Overload 1 makes the most sense and it would be right on the power curve.
-
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 |OT8| Elise's Extremely Irresponsible Field Trip To Un'Goro
- Thread starter ZealousD
- Start date
- Status
My beef with Auctioneer is that it limits Rogue's deck archtypes. The only "good" Rogue decks have been Miracle variants.
Of course if you nerf/move to wild Auctioneer you gotta print good Rogue cards or else the class witll be dead.
I mean, its kinda odd for a Shaman AOE to not have overload lol #ClassIdentity
BlackBuzzard
Banned
Ofcourse i would love to see something not miracoli rogue.
Glass Shark
Banned
I just realized I've spent over $400 on this game since January
Huh
Huh
3-cost is fine. That puts it in the same tier as Twilight Flamecaller which is a reasonable card. Might still be better since Maelstrom Portal scale with spellpower.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
I think Spirit Claws is going away.
Remember this is Shaman we're talking about here. There's a million great cards in contention.
I'm getting more worried about a Midrange/Mid-Jade Shaman that can change some stuff arround to counter Dragon Priest and Renolock harder as aggro loses popularity. Things like Ragnaros and Thing From Below.
Remember this is Shaman we're talking about here. There's a million great cards in contention.
I'm getting more worried about a Midrange/Mid-Jade Shaman that can change some stuff arround to counter Dragon Priest and Renolock harder as aggro loses popularity. Things like Ragnaros and Thing From Below.
Wait why can't HS have a PTR too?
They have a PTR for Diablo 3 (a non competitive game), Overwatch, WoW and even HotS. Other MP games have a PTR too, hell we are starting to have single player online games with PTRs.
I see zero reason for there to not be a PTR for HS other than technical or budget limitations.
They have a PTR for Diablo 3 (a non competitive game), Overwatch, WoW and even HotS. Other MP games have a PTR too, hell we are starting to have single player online games with PTRs.
I see zero reason for there to not be a PTR for HS other than technical or budget limitations.
Lagspike_exe
Member
This is an underwhelming update. Quite so. It won't influence the meta that much. More significant changes were necessary. The new expansion has to hit it out of the park or things are looking pretty bad.
BigJonsson
Member
RIP STB and spirit claws
I believe it has more to do with technical issues.. specially with a team still learning how to properly make escalating tools for the game going forward.
There is definitely a need for a PTR give how even they acknowledge there is a constant problem of nerfs and updates to the game
Blizzard mostly uses their PTRs for QA reasons. It's a great/cheap way to outsource your regression testing! They don't really use them for real-world balance testing.
There are fewer nuts and bolts involved in changing an integer from "2" to "1". Blizzard could probably stand to do PTRs for testing whenever they release major expansions so they don't constantly break Wild Pyromancer, but for minor balance changes there's little need.
Woah, missed the news on new Ranked floors. That's fantastic.
So uh, does that mean that once you attain Rank 5 (let's say), you'll never fall below Rank 5 again, or just when the stars are awarded at the end of the season?
If it's the latter, I'm confused then about how the next season plays out. If you start at rank 5 the next season, what do you have to do to ensure you don't fall below rank 5 in the season after that? Get to 4?
So uh, does that mean that once you attain Rank 5 (let's say), you'll never fall below Rank 5 again, or just when the stars are awarded at the end of the season?
If it's the latter, I'm confused then about how the next season plays out. If you start at rank 5 the next season, what do you have to do to ensure you don't fall below rank 5 in the season after that? Get to 4?
it acts only within the season, you get the same stars for the rank on the next season as normal to start again laddering, this will just prevent falling too much in rank once in there in a particular season
Oh, so this is separate from the reset/stars mechanic at the end of the season. We're talking about de-ranking within the season itself? I didn't realize it wasn't possible to fall below 20. Ok, that's cool. I dig this.
They've said before they're looking into increasing end of season bonus stars, if they make more players start from 15 or 10, it makes a difference with this change. By itself it's worthless, I think they will add that next. They have to figure out how many stars they should give so I'm guessing they will monitor this next season with this change and go from there.
Expect to see fewer pirate warriors and more aggro shamans up until rotation.
every turn 1 aggro pirate opener is now dead to maelstrom portal, potion of madness, and whirlwind. stb dies to 3 class hero powers or an opposing patches
all this just means that tunnel trogg into totem golem is the strongest opener again
on the plus side, hunter might be back since its one drops can trade evenly with the pirate package now
every turn 1 aggro pirate opener is now dead to maelstrom portal, potion of madness, and whirlwind. stb dies to 3 class hero powers or an opposing patches
all this just means that tunnel trogg into totem golem is the strongest opener again
on the plus side, hunter might be back since its one drops can trade evenly with the pirate package now
BlackBuzzard
Banned
Jade Lightning should be 1 overload as well or 3 dmg 1 or the other right now its way too much value.
I'm someone who plays Jade druid and your posts make me sad. Is auctioneer a problem with the shaman and pirate decks that make up the vast majority of problems right now?
What they've noted is that they want to remove decks that have been around forever with the rotation, especially if they're full of Basic and Classic cards.
To do that, two of the biggest culprits that need to be addressed are Miracle Rogue and Freeze Mage.
Removing Gadgetzan will force Rogues into new archetypes and make it less problematic to print new cheap Rogue spells, since you're not fueling both Combo and infinite card draw.
Ben Brode has acknowledged that this is just the first fix and I don't agree that it is pointless. This is an easy fix that has been asked about for a long time and as much has they are hemming and hawing on changes this will make many people happy.
Also, as it turns out, we will keep complaining regardless of what they do. I for one am unhappy that it is taking so long to do things that seem obvious. I also think, as I posted before, that two card changes is not enough to fix the meta, but maybe I'm wrong there. Hopefully some more changes to cards, arena balance and ranked play come along before the standard rotation.
Why not? That helps enable Combos and buffs cards like Edwin.
Lone_Prodigy
Member
Played against a Hunter who used Alleycat with Starving Buzzard, Timber Wolf, and Tundra Rhino. It didn't work for him (took too long to set up) but it was kind of interesting.
charlequin
Banned
Because there's three things you'd use a PTR for and none of them are of benefit to Blizzard:
- Technical and platform changes in HS are generally small enough or tweakable enough that they can just push them into production and modify them later if needed.
- New expansions will make less money across the board if you give people a meaningful test period with them before real launch so some hypothetical balance benefit isn't going to make it worthwhile.
- The community's ability to understand and rate balance correctly in the short term is awful and so they're not going to get useful balance feedback from the public via a PTR on mid-season nerfs like this.
They're much better off doing consultations with small groups of pros than opening anything up to the general public.
The rotation is going to blow up most of the decks that exist right now, it's going to totally reset the metagame regardless of what the new content is.
Again, it's fixing something, just not the thing you're complaining about. It's independently worthwhile to do this even if they have to do a different thing in addition later to fix other problems with the ladder structure.
It's a little weird to me that the Miracle name is explicitly attached to a combo build in HS given that it's taken from a similar tempo deck in MTG. I would imagine you could design cards that would fuel a tempo version of this deck in the absence of GA without making all the other support cards useless.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Isn't it widely accepted that the period after release is when the comunity is at its most postive, because the meta isn't figured out?
Wouldn't a PTR kinda force everyone onto the PTR in order to experience the non-figured out meta?
Wouldn't a PTR kinda force everyone onto the PTR in order to experience the non-figured out meta?
https://twitter.com/Kripparrian/status/831430992007221252
As much as you want to laugh at salty Kripp, and despite the small sample size, let's hope the Arena changes are sooner than later. daamn lol
IMO only the first point is actually valid for not having a PTR and it's not even that major of an issue.
#2 could be applied to just about out any other game as well. Should games not put out demos or betas because it might affect sales? This is more of an opinion rather than something concrete to go against a PTR. If Blizzard's main reason for not putting out a PTR for HS is entrenched in financial reasoning than that is exactly the type of thing that gets Blizzard (or team 5 in this case) accused of being greedy and conservative in their design choices. I would like to think that the team considers general game design above economical gains.
#3 is another opinion and one I strongly disagree with. I feel that the community at large especially the pro players of HS are very good at breaking down and developing a meta. 90% or more of metas in HS have been figured out within weeks. It's not just about listening to reddit feedback but also checking online stats and usages. Blizzard is also smart enough to not look at random forum complaints but rather the overall picture as they do in their other games. Everyone in the D3 community felt very negatively about the recently added Primal Ancients in D3 PTR and Blizzard fixed that immediately. Every Tavern Brawl (including Heroic Brawl), Arena meta, constructed meta etc. gets figured out within weeks and people know what the dominant stuff is. You can discredit the community all you want but they know how to break down stuff real quick. When Firebat had that Batstone tournamemt, pro players banned out Patches because they knew Pirates was going to be an issue and this was within a week of the game's release!
There are easy fixes to #2 and #3. Dish out the PTRs to a select few players which include streamers and professional players, Arena and Constructed alike. It does not have to go open PTR, it can be invite only like they did in the past. Since a majority of the players will not be able to play it, Blizzard's investments are kept in check AND they limit feedback from a select few players.
You know Blizzard consulted a select few community for the Standard rotation. Originally Blizzard was going to only rotate out Naxx for standard but the members of the community strongly advised Blizzard to advise did gvg in so they did. And that was advised do great suggestion because the meta woukd have been even worse with gvg cards in them right now. This isn't a new thing for Blizzard to consult members of the community.
Just for comparison, here are my historical winrates since February 2015.
And my winrates in the MSG era.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
It's a double edged sword to use PTR as balance. You might have slightly better balance but you don't actually want the meta to be figured out that way before the set even releases. If the meta is figured out during PTR, that isn't good at all. If the meta isn't figured out during the PTR, it contributes little to balance. So I think in using a PTR you always get a less than satisfactory outcome, at least for new expansions
We all have fun speculating the strength of cards before the set is released too.
Where PTR could be useful is in testing brawls, new modes, and balance changes between set releases.
I can't help myself but also call out Kripp for posting such a small sample size. But I agree completely.
We all have fun speculating the strength of cards before the set is released too.
Where PTR could be useful is in testing brawls, new modes, and balance changes between set releases.
https://twitter.com/Kripparrian/status/831430992007221252
As much as you want to laugh at salty Kripp, and despite the small sample size, let's hope the Arena changes are sooner than later. daamn lol
I can't help myself but also call out Kripp for posting such a small sample size. But I agree completely.
homeworkfilms
Member
Anyone saying that the pirate nerf won't do much are probably wrong. There are now so many more ways to clear out that combo without losing advantage that it should shift things considerably. It is especially good for hunter and pally who now should be able to do enough early game to have viable decks again.
That being said I agree that jade is going to be fairly dominant now which probably means a super board clear centric reno lock will be a good counter play. Reno lock already does fairly well against jade shaman at the very least.
That being said I agree that jade is going to be fairly dominant now which probably means a super board clear centric reno lock will be a good counter play. Reno lock already does fairly well against jade shaman at the very least.
slightconfuse
Banned
I think the rotation will helps things slot. These nerfs are a good start.
Also anyone need 80g?
Rainmaker#1189
Also anyone need 80g?
Rainmaker#1189
That's not how PTR works in some cases.
What happens is that testing is done, and a few cards/strategies are seen as more powerful than normal.
Then the developers fix those problems and release the game afterwards. So the PTR doesn't test ALL of the actual fixes because the game is released then. Otherwise there would be an endless cycle of fixes -> testing -> feedback -> fixes -> testing etc.
The PTR is generally for testing extreme balance issues like this Pirates problem that is obvious day 1 (or day -30 in most cases).
Another thing is that they don't need to release every card in the PTR, just the ones that they feel need testing. You don't need to have stuff like Worgen Greaser in the PTR because even Blizzard knows that is not worth testing because the power level of the card is generally known. That way the release still feels different.
The same aggro decks that pirates were suppressing, like hunter and zoo, also suppress slower jade decks like Jade Druid or Jade Rogue. That's why we aren't going to see a Jade meta. We will simply see different types of aggro decks.
charlequin
Banned
I mean, I think in reality #2 is the only one that's needed to explain why Blizzard won't go in this direction, but let me try to dig into all of this.
Companies don't do demos or betas unless they're confident they'll have a net positive effect on sales. Publishers have consistently pushed back on platform requirements that force games to have demos, and typically avoid releasing them for titles that won't hold up well in this context. Similarly, there may have been a time when PC games did legitimate open betas with the purpose of improving and refining their titles, but betas these days are almost 100% a marketing stunt intended to catch catastrophic bugs but otherwise just to get people hooked on a small taste of a multiplayer game then force them to shell out to keep playing.
If you look specifically at the closest comparison here, WoW, the PTRs there have no negative impact on sales because the units are different -- people just have subs (which they pay no matter what) and expansion purchases (which you effectively can't keep playing without buying.) Hearthstone's F2P model isn't nearly as immutable in revenue.
Having everyone only buying packs in HS after the meta is settled isn't just going to chip away at the margins, it's going to catastrophically reduce sales across the board.
You're going to have fewer people on a test server and less time. That's not to say that they won't get pretty far, but you won't have time to fully iterate to the real stasis point of the metagame (if you did then people really wouldn't be willing to pay for cards) and you'll get people offering their bad solutions to "balance" the issues found far more stridently than you do now.
I don't have an issue with this and I don't think it has most of the issues I described, it's just very much not a *public* test realm. If you want to call it a PrTR or something I'm down. To be clear: "PTR" in Blizz-speak generally suggests a wide-open, non-NDAed server that any player can sign up for and fuck around in, which I don't think would ever work for Hearthstone; having some specific community representation that's selected to participate I'm definitely for.
Sent a request, if you still need someone.
Pirate Warrior still open t1 with muster for battle
Its still extremèly hard for zoolock to back to the meta
Altho Spirit Claw nerf is Huge.. that card that switch shaman as best class instead brief period where Warrior is the best.
Spirit Claw made you play Shaman really differently.. 1 mana weapon that made you control the board àfter you curve out with overstatted minion.
Jade Claw not in same ballpark for early boarď control tool.
Its still extremèly hard for zoolock to back to the meta
Altho Spirit Claw nerf is Huge.. that card that switch shaman as best class instead brief period where Warrior is the best.
Spirit Claw made you play Shaman really differently.. 1 mana weapon that made you control the board àfter you curve out with overstatted minion.
Jade Claw not in same ballpark for early boarď control tool.
Speaking of those arena statistics, I have a noob question I'd like some veterans to help me understand.
I personally "feel" like I do better in games when I have the coin, particularly with jade druid since the coin helps with getting more powerful cards out early when needed, or with driving auctioneer. However, this is obviously an unscientific feeling and I haven't kept statistics.
My question is: Why would the first player win so much more often in arena? Is a chance of getting a 1-drop down in the first round really that powerful? It seems to me that 2-drops are far more common, and if you don't put a 1-drop then the second player will coin out a 2-drop and leave you already behind. Is there something else at play here?
(Also a related question: If a 1-drop is so powerful, should you basically mulligan everything for a chance at getting one?)
I personally "feel" like I do better in games when I have the coin, particularly with jade druid since the coin helps with getting more powerful cards out early when needed, or with driving auctioneer. However, this is obviously an unscientific feeling and I haven't kept statistics.
My question is: Why would the first player win so much more often in arena? Is a chance of getting a 1-drop down in the first round really that powerful? It seems to me that 2-drops are far more common, and if you don't put a 1-drop then the second player will coin out a 2-drop and leave you already behind. Is there something else at play here?
(Also a related question: If a 1-drop is so powerful, should you basically mulligan everything for a chance at getting one?)
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
I just want to point out the stats are probably not nearly as slanted as kripp's "data" of a grand total of 38 games suggests.
There are a ton of factors as to why you might feel like going 2nd has the advantage. Overall I am certain going first is advantaged (perhaps 10-15% range, with 20% being really extreme and not likely). But you're not the first person to say they feel like going second is an advantage even when the statistics suggest the opposite.
BlackBuzzard
Banned
Wow Krip went all in on how garbage the mean streets expansion was.
Constructed is very different from Arena.
In Constructed, you have more combos and synergies that you can take advantage of as the 2nd player because the 2nd player also has one additional card to work with. In addition, you have more spells to come back from a deficit along with other recovery tools that you have specifically put into the deck. Control and combo decks do fine in Constructed going second... going first has advantage in aggro/tempo match ups in Constructed.
Guess what Arena is played as for the most part? Aggro and tempo for the most part. In a game of tempo, first player has massive advantage. In Arena you cannot count on synergies and combos so having that extra card doesn't mean as much. Also you are less likely to have recovery tools/answers to their tempo plays so once you are behind on board it snowballs out of control.
In your example of coining out a 2 drop... that's a risk that the player going second is taking. They are going for a one time tempo play at the start and if it gets answered they are not favored to win the match anymore. Imagine if the player going first does nothing on turn 1 and you coin out a 2 drop. They answer with Dark Bomb or Frostbolt, then you play another 2 drop. They are now on 3 mana crystals and will play a 3 drop that contests your 2 drop freely, you play your 3 drop, their 3 drop kills your 2 drop for free and they play a 4 drop. So you went all in as early as turn 2 and got punished which resulted in a snowball effect.
A person going first playing a solid 1 drop is heavily favored to win the game in Arena. There are statistics on all of this. In addition, 1 drops are very powerful for their cost and many 1 drops contest 2 drops. Let's they play a 2/1 1 mana minion (very average even mediocre 1 drop) and you are not one of those classes with a ping. You have a 2 mana 3/2 card that will die to a 1 drop. You are now in a terrible position because they got to play a 1 drop on curve to contest your 2 drop. Now imagine if they play a Trogg/Mana Wyrm/Chow/Mixtress/Flame Imp/Buccaneer or other 1 drops that can grow or combo with another card.
It's a snowball effect in Arena that is very hard to stop because of the limited options. That's why Blizzard wants to increase the amount of spells that are drafted, so that there is less of this player 1 snowball effect.
You should mulligan for 1 drops based on match ups. Most tempo/aggro decks always want a 1 drop. If you are playing a control deck against another control deck then you don't really want a 1 drop and you instead want your greed cards (the Kazakus, the Twilight Drakes, the Mountain Giants etc.). Sometimes in very specific match ups like say a Shaman vs Warrior, it's not uncommon for high level plays to mulligan away Tunnel Trogg in favor of a Totem Golem to avoid the turn 2 War Axe punish.
If I am playing Zoo, I am mulliganing HARD for 1 drops in almost every match up. Hell I would even drop certain 1 drops against certain match ups for better 1 drops because I have so many 1 drops. In other decks, if I am going first I REALLY want a 1 drop at start. If I am going second and if I have two solid two drops then I would probably want to coin one out and not need a 1 drop there. There's more nuances to this than just that but generally if you are playing aggro/tempo or playing control vs aggro/tempo... 1 drops are REALLY good on turn 1 so mulliganing for them (even all the way) is not usually wrong.
https://hsreplay.net/articles/4/mulligan-luck-arena
The stats at large are damn near undeniable. Sure it's not as slanted as Kripp's own data but there's a gross difference between going first vs going second in Arena.
If you go first and drop a 1 drop against someone going second then you have a difference of 15% in win rate in some cases. That's 45%vs 60% in some cases. That's kinda outrageous.
If you go first and not even drop a 1 drop then you are still favored to win by about 6% more.
Tempo is almost everything in arena, because you usually don't have synergies that give value cards value and allow you the ability to catch up, or you're lacking in single-card value like board clear. When you go first you have a lot more capacity to dictate the flow of the game, including trades on the board.
And yes, if you have a good one drop in arena, you should generally mulligan hard for it.
Glass Shark
Banned
Fuck Dragon Priest in the ass. For some reason I cannot beat this deck with anything in my arsenal.
Karsticles
Member
I thought it was obvious from day 1, but folks here were pretty excited...lol.
Last time they did a first vs second advantage in Constructed it was fairly evenish. It was shown that tempo decks have significant advantage going first vs second but control/control decks were favored going second.
This was near the end of Old Gods though. But I still think Reno decks like going second and can win from coin Reno Jackson against Aggro.
This was near the end of Old Gods though. But I still think Reno decks like going second and can win from coin Reno Jackson against Aggro.
- Status