Hearthstone

Of the Tabletop, and other, lesser varieties.

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:13 pm UTC

Chen wrote:Fair enough. The only thing not considered there is the relative fairness of arena compared to trying to play ranked (or god forbid casual). Someone who is brand new is going to get stomped pretty hard in ranked or casual, especially the early parts of the month.

Also I'm not sure how often you'd need to win high to compensate for low wins, just due to how much the rewards increase as you get to higher wins.


Extreme high wins are quite nice. Going 12-0 is way better than going 0-3. Of course, because the average is 3, the odds of getting 12 wins are pretty low, even if you assume they're distributed randomly. <1%. In practice, a new player is also likely to be at something of a disadvantage in arena due to not knowing the cards. It's a format that requires a decent amount of meta knowledge.

Given scaling, in most cases, win rates should approach 50% overall, after a time. You'll settle at whatever rank you're competitive at, and hover around there. There's a scale compression early in a season, but it still exists, due to the stars awarded for winning.

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Adacore » Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:47 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
Chen wrote:Arena is generally the best way to make gold. Even those times when you crap out at 0-3 you can get 20-30g in addition to the pack which almost breaks even on itself. 3 wins (the average) and you'll break even or get more. Anything more than 3 you're almost certainly making a profit over packs and the higher you go the bigger the profit. 12 wins can give you 2 packs and a couple hundred gold. Arena also teaches you some good basics of the game. Check out a site like Heartharena to see some general card rankings or watch a stream of a good arena player and you can get a good feel for at least what cards you should be picking. Then it's really just practice.

That's incorrect. Three wins is still a net negative compared to simply playing games in ranked and burning your gold on packs.

If you really want to go in depth on this, as you've both touched on, Chen was technically right, because a "3 win average" is equivalent to a 50% win rate, and gives you a normal(ish) distribution of wins centered around 3. Since the rewards scale non-linearly, your average reward even at 3 wins average ends up being more than 60 gold with a 50% win rate.

I wrote an analysis about this on reddit last year.

Nork
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:05 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Nork » Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:59 pm UTC

One point not discussed here that was in the reddit thread and is quite relevant is that 1 dust is equivalent to about .95 gold for the purposes of expanding your collection. Dust doesn't help unlock solo adventures or pay for arena entries, but solo adventures are cheap in the grand scheme (and if your goal is money for arenas and you're debating arenas vs. constructed, there's a problem).

Another point not discussed is return on player growth. If you play a lot of arenas, you'll get better at them, and your average will climb beyond a 3 win average and earn better rewards. In constructed, they keep modifying your rating until you're averaging a 50% win rate, so trying to grind out money in constructed modes will never get better than 1.6g/game.

One point in favor of constructed mode for farming is that (in general) no matter what deck you use, you'll eventually reach a point where you're at a 50% win rate. This means you can adjust your deck/playstyle to finish games as quickly as possible and not care how good it is. If you build an extremely aggressive deck, you'll win fast when you win, and you can get more games completed in the same time as an arena deck. The primary downside to this is that fast games with a deck that minimizes strategy will really emphasize the grindy nature of what you're doing, and take the fun out of the game. I'd much rather play in a mode that I like and have slower progress than progress faster in a mode I don't enjoy.

Chen
Posts: 5108
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Chen » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:07 pm UTC

The 50% win rate thing is kind of iffy while laddering though, since there's no MMR used there. You only have MMR in casual or once you've hit Legend rank. While laddering you face people at the same rank as you, which can result in some pretty big mismatches, especially at the low end. Win streaks can also push you up the ladder even if you're at a 50% win rate (or lower), at least while you still get bonus stars (anything below rank 5).

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:09 pm UTC

Note that laddering also results in a win chest, so that is an additional factor not accounted for.

If you're already playing ladder enough to essentially maximize standing for where you're at, it's not really a delta, but if you're looking at playing arena very heavily instead of laddering, it is.

Large sample averages for ranked should always approach 50%. Yeah, you can get win streak bonuses, but those mostly help you clear ranks where you're wildly overmatching opponents, and they cease to be a significant factor as you approach the rank where you win about as much as you lose. Yeah, it may not be *exactly* 50/50, but ranked matches are won by 50% of the players overall, so you're going to trend toward that.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5361
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby mosc » Tue Sep 29, 2015 2:53 pm UTC

Adacore wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
Chen wrote:Arena is generally the best way to make gold. Even those times when you crap out at 0-3 you can get 20-30g in addition to the pack which almost breaks even on itself. 3 wins (the average) and you'll break even or get more. Anything more than 3 you're almost certainly making a profit over packs and the higher you go the bigger the profit. 12 wins can give you 2 packs and a couple hundred gold. Arena also teaches you some good basics of the game. Check out a site like Heartharena to see some general card rankings or watch a stream of a good arena player and you can get a good feel for at least what cards you should be picking. Then it's really just practice.

That's incorrect. Three wins is still a net negative compared to simply playing games in ranked and burning your gold on packs.

If you really want to go in depth on this, as you've both touched on, Chen was technically right, because a "3 win average" is equivalent to a 50% win rate, and gives you a normal(ish) distribution of wins centered around 3. Since the rewards scale non-linearly, your average reward even at 3 wins average ends up being more than 60 gold with a 50% win rate.

I wrote an analysis about this on reddit last year.

This of course assumes that cards you get in packs you don't actually want. In my situation, I rarely even have the COMMONS that come out of the packs already so their dust value (5 dust) is nothing like their actual value to me (more like 40 dust to craft them) making getting actual cards much more significant than dust and hence arena being a complete waste of my gold.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

Chen
Posts: 5108
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Chen » Tue Sep 29, 2015 3:17 pm UTC

mosc wrote:This of course assumes that cards you get in packs you don't actually want. In my situation, I rarely even have the COMMONS that come out of the packs already so their dust value (5 dust) is nothing like their actual value to me (more like 40 dust to craft them) making getting actual cards much more significant than dust and hence arena being a complete waste of my gold.


Uh wouldn't that make arena MORE valuable? The thing that drops the arena average reward is the random singleton cards you get. If you're saying you often need those cards, that would increase the value of the arena.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Sep 29, 2015 6:30 pm UTC

Not really. You're going to get all the commons pretty rapidly anyway. Both methods result in you cracking many packs, and that's the dominant way of gaining cards. Given the ratio of commons, you are going to have a surplus of commons regardless of which method you use.

Rares too, to a significant extent. You're going to max those out long before epic/legendary. So, over the long run, those cards are not very important. They're still worth dust value, though.

Now, if you can routinely do very well in arena, those singleton cards can include epic/legendary. So, those reward levels are indeed quite valuable. This starts happening at eight wins. Anything below that has no chance to do better than a rare.

If you're looking at the short term, cracking packs is a superior strategy for your collection vs arenas, because you're cracking more of them, whereas dust is likely being saved until you have enough for a legendary. In the long term, it makes no real difference in terms of cards vs dust, because all excess cards become dust, which become the legendaries you didn't pull, and statistically, excess commons and rares are incredibly predictable.

Chen
Posts: 5108
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Chen » Wed Sep 30, 2015 11:52 am UTC

I was talking to Mosc, who was saying the common card value was closer to 40 dust value to him compared to the 5 dust disenchant value. That would just skew the arena expected value higher, if he's assigning a value of 40 dust to commons rather than 5. I was questioning the assertion of "arena being a complete waste of my gold." that Mosc mentioned, because it seems valuing common at higher than 5 dust would just make it EASIER for Arena to be better than opening packs (since you get a pack with the arena anyways).

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Sep 30, 2015 2:20 pm UTC

Chen wrote:I was talking to Mosc, who was saying the common card value was closer to 40 dust value to him compared to the 5 dust disenchant value. That would just skew the arena expected value higher, if he's assigning a value of 40 dust to commons rather than 5. I was questioning the assertion of "arena being a complete waste of my gold." that Mosc mentioned, because it seems valuing common at higher than 5 dust would just make it EASIER for Arena to be better than opening packs (since you get a pack with the arena anyways).


When you hit dust, you do indeed get five gold, so...that's the value.

That will be a far more common use case, due to distribution than crafting commons. You shouldn't craft commons overall, because you'll fill up on them very swiftly, and you're essentially just crafting cards you'll dust later, for a significant net loss.

Ignore the pack with arena. You get packs in the alternative too(buying packs). Essentially, you are comparing the non-pack rewards of arena against the value of half a pack, plus whatever gold you would have gotten from playing those games in ranked.*

However, if you're working in cash, the math works out differently, because an arena entry is, if memory serves, $2, whereas a pair of packs if $3. So, unless you're taking advantage of a bulk discount or something, arena is the better buy. Unless you're *really* bad at arena, I guess.

*Strictly speaking, if you've already maxed out your gold from ranked for the day, the math is different, but that's deeply unlikely. You shouldn't be capping that out unless you're playing a TON of hearthstone.

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Adacore » Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:04 am UTC

On a different subject, I managed to hit legend again (for the second time ever) on the final day of the September season, playing Midrange Shaman this time. The deck is pretty fun, and seems to have good matchups against some of the more popular decks atm, but didn't really do anything spectacular or flashy. I read a random comment somewhere about Patron Warrior having a bad matchup against basic, solid midrange decks, so I decided it might work, and then after a bit of testing I realized that Hex and Earth Shock are really good counters to Secret Paladin as well. Turns out I was right, and I had a 70% win rate overall.

I kept the list pretty much unchanged, just adding a Harrison Jones in at rank 12 or so, after I realized that a majority of my games were against Paladin, Warrior or Hunter, and Harrison is insane against all of them (hitting the Light's Justice after a Muster to draw 4 cards is nuts). Having said that, Tuskar Totemic put was probably the most 'fun' card - a quarter of the time it just wins you the game if you play it on turn 3 and it gives you a Totem Golem or a Mana Tide, or a Flametongue if you have a minion survive from the previous turn. Bloodmage Thalnos was a superstar too (Thalnos + Earth Shock against Mad Scientist or Creeper, or Thalnos + Lightning Storm against a board of Grim Patrons are both amazing). Also, many 9/8 Mysterious Challengers were Hex'ed.

Given I didn't start playing ranked until the 25th, starting at rank 23, I'm pretty happy that I made it in just 5 days of play - looking forward to seeing what's in my chest tomorrow. The final two games were both against Face Hunters, and I had an absolutely perfect starting hand for both of them (Zombie Chow, Creeper, removal spells), and drew Harrison Jones just when I needed him. One of them messaged me after to congratulate me on how thoroughly I beat him, and gave me props for playing Shaman to legend, which was nice. Not sure if I'm going to try again this season - might be nice to actually spend some time in legend before the season ends, but the grind to get there is much harder early in the month.

User avatar
Bigtraine
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 8:15 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Bigtraine » Thu Oct 08, 2015 10:53 pm UTC

For all of the newer players, one thing to consider taking advantage of is watching some popular streamers on their F2P accounts. I know Trump streams somewhat regularly on a F2P account and others do as well. It can give you some insight on what can be most effective on a limited budget.

User avatar
Biliboy
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:43 am UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Biliboy » Sat Dec 12, 2015 1:35 am UTC

Lots of new cards with the newest expansion, but forget about that, I want to brag about making a fatigue warrior fatigue himself. It was the most satisfying thing. Ever.

(for those who don't know, fatigue warrior spams armor out the wazoo, up to 30-45 sometimes, with control spells/weapons, and forces his opponent out of cards to die to fatigue damage that builds each turn. Simply one of the most annoying decks to play against)

User avatar
Yubtzock
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:37 pm UTC
Location: Breslau/Wrocław

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Yubtzock » Sat Dec 12, 2015 7:09 pm UTC

...making a fatigue warrior fatigue himself. It was the most satisfying thing. Ever.

(for those who don't know, fatigue warrior spams armor out the wazoo, up to 30-45 sometimes, with control spells/weapons, and forces his opponent out of cards to die to fatigue damage that builds each turn. Simply one of the most annoying decks to play against)

I can confirm it being extremly satisfing. What deck were you playing? I managed the same with hyper control/fatigue priest
(Basicaly no clerics and PW:shields. Instead shrinkmeisters, shadow madness, recombobobs, and all the removal you can get in priest). Before the last wing my alternate win con was Ysera, but I've changed it to the new legendary that gives you the golden monkey.
Best part is the warrior also picked her up. It did not help him.
Luckily for me he was running stuff like shield blocks, deathlords (promptly stolen by cabal) and I've made sure I have some spare removal in case his monkey hits first. It did. I didn't even need my own so I waited until he has to give me back my excavated evils. Pure joy.

User avatar
Biliboy
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:43 am UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Biliboy » Sun Dec 13, 2015 6:32 am UTC

Also priest, a modified version of Amaz's Paletress priest. I was fortunate that he didn't have the legendary that upgrades his armor, or the game might have gone a bit differently. Being able to steal at least 4 minions from people is fun. It has a good record against aggro decks too, though that paladin everyfin is awesome deck is kinda toxic... if the game drags to 10 mana you just know all he needs is the right draw to OTK you.

User avatar
Yubtzock
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:37 pm UTC
Location: Breslau/Wrocław

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Yubtzock » Sun Dec 13, 2015 5:29 pm UTC

This is why my version of fatigue priest runs recombobombs - that way two murlocs are guaranteed not to die that game. If I'm lucky I can spare the entomb to get another murloc and never play it.
Now, if only I could find a way to win against combo druid...

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:53 pm UTC

So, not sure if anyone plays this still, buuut, apparently they're adding formats, MTG style.

Classic will always stay in their version of Standard, along with the latest stuff. Last two sets, if memory serves, as well as last adventure or whatever. The others will still be legal in wild. It looks like they're going to rotate stuff that's wild-only out of the marketplace, though, including adventures. If you unlock at least one wing, it remains available to you, though.

So, get those GvG packs now if ya want 'em. You'll still be able to build stuff later with dust, but that's painful.

User avatar
Xenomortis
Not actually a special flower.
Posts: 1387
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:47 am UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Xenomortis » Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:03 pm UTC

I'm not sure if this sucks more or less for the occasional player.
Image

User avatar
DaBigCheez
Posts: 794
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:03 am UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby DaBigCheez » Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:58 pm UTC

It might lessen the burden of being a new player, since you only have two or so sets to catch up on before you have a "full set".

On the other hand, as an old player, it makes me even less eager to return; having stopped playing around Blackrock Mountain, basically all of the cards I'd previously acquired are now rotated out of Standard format, meaning I'm basically useless there, whereas I still don't have the new cards, making me useless in Wild as well. As a result, it feels like all of my previous progress is now meaningless, and it feels like if I started playing again, I'd either have to view it as an ongoing commitment, or accept that another "burst of heavy play, followed by stopping for a while" is going to be just as pointless.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...

If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.

User avatar
Xenomortis
Not actually a special flower.
Posts: 1387
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:47 am UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Xenomortis » Wed Feb 03, 2016 10:08 pm UTC

That's basically my feeling.

I feel like that this could be good for the game, or at least good for players that are willing to make the investments.
But for me?
TGT introduced a "few" significant cards - the important ones that I need to keep up with some of the meta decks I could craft easily if I didn't get them from packs, because my current collection is good enough.
But in the future? Cards from the new expansion become much more important because I lose significant chunks of my collection, never to see them again. Any investment made toward those cards is now all but gone.
I could just play Wild, but I'm not sure how sustainable that is in the long run - Wild is completely unapproachable for a new player.

And I do feel this will result in more card duplication - as important tools get cycled out, cards that achieve the same, or a very similar, thing have to be introduced.
How happy would you feel if you had to craft "Modern Heal Bot" just because the older one got cycled out?
Image

User avatar
faranim
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:14 pm UTC
Location: Maryland, USA

Re: Hearthstone

Postby faranim » Thu Feb 04, 2016 7:16 pm UTC

It sucks if they remove the ability to ever buy the old packs or complete the old adventure paths. I still haven't done the League of Explorers or Blackrock Mountain. I hope that they will at least let you craft those cards with dust once the adventure path is gone.

The actual Standard Mode I think is a good thing. I'm already lacking a large number of "essential" legendaries (Dr. Boom, Ysera, Ragnaros, etc). It's good to see those kind of staple cards phased out over time.

Most of my play time is in Tavern Brawl or Arena anyway, so I'm not particularly concerned.

Chen
Posts: 5108
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Chen » Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:09 pm UTC

faranim wrote:It sucks if they remove the ability to ever buy the old packs or complete the old adventure paths. I still haven't done the League of Explorers or Blackrock Mountain. I hope that they will at least let you craft those cards with dust once the adventure path is gone.


You will be able to craft the cards once the adventures are gone. Also if you even start one wing you apparently will be able to continue to play through them all.

The actual Standard Mode I think is a good thing. I'm already lacking a large number of "essential" legendaries (Dr. Boom, Ysera, Ragnaros, etc). It's good to see those kind of staple cards phased out over time.

Most of my play time is in Tavern Brawl or Arena anyway, so I'm not particularly concerned.


Just for reference, Ysera and Ragnaros are classic cards and not rotating out. There are a lot of strong legendaries in the classic set:
Alextraza
Sylvanas
Antonidas
Tirion
Jaraxxus
Grom
Baron Geddon
Cenarius
etc

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5361
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby mosc » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:21 pm UTC

Well now I'm not going to make Dr. Boom my first legendary craft. Thinking Antonidas because mage sucks without him but I'm not sure how much I'll like mage without unstable portal anyway.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

Nork
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:05 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Nork » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:38 pm UTC

DaBigCheez wrote:On the other hand, as an old player, it makes me even less eager to return; having stopped playing around Blackrock Mountain, basically all of the cards I'd previously acquired are now rotated out of Standard format, meaning I'm basically useless there, whereas I still don't have the new cards, making me useless in Wild as well. As a result, it feels like all of my previous progress is now meaningless, and it feels like if I started playing again, I'd either have to view it as an ongoing commitment, or accept that another "burst of heavy play, followed by stopping for a while" is going to be just as pointless.

Aren't you in the same boat even if they don't do this? All those cards you wouldn't have in Wild are still cards you wouldn't have if things were unchanged.

I do think it would be nice if they left the ability to buy packs and play outdated adventures, but I don't really go back and re-play adventures very often, so I guess I understand why they want to cut corners there.

User avatar
Xenomortis
Not actually a special flower.
Posts: 1387
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:47 am UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Xenomortis » Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:10 pm UTC

I'm kind of sad Loatheb is going to go. It's got a really neat and unique effect that works well (unlike the unique effect of, say, Nozdormu).
I wouldn't mind if some cards from previous sets were occasionally cycled in (although it might annoy people who disenchant all the cards from previous sets as they go).
Image

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:17 pm UTC

Xenomortis wrote:I'm not sure if this sucks more or less for the occasional player.


If you just wanna play standard, I think it makes it easier....less to keep up with if you're gone for a while.

But if you want to play wild, it gets worse. Missing an adventure because you didn't pay attention/have the gold/whatever at the right time is sucky.

It definitely reinforces my decision to play this game in free to play mode, not buying packs with money. Because...it just seems MORE like throwing money in a pit now. Don't get me wrong, I've played magic and stuff plenty, I don't mind shelling out if it seems like value is there, but Hearthstone just seems a little too overt on putting the endless grind in my face.

Or maybe I'm just cynical from playing WoW for a coupla years, I dunno.

Chen
Posts: 5108
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Chen » Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:38 pm UTC

Nork wrote:I do think it would be nice if they left the ability to buy packs and play outdated adventures, but I don't really go back and re-play adventures very often, so I guess I understand why they want to cut corners there.


I think you'll be able to replay adventures you've bought no? It just won't let you buy the old ones if you haven't started unlocking them. And I think the reason for that is to pre-empt people complaining "oh man I bought all these packs and adventures and now I can't use the cards (in standard)" and then asking for money back or whatnot.

User avatar
kaispencer
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2016 4:51 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby kaispencer » Sun Feb 21, 2016 5:04 pm UTC

I remember my first pack) Made it from standard cards and it was such a thrill.

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Jahoclave » Sun Mar 06, 2016 9:03 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
Xenomortis wrote:I'm not sure if this sucks more or less for the occasional player.


If you just wanna play standard, I think it makes it easier....less to keep up with if you're gone for a while.

But if you want to play wild, it gets worse. Missing an adventure because you didn't pay attention/have the gold/whatever at the right time is sucky.

It definitely reinforces my decision to play this game in free to play mode, not buying packs with money. Because...it just seems MORE like throwing money in a pit now. Don't get me wrong, I've played magic and stuff plenty, I don't mind shelling out if it seems like value is there, but Hearthstone just seems a little too overt on putting the endless grind in my face.

Or maybe I'm just cynical from playing WoW for a coupla years, I dunno.

For me it's pretty much the end of my desire to play the game at all. Which, I suppose is a good thing as I ended up hating the game more than enjoying it.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5361
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby mosc » Tue Apr 12, 2016 4:48 pm UTC

I'm not liking this new set much. Lots of big slow cards and it makes me wonder how decks with lower dust costs are going to compete. Standard's anti-aggro shift doesn't really bother me but aggro cards have always been lower dust than big slow epic/legendarys. Nax and GVG didn't just have powerful legendary cards like boom, they also had a sea of playable commons.

Hearthstone seems to want standard games to go well past turn 10 and that requires not printing aggro cards. Leaving them out means anti-aggro tech pieces can be left out as well and then things get more and more ponderous.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Adacore » Fri Apr 15, 2016 12:43 am UTC

I suspect the developers had the same concern over the cost of slow, late-game decks, and that's why they're making one of those new, slow decks (the C'Thun deck, which most people seem to be speculating will be competitively viable) free for everyone. It seems like C'Thun is intended to be the 'starter deck' for the new Standard set.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5361
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby mosc » Fri Apr 15, 2016 11:50 am UTC

C'Thun deck contains 1 free card. Hardly a free deck. Can you imagine playing a 10 casting cost win condition in a warrior or priest deck without justiclar?
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

Chen
Posts: 5108
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Chen » Fri Apr 15, 2016 1:25 pm UTC

mosc wrote:C'Thun deck contains 1 free card. Hardly a free deck. Can you imagine playing a 10 casting cost win condition in a warrior or priest deck without justiclar?


Justicar tends to be too slow against the really fast decks anyways. I haven't been using it in Control Warrior for a while now. Granted control warrior is really weak in the current meta anyways so I haven't really been running it at all. A rogue C'thun deck is something that'll probably show up in standard, especially since a lot of the faster cards seem to be phasing out.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5361
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Hearthstone

Postby mosc » Sat Apr 16, 2016 1:21 pm UTC

justiclar is too slow now because there are aggro decks. If you're playing a 10 casting cost minion and lots of cards that interact with him in warrior and priest you'll have plenty of turns for justiclar to be a necessity.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 1776
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Panama

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Weeks » Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:37 pm UTC

Sup my friends.

I'm playing this game again.

Actually enjoy all the new cards printed since I last played, loooooots of interesting stuff that I can't wait to put in my collection and fuck around with in Wild in like two years, lol (only half joking). And since I'm a casual scrub I don't really care about pirate meta, but I'll probably take a stab at rank 15 (!!!!) this month or the next

Also pretty lucky that I got back in time to get 1400 gold for BRM and LoE before they rotate. Pretty clutch imo

Thoughts on un'goro?
Am I gregnant
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
rath358 wrote:manually adding a long list of swear words to my dictionary worked.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 465
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Hearthstone

Postby SDK » Mon Apr 03, 2017 5:15 pm UTC

Times are good. I'm primarily an Arena player, so I usually shoot for Rank 15 too! Though I have made legend a few times, and once as high as 3rd place in all of NA. /arrogantprick

Un'goro seems cool. The quests are neat, and I'm looking forward to seeing how this will shake up the Arena games. I'm most looking forward to Adapt - it should make for some interesting choices.
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 1776
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Panama

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Weeks » Mon Apr 03, 2017 5:32 pm UTC

[quote="SDK"]Though I have made legend a few times, and once as high as 3rd place in all of NA.[/size]Whoa really? That's cool. I think the furthest I got way back when was like rank 14 or 13.

I really want to craft and play a Shaman Murloc Quest deck, it just seems to have the best fun:competitive ratio, and murlocs are cool! But they die to AoE and I bet elemental shaman is going to be the thing now, and I don't really feel like crafting Kalimos.

I have had very mixed results in Arena, especially after the changes. I think I'll wait till the expansion hits to draft my next Arena, I don't really need/want MSOG packs. (I feel like after Reno rotates Kazakus won't see much play, which is the legendary I might've wanted. I already have jades for Shaman and Druid) Is it right to think that Arena is a value fiesta now, as opposed to the mainly tempo meta of the previous patches? Like, curving out perfectly isn't as great because of so much more removal. Or something?
Am I gregnant
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
rath358 wrote:manually adding a long list of swear words to my dictionary worked.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 465
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Hearthstone

Postby SDK » Mon Apr 03, 2017 6:08 pm UTC

Arena is a bit different than before, yes. It's still important to hit your 2-drops, but it's rare to see a very successful aggressive deck. Hunter can still pull it off though, so you do need something to shore up your early game. Focus on that too much, though, and you'll get blown out by Warlock or Mage (which tends to be packing a very high curve these days). Strong AoE at common and rare (Abyssal Enforcer, Volcanic Potion, and Felfire Potion) was key in shifting that meta.

It's true that tempo was more important before, but card advantage was still important even then. Rogue and Paladin were king then thanks largely to value gained from their hero powers. Now the advantage seems to come more from card quality, like you said. The right Paladin deck can still be broken, but it's much more dependent on its draws.

That 3rd place finish was a while back now, when I was playing Patron Warrior. My current goal is reaching 12 wins with all 9 classes in Arena. Still working on Warlock, Druid and Warrior. I've gotten to 10 or 11 wins with each of them, but Warrior is just so bad!
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 1776
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Panama

Re: Hearthstone

Postby Weeks » Mon Apr 03, 2017 6:14 pm UTC

Highest Arena wins I've got is 10 T^T
Am I gregnant
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
rath358 wrote:manually adding a long list of swear words to my dictionary worked.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 465
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Hearthstone

Postby SDK » Mon Apr 03, 2017 6:25 pm UTC

10 is pretty good! We can get you there. 8-)
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)


Return to “Gaming”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Exabot [Bot] and 14 guests