4+ months)then they bring down the hammer hard. They hope that releasing new cards would fix a problem but that has never happened, a nerf is usually always required. And now they have an additional fall back with rotations so they are even less inclined to make changes.
These two fixes are easily remedied. They should have a two per year balance update (versus one) and have more communication in between. Don't be radio silent on issues and then tell a week before what cards are about to get nuked. With more frequent updates they are also less likely to delete cards as well.
The other frustrations are with their card design philosophies. It seemed that with Old Gods they had greatly dialed back on their design philosophies like high RNG (minus Yogg which they probably thought was not competitive anyway), aggressive deathrattles, charge minions and asymmetrical board clears. But then with Karazhan they reversed almost of it. They started to brute force archetypes, added in more huge swing RNG cards, added asymmetrical clears that could be abused by aggro/tempo decks and added aggressive deathrattle like Grandmother. They have undid the good they did with Old Gods.
That means they have to create the artwork, code it, do the effects work, do the sound design and VA then balance it within a day. That's a lot of work and balance becomes even more complicated when you are testing cards WHILE new cards are being made at the same time.
So comments about lazy developers is completely off base. Hell I even think the balance division is doing its job as well as they possibly can minus gross errors like Firelands Portal (which I chalk it up to them not having Arena as top priority). For every card that creeps out as over powered, they probably balanced like 20 other cards just right. Hell some cars don't show their true strength months after release so it's unreasonable to expect Blizzard to fully balance cards at a rate of one per day. It's unfeasible and it's an unrealistic expectation.
The frustration with Blizzard comes down to two things:
1) Lack of consistent communication.
2) Slow response to obvious, egregious problems.
When there's some problem in the game, Blizzard remains quiet on it until at least the next expansion (so we are stuck with the problem for 4+ months)then they bring down the hammer hard. They hope that releasing new cards would fix a problem but that has never happened, a nerf is usually always required. And now they have an additional fall back with rotations so they are even less inclined to make changes.
These two fixes are easily remedied. They should have a two per year balance update (versus one) and have more communication in between. Don't be radio silent on issues and then tell a week before what cards are about to get nuked. With more frequent updates they are also less likely to delete cards as well.
The other frustrations are with their card design philosophies. It seemed that with Old Gods they had greatly dialed back on their design philosophies like high RNG (minus Yogg which they probably thought was not competitive anyway), aggressive deathrattles, charge minions and asymmetrical board clears. But then with Karazhan they reversed almost of it. They started to brute force archetypes, added in more huge swing RNG cards, added asymmetrical clears that could be abused by aggro/tempo decks and added aggressive deathrattle like Grandmother. They have undid the good they did with Old Gods.
bangbang i'm a timpani
Banned
I'm really proud of myself, I finally started winning again with a control deck. I used to be an enormous fan of C'thun warrior but it just doesn't work post-Karazhan.
Fibonacci's N'zoth warrior has been great for me: https://manacrystals.com/deck_guides/2176-fibonacci-s-legend-control-warrior-feat-n-zoth. I actually didn't have Cairne until I crafted him last week in my search for a good control deck, took Fibonacci's list and went to town.
The only change I made was to drop an ironforge portal for an acolyte. The portal is pretty good but i wanted another earlier proactive thing to play, especially when i end up against Malydruid or Miracle rogue where I'm just letting them cycle as they see fit otherwise.
My first say 10 games I wet 2-6 and dropped from rank 10/11 down to 13. Last 8 I'm 8-2, undefeated against shaman!, and brought myself back to 10. feels like the success i used to have with c'thun.
weakest matchup is easily Hunter. only faced one but i got wrecked. probably a 7/3 or 6/4 matchup at this point.
second weakest matchup is probably control warrior, so i try to get my alex/grom/gorehowl burst combo over two turns going asap.
Fibonacci's N'zoth warrior has been great for me: https://manacrystals.com/deck_guides/2176-fibonacci-s-legend-control-warrior-feat-n-zoth. I actually didn't have Cairne until I crafted him last week in my search for a good control deck, took Fibonacci's list and went to town.
The only change I made was to drop an ironforge portal for an acolyte. The portal is pretty good but i wanted another earlier proactive thing to play, especially when i end up against Malydruid or Miracle rogue where I'm just letting them cycle as they see fit otherwise.
My first say 10 games I wet 2-6 and dropped from rank 10/11 down to 13. Last 8 I'm 8-2, undefeated against shaman!, and brought myself back to 10. feels like the success i used to have with c'thun.
weakest matchup is easily Hunter. only faced one but i got wrecked. probably a 7/3 or 6/4 matchup at this point.
second weakest matchup is probably control warrior, so i try to get my alex/grom/gorehowl burst combo over two turns going asap.
Kibler continuing to prove why he's the smartest guy in the room.
All definitely true. There's a lot of work that goes into creating these cards. Plus they have to come up with unique tavern brawls something like one every two weeks. That requires a level of work and testing as well.
Personally I just think it's a bit of a shame that Blizzard's current pipeline has only been able to support coming up with new cards. There's a lot that can be done in terms of improving arena, coming up with new modes, fixing the grind of the ladder so that people can play the game competitively and reach the higher levels without doing an insane grind every month. But all of this stuff gets shoved to the side or post-poned until there becomes a huge community pushback, like what we saw with Purify.
Tldr of the Kibler video:
*Yogg probably isn't that strong in terms of win percentage when played but should be changed anyway because the perception around it is too toxic. Undermines the work players have done to get far.
*Blizzard should've just moved more cards to Wild rather than nerfing them so that people could always play their classic decks like Handlock. I agree although now that Blizzard has adopted this nerf policy it's hard to go back on.
*Shaman is definitely out of line and Tuskar Totemic is rage inducing but cards like Tuskar and Yogg are more problematic because class strength is high. Druid still has very strong class cards but seems like that's a topic for a different day.
*Conquest format with more games means that it's difficult to prepare a counter strategy. 3/5 is the max but 4/7 makes it near impossible to make a counter strategy. Basically forces players to play meta/standard secks. He would like to see side deck style tournaments. Another issue is that Shaman can't really be countered in competitive formats anyway so that's also a problem balance wise.
Reasonable video but I can't expect Blizzard to adopt the "move to Wild" style of balancing with the exception of maybe Yogg. If they start doing that then they should start reverting the nerfs they made to stuff like Molten Giant and then move those cards to Wild.
The talk about conquest format with lots of games is also a good point. I don't really think that a tournament where you bring one class and side deck would be that successful because I think the multi class structure of HS is interesting and usually shows more diversity. I mean if we have a single class tournament with side decks... everyone is going to bring Shaman and then have an Aggro tech and a Midrange tech. Impossible to counter. This happens in other TCGs.
*Yogg probably isn't that strong in terms of win percentage when played but should be changed anyway because the perception around it is too toxic. Undermines the work players have done to get far.
*Blizzard should've just moved more cards to Wild rather than nerfing them so that people could always play their classic decks like Handlock. I agree although now that Blizzard has adopted this nerf policy it's hard to go back on.
*Shaman is definitely out of line and Tuskar Totemic is rage inducing but cards like Tuskar and Yogg are more problematic because class strength is high. Druid still has very strong class cards but seems like that's a topic for a different day.
*Conquest format with more games means that it's difficult to prepare a counter strategy. 3/5 is the max but 4/7 makes it near impossible to make a counter strategy. Basically forces players to play meta/standard secks. He would like to see side deck style tournaments. Another issue is that Shaman can't really be countered in competitive formats anyway so that's also a problem balance wise.
Reasonable video but I can't expect Blizzard to adopt the "move to Wild" style of balancing with the exception of maybe Yogg. If they start doing that then they should start reverting the nerfs they made to stuff like Molten Giant and then move those cards to Wild.
The talk about conquest format with lots of games is also a good point. I don't really think that a tournament where you bring one class and side deck would be that successful because I think the multi class structure of HS is interesting and usually shows more diversity. I mean if we have a single class tournament with side decks... everyone is going to bring Shaman and then have an Aggro tech and a Midrange tech. Impossible to counter. This happens in other TCGs.
I can't really see them moving Yogg to Wild for the core game. The card is among their most popular legendaries ever (if not the most popular legendary) and is apparently also the most crafted card of the set.
Beyond that, it's a build around card that's powerful when you play a ton of spells, but also has major drawbacks and frequently serves as your only win condition.
I could see them considering tournament specific bans, but I'd be really surprised if they actually went after the core game.
I'm expecting them instead to just add a new card similar to Loatheb (in terms of a strong card that punishes spell heavy decks, not necessarily reusing the mechanic) since one way to really beat up on Yogg decks is to just make some of their earlier turns weaker.
Beyond that, it's a build around card that's powerful when you play a ton of spells, but also has major drawbacks and frequently serves as your only win condition.
I could see them considering tournament specific bans, but I'd be really surprised if they actually went after the core game.
I'm expecting them instead to just add a new card similar to Loatheb (in terms of a strong card that punishes spell heavy decks, not necessarily reusing the mechanic) since one way to really beat up on Yogg decks is to just make some of their earlier turns weaker.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
Talks about stats, of course people don't care whether or not yogg saron actually decides those matches. If they did, they wouldn't care when yogg saron doesn't change the course of a match. People would argue yogg is unbalanced if stats mattered.
Talks about perception, if the card creates an extremely negative experience, then that's a very bad thing. He argues yogg saron should be changed because of perception. Hey, I said that last night, right?
He basically reflects my thoughts on RNG. The huge variance particularly.
--
Next topic: balance changes
Too many changes is problematic. Yep. CCGs that change too often can be problematic. Yep. Nerfs at rotation rather than putting these cards into wild only mode stops people from playing old decks in wild (said this recently about oil rogue). Yep.
--
1 adventure more per year... sounds great.
Good video.
Talks about perception, if the card creates an extremely negative experience, then that's a very bad thing. He argues yogg saron should be changed because of perception. Hey, I said that last night, right?
He basically reflects my thoughts on RNG. The huge variance particularly.
--
Next topic: balance changes
Too many changes is problematic. Yep. CCGs that change too often can be problematic. Yep. Nerfs at rotation rather than putting these cards into wild only mode stops people from playing old decks in wild (said this recently about oil rogue). Yep.
--
1 adventure more per year... sounds great.
Good video.
Karsticles
Member
Just give me Molten Giant back and I'll be happy.
I think Kibler's video is very reasonable, but this idea that when characters or stats are changed in a game like League of Legends and player experience is not affected or most players don't notice or wouldn't care is incorrect.
And this notion that people build a deck around a certain card, stop playing for a while, come back to see the card changed and have a reaction absolutely happens in a game like League of Legends too. Happens with the heroes you bought that maybe now are not as useful (or top tier), happens to your favorite go to builds, happens to the way you lane or do jungle route, etc.
And that happens even to people for whom these changes tend to be "invisible" because of the community. Being a team game, the community will be the first to point out to you that things are changed, from the pre-game chat and during the game itself there will be an expectation from your teammates that you know Anivia was nerfed slightly or X item is now better than Y item for Phys resistance, etc. His point is that changes like these would drive people away from Hearthstone but not from LoL or other more iterative games, and while I agree it probably does, it will do it for both, and it's not something unique to HS or digital CCGs. On the other hand, unreasonably powerful decks and problem cards like Undertaker or Mad Scientist do too, so the trade off to changing cards in a more timely manner (or doing something else to them like bans and relegation to Wild format) might even help minimize the damage or drive fewer people away.
He says that Yogg is more a problem of perception than statistical realities. Well, maybe timely communication and changes is also a problem of perception in online games, where if a playerbase feels like they are being listened to more than not that would keep them from leaving the game, whether the "problem card" is as big of an issue as they think it is. And I'm NOT advocating for weekly balance patches or anything like that, before anyone says that. Too many changes can be problematic for ANY game, absolutely. Changes that aren't timely can be as well.
Edit: Oh, and I don't really care about Yogg in this meta btw. I'm kind of amused that it is such a nightmare for people all of sudden.
And this notion that people build a deck around a certain card, stop playing for a while, come back to see the card changed and have a reaction absolutely happens in a game like League of Legends too. Happens with the heroes you bought that maybe now are not as useful (or top tier), happens to your favorite go to builds, happens to the way you lane or do jungle route, etc.
And that happens even to people for whom these changes tend to be "invisible" because of the community. Being a team game, the community will be the first to point out to you that things are changed, from the pre-game chat and during the game itself there will be an expectation from your teammates that you know Anivia was nerfed slightly or X item is now better than Y item for Phys resistance, etc. His point is that changes like these would drive people away from Hearthstone but not from LoL or other more iterative games, and while I agree it probably does, it will do it for both, and it's not something unique to HS or digital CCGs. On the other hand, unreasonably powerful decks and problem cards like Undertaker or Mad Scientist do too, so the trade off to changing cards in a more timely manner (or doing something else to them like bans and relegation to Wild format) might even help minimize the damage or drive fewer people away.
He says that Yogg is more a problem of perception than statistical realities. Well, maybe timely communication and changes is also a problem of perception in online games, where if a playerbase feels like they are being listened to more than not that would keep them from leaving the game, whether the "problem card" is as big of an issue as they think it is. And I'm NOT advocating for weekly balance patches or anything like that, before anyone says that. Too many changes can be problematic for ANY game, absolutely. Changes that aren't timely can be as well.
Edit: Oh, and I don't really care about Yogg in this meta btw. I'm kind of amused that it is such a nightmare for people all of sudden.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
I think he meant like if you change a few stats on an ability in a MOBA, it's not that the change is not understood or known, but the impact of the change could be unnoticed by the majority of people. But in a card game, you change 1 stat and it can go from one of the most played cards in the entire game to nigh unplayable. That is almost exactly what happened with novice engineer. It was a 1/2 and it was in most decks. They turn it into a 1/1 and it's abandoned to maybe freeze mage and some other combo decks only.
Then we saw it again with leper gnome. 2/1 leper gnome = autoinclude in every aggro deck. 1/1... leper gnomes still exist? Do face decks still exist? Not much besides shaman.
Then we saw it again with leper gnome. 2/1 leper gnome = autoinclude in every aggro deck. 1/1... leper gnomes still exist? Do face decks still exist? Not much besides shaman.
SonicXtreme
Member
why tf this game lets you get the 'win 5 tavern brawls' quests on mondays and tuesdays blows my mind
Oh, OK.
The Wizard
Member
Decided to take Warrior over another Mage in Arena and I've been rewarded with an 8-2 run so far.
Also I learned that if you commanding shout and play a minion after into Mirror Entity the copied minion gets the buff too. Makes sense now that I think about it.
Also I learned that if you commanding shout and play a minion after into Mirror Entity the copied minion gets the buff too. Makes sense now that I think about it.
Mage is still King/Queen in arena, but that said, I have been absolutey destroyed by several Warriors after recent arena fixes. Usually things like Fiery War Axe, executes and Fools Bane have been part of the equation. One guy basically had a budget tempo warrior that was quite disgusting.
Hopefully as more changes to arena are implemented we will see more classes shine.
I think once you start balancing cards, it actually does make sense to do it more frequently.
As it stands, any cards from Old Gods are effectively on a 1.5 year pre-announced ban that people are just sitting around and waiting for if they're tired of them or they're majorly impacting the balance of the game.
Of course, the one thing worth considering is that cards are actually effectively buffs or nerfs to other cards, so simply releasing new cards more frequently can be very similar to balancing existing cards.
Magic recently shifted to having four equal sized releases each year, which essentially means there's a major balance shift every three months.
I think Hearthstone would actually benefit from a setup like that, because the gap between major sets is too long for issues to actually be addressed, and adventures aren't sufficient. If you play a class that gets screwed in the first expansion of the year, your class is just SOL for 8 months. Similarly you have then have two gigantic expansions back to back within 4 months, so the impact of the last expansion of the year is much less far reaching.
The lack of additional modes also hurts since there's nothing really incentivizing you to construct a deck in a different manner. If you're playing Two Headed Giant or FFA in Magic, you have very different concerns than a 1v1 deck does, and jumping into those modes gives you a ton of variety you wouldn't get otherwise. Similarly the draft structure of Magic allows you to build a deck that can take some significant stylistic risks since you don't have to hedge everything around an optimal value pick each turn, which basically results in you continually making value minion curve decks with some strong removal.
As it stands, any cards from Old Gods are effectively on a 1.5 year pre-announced ban that people are just sitting around and waiting for if they're tired of them or they're majorly impacting the balance of the game.
Of course, the one thing worth considering is that cards are actually effectively buffs or nerfs to other cards, so simply releasing new cards more frequently can be very similar to balancing existing cards.
Magic recently shifted to having four equal sized releases each year, which essentially means there's a major balance shift every three months.
I think Hearthstone would actually benefit from a setup like that, because the gap between major sets is too long for issues to actually be addressed, and adventures aren't sufficient. If you play a class that gets screwed in the first expansion of the year, your class is just SOL for 8 months. Similarly you have then have two gigantic expansions back to back within 4 months, so the impact of the last expansion of the year is much less far reaching.
The lack of additional modes also hurts since there's nothing really incentivizing you to construct a deck in a different manner. If you're playing Two Headed Giant or FFA in Magic, you have very different concerns than a 1v1 deck does, and jumping into those modes gives you a ton of variety you wouldn't get otherwise. Similarly the draft structure of Magic allows you to build a deck that can take some significant stylistic risks since you don't have to hedge everything around an optimal value pick each turn, which basically results in you continually making value minion curve decks with some strong removal.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
Blames priest when he loses. Just a regular salty mofo this one is.
Blames mage being too strong, even though the mage he faced didn't even have a particularly strong draft and he has a 3 legendary draft.
*18 Legendary Draft
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
That's not the case it changed from
Big Set > Small Set > Small Set > Core Set (medium set)
to
Big Set > Small Set > Big Set > Small Set
The major balance shift is also not every 3 months since that's more affected by cards rotating out not so much in (unless they are super powerful) and rotation happens with every Big Set so every 6 months.
Oh, sorry, I've been out of the physical version for a while and misunderstood that.
That said, every six months with rotations would still be twice the update rate.
It would also seem to make more sense in that you don't have one big set rotating out after 8 less months than the other like Hearthstone is currently set up (assuming the Fall set ships in 2016).
Yeah I never watched him before, just saw it on Reddit due to having 3 malchezzars. Deck is pretty sick when it gets late game.
- Status