Hearthstone |OT8| Elise's Extremely Irresponsible Field Trip To Un'Goro
- Thread starter ZealousD
- Start date
- Status
It's true, I think Jade Shaman being a thing post rotation is very real and Blizzard should be concerned about it. At the same time, less aggro opens space for stuff like Jade Druid to proliferate. A non Pirates meta needs to be tested out first before nerfing specific classes is what I am saying. Unfortunately the timings make it such that we are going to have a rotation before things settle.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
http://www.pcgamer.com/hearthstones-ben-brode-promises-balance-changes-coming-this-month/
Says a balance patch around the end of the month and info about a week before it hits. Also, patches and small time buc in 50% of decks at rank 5 and up.\
Aggro shaman has 53% winrate across all ranks. And is hard countered by CW + renolock.
Says a balance patch around the end of the month and info about a week before it hits. Also, patches and small time buc in 50% of decks at rank 5 and up.\
Aggro shaman has 53% winrate across all ranks. And is hard countered by CW + renolock.
pirates package is in 50% of all decks rank 5 and above
good expansion, blizzard
good expansion, blizzard
You're wrong. Card changes require a client patch.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Personally, I'd I'm all for a chaotic schedule of random balance patches to fill the gaps of staleness so things never settle. This game is mostly only fun for me when the meta is in flux.
It kinda sucks to have things be kept unfun for 2 months just because everything will change in 2 months anyway.
charlequin
Banned
I'm talking specifically about the category of players who are active on places like reddit or the Blizzard forums who freak out every time a Blizzard employee says anything public, make wild accusations about them lying about their data, suggest that the current meta is the worst there's ever been and Team 5 is too incompetent and evil to even make the game enjoyable for one second. Like with WoW, there's a category of people who actively undermine reasonable critiques with this behavior because it's difficult to separate them.
In this particular case, there's one specific issue that's backed up by data: STB + Patches is too good in too many decks so 50% of everything is running it. The actual percentage of different classes isn't all that particularly bad, the win rates of everything are actually all pretty reasonable, but the specific pirate package is omnipresent and obnoxious enough to be an issue.
They just need to inject cards into the environment more often during the year. Right now they have three content drops; they should go up to around six.
Emerson
May contain jokes =>
There's a reason this happens every couple months without fail. Blame the community if you want, maybe that's part of it, but plenty of card games do not have their community literally on the verge of exploding every 3 months.
Hearthstone has fundamental design problems that encourage this kind of thing to happen, and the development team has fundamental weaknesses in their card design and their ability to react to states of imbalance. On top of that, for how successful this game is, the pace of development both of card releases and general features is glacial. At this point, I don't particularly expect any of it to change.
Play Eternal.
Hearthstone has fundamental design problems that encourage this kind of thing to happen, and the development team has fundamental weaknesses in their card design and their ability to react to states of imbalance. On top of that, for how successful this game is, the pace of development both of card releases and general features is glacial. At this point, I don't particularly expect any of it to change.
Play Eternal.
I suspect this is partly because no other card game has the sheer community size of Hearthstone that lends itself to people mass-switching to whatever they hear is good.
Since I heard there were so many shamans, I decided to try control warrior. I have not seen a single shaman in 5 ranked games now.
Emerson
May contain jokes =>
I suspect this is partly because no other card game has the sheer community size of Hearthstone that lends itself to people mass-switching to whatever they hear is good.
Since I heard there were so many shamans, I decided to try control warrior. I have not seen a single shaman in 5 ranked games now.
The rampant netdecking most likely results primarily from the short seasons and the poorly-designed ladder which incentivize people to climb quickly with the highest win rate possible. Most players generally enjoy playing with decks they like or find fun, not just the strongest one possible. However, with no time to experiment and no buffer preventing your rank from dropping, many refuse to use a sub-optimal deck.
The game itself, by virtue of its design, also overly rewards optimal mana curve and so it is much more punishing of sub-optimal decks than Magic or Eternal.
I feel like we've discussed this a couple of times, but how could the ladder be better?
If they give arbitrary divisions like other games with elo ("silver", "gold", etc.) then you'd A) get people being elitist by dismissing others as "silver trash" or whatever (maybe this already happens with numbers but I don't know), and B) you'd have either elo inflation from locked-in divisions, or the same results because your rank is just masked.
In addition, having larger divisions would make the game feel more grindy because you have to play even more games before your number ticks over (this happens in League of Legends for example). If there's a buffer to prevent rank dropping, then the game likewise becomes more grindy. Note that people can try decks in casual, but presumably the meta might be different there so the argument is that it's not the same. People can easily experiment with decks now even in ranked. They might quickly drop a few divisions, but by the streak mechanic they will also very quickly regain ranks if they find a successful deck.
I can see the mana curve argument though.
Emerson
May contain jokes =>
I think honestly the most important component of fixing the ladder would be making the seasons longer, sadly that's the option they seem to be the least willing to do.
Really I wouldn't worry too much about how players are going to label each other when designing an effective ranked environment. Elitism can and will develop with any skill progression system, I don't know that it's worth trying to avoid.
And yeah, you can experiment in ranked now, but the point is people are much less likely to do so considering they feel a pressure to get their rank up in a very short season. It takes an absurd amount of games to get to legend, even for a skillful player.
Really I wouldn't worry too much about how players are going to label each other when designing an effective ranked environment. Elitism can and will develop with any skill progression system, I don't know that it's worth trying to avoid.
And yeah, you can experiment in ranked now, but the point is people are much less likely to do so considering they feel a pressure to get their rank up in a very short season. It takes an absurd amount of games to get to legend, even for a skillful player.
Would you be OK with mid-season balance adjustments, then? e.g. 3-month season but balance adjustments once a month?
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
I don't think the season length is an issue that contributes to net decking. It might contribute to faster decks having a larger advantage over slower decks, but I don't think that impact is concerning enough.
I think the problem with the ladder is the weird arrangement of fast progression at first, then you slow down, and then you slow down a whole lot. This makes you think you're doing really well at first and then just bad later on. It ends up that hitting rank 5 is only half way to legend. You progress fast ranks 25-5, with win streaks and less stars per win. Then 5->legend feels like a slog. They can fix that, they already talked about perhaps doing win streak bonus in rank 5->legend.
I think the problem with the ladder is the weird arrangement of fast progression at first, then you slow down, and then you slow down a whole lot. This makes you think you're doing really well at first and then just bad later on. It ends up that hitting rank 5 is only half way to legend. You progress fast ranks 25-5, with win streaks and less stars per win. Then 5->legend feels like a slog. They can fix that, they already talked about perhaps doing win streak bonus in rank 5->legend.
Emerson
May contain jokes =>
I don't see any issue with balance adjustments happening at any time. They don't necessitate a new season starting.
Ideally this game would depend more on a true ELO/MMR system rather than this. And players' skill levels do not change based on balance adjustments.
Determining that ELO/MMR is going to take a lot of games though, which again comes back to being very grindy like the incredibly time-consuming LoL ranked ladder. That was one reason I stopped playing, plus the long queue times.
Also, players skill levels may not change for a specific deck, but they will change if players modify the deck or switch classes. To me, it seems that will once again encourage people to stick with the same thing over and over, trying to find something optimal that they are the best at. This happens in League, Overwatch, etc. with people playing "mains" and could result in the same sort of netdecking homogeneity. Maybe?
soulslayer
Member
I think the underlying problem is that they tied in the qualification for the Hearthstone World Championship to the ladder. Since they already mapped out the qualification process for 2017, they can't change how the ladder works anymore (at least till 2017 ends). This in itself forces these high level players to play 50% shaman in the last day of the season. There's just no incentive to play anything else because not only is shaman OP, games also don't take that long too.
I wish they had just made a different qualification mode for the HWC. They could have just added tournament mode and have the players qualify by winning daily/weekly tournaments. That or just make the seasons longer, and make it so that the LAST DAY of the season isn't all that matters for farming points.
I also wish they would do rotations instead of straight nerfs. There's a reason Wild exists. Un-nerf combo, warsong commander, and just let players go WILD. Wish more players would also start playing Wild.
Right now, the game has just de-volved into either a) I play the pirate package or b) I play Reno decks. It really doesn't matter that you have a "diverse" set of classes being represented right now. Because the way the game is set up now (the current meta), you just play 1 of 2 styles. And that makes everything so similar, so homogeneous. And that makes the game un-fun. There's really not much difference to playing against a warrior, shaman, rogue because it's just pirates hitting your face every single game. There's not much difference playing against Reno decks that have a busted Kazakus and Turn 6 Get rich and Auto win card (never really liked the design of Reno, but this is just a personal preference). It's why this meta game feels like the worst it's ever been for me, and I've been playing this game since 2014.
BananasWithGuns
Member
I'm actually pretty excited for the nerfs, because then we can head right into the rampant bitching about Rogue, Kazakus/Reno. Jade Idol, etc.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Yeah, leagues certainly seem the way to go. Even if like 50 percent of the player base ends up in diamond league after a couple particularly hardcore grinding seasons, it'd be better than droping all the way down to rank 25 after a month of inactivity.
And mana curve might not be as bad if they didn't print so many absolutely rediculous 1 and 2 drops. You know how many 3 mana 4/3 or 3/4 and 4 mana 5/4 or 4/5 and ect cards there are that actually do anything on top of having decent stats? And yet 1 and 2 drops all the time seem to have no problem getting practically free upgrades to being way overstated.
It makes no sense at all.
I think thresholds would be a great fix. Say at 20 - 15 - 10 - 5. And at the end of the season you drop only to the threshold.
Let Legends start at rank 5 etc.
That or a mirror match. Especially if you try something out of the ordinary. I swear I had 3/5 games vs. Hunter when I switched to that class for questing.
I just want to try mage again. It's been something like 5-7 arena runs in a row with no mage as an option, and no legendary cards as an option.
*edit* Enemy arena mage had 3 sorcerer's apprentice in their top 9 cards. LET ME PLAY MAGE DARNIT
warlock cards and hero power are just disgusting now though.
abyssal enforcer.
ABYSSAL.
ENFROCER.
I find this interesting because starving buzzard and the undertaker hunter meta was when I first started playing Hearthstone and I enjoyed the hell out of it. I ended up around Rank 3 at one point and I didn't even know what that meant. I just played so much and won so much I flew up the ranks. Meanwhile I spent a lot of time getting good at the mirror match while dominating the other decks. This also lead to me getting Hunter as my first golden hero portrait.
I see similar stories from new players here where they have picked up secret paladin, dragon/tempo warrior, midrange shaman etc. and reach high ranks early in their HS career while also enjoying the game.
It makes me wonder if I started now, would I just play aggro jade pirate shaman since it is Tier 1 and have just as much fun? Or maybe there was just something different about the game back then; have we become jaded to the point that only a perfectly balanced meta will satisfy us?
Lagspike_exe
Member
I built the Patches deck day 1 when MSOG hit but I can't be bothered to play it, let alone grind it out to rank 5. Face smashing is mind boggling boring.
Ouch. I got 25 gold and 35 dust with 4 wins.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
50% occurrence of patches package at higher ranks is a dreadful stat.
That's not an entirely fair statement, but this isn't a lot of data, it isn't statistically significant and it is anecdotal. It is just a snapshot of the past few days of my personal time with Hearthstone.
I'm tempted to show some more track-o-bot info over a longer time, it's only mildly interesting, but it supports what we already know. Shaman is over tuned.
Noxious goes over the history of HS card releases and balance changes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtcS3NiLBog
Points out big gaps in releases and balance changes (6 months to fix Undertaker lol). They have gotten better at closing up the gaps though.
I don't think anyone is expecting an adventure in the spring. Most people are expecting an expansion. If they release an Adventure... then oh man.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtcS3NiLBog
Points out big gaps in releases and balance changes (6 months to fix Undertaker lol). They have gotten better at closing up the gaps though.
I don't think anyone is expecting an adventure in the spring. Most people are expecting an expansion. If they release an Adventure... then oh man.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
I don't even think UT was a big problem until like a month or two before GVG and IIRC it was fixed about a month into GVG. So it was probably an issue for only 3 months, not 6. I think it was borderline in naxx, broken after gvg.
Dr.Horrible
Member
Sacrificial pact on Jaraxxus will never not be the greatest thing.
And where is the promised arena patch?
I'm assuming that is what is coming at the end of this month.
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
It's not Jade Shaman or Pirate Warrior or Renolock or anything else that gets me.
But there is a cold dark place in hell for mother fuckers who purposefully rope all game just cause.
But there is a cold dark place in hell for mother fuckers who purposefully rope all game just cause.
You can beat greedy control decks with sticky midrange decks, combo decks, Mill/Fatigue decks and Jade decks. It's a myth that only aggro can beat greedy control decks.
Hell if they are playing a greedy Malchazaar deck you can tempo them out with most competent decks.
slightconfuse
Banned
Holy crap I had no idea that actually worked.
LyleLanley
Banned
I don't know how to fix it but pretty much all the current good decks just feel awful to play against.
nice, I believe Nox is a nice streamer, not as negative as most, which I always look for in this salt-driven comunity.
It is supposed to be an adventure no? I mean, having to get 2 expansions of content is the perfect barrier for new players or player without much collection...
charlequin
Banned
I mean, the last time they specifically made a statement about it, it was to say that their release schedule would be Expansion -> Adventure -> Expansion.
Reading between the lines of their statements in the last few months, they're looking to move to more total content drops during the year, so I imagine that exact list is gonna change, but it'll still probably be a full expansion in April to start the rotation year.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked