I guess we can pretty much wipe out that last lingering hope for a rotating wild system, because its clear that they either don't want to commit to it (let's face it, balancing two systems of standard would mean more manpower), or just plain don't want to do it. Although, with the amount of work they're doing with wild at the moment, I don't see why any of the reasons stated are even remotely substantial.
We don't do a good job of transitioning players from purchase to fun
No shit. I don't want to bring up topics like these for extended discussions but let's face it, hearthstone is expensive to have fun in. I mean, we're talking about paying a total of 80 bucks and get like around 5 legendaries on average.
Really depends on your definition of fun.
I literally never spend money on Hearthstone and I have tons of fun playing it.
Honestly, I'm pretty happy with what we have right now. One page displaying class level and total wins serves me fine.
If anything, I'd love to see Griffior's idea of Full Art cards implemented, which is somewhat related to player's profiles (quick example: deal lethal with Leeroy Jenkins 1.000 times to unlock his full art which will be used in game (only) for you). Griffior is the most creative guy I know in this area and this my favorite idea of his :)
One issue with all of this kind of stuff is avoiding to disappoint the longterm players. They either have to implement stuff based on data they're collecting anyway (which we don't know about, but certainly limits the possibilities) or focus on recent stuff like they did with achievements. Quite a challenge I think.
Or maybe a win rate percentage per season? Not sure if they could retroactively give us stats on every single win/loss since the beginning of time. I'd also be scared to know what those numbers are, coz I've been on quite a few losing streaks in the past x_x
I guess we can pretty much wipe out that last lingering hope for a rotating wild system, because its clear that they either don't want to commit to it (let's face it, balancing two systems of standard would mean more manpower), or just plain don't want to do it. Although, with the amount of work they're doing with wild at the moment, I don't see why any of the reasons stated are even remotely substantial.
We don't do a good job of transitioning players from purchase to fun
No shit. I don't want to bring up topics like these for extended discussions but let's face it, hearthstone is expensive to have fun in. I mean, we're talking about paying a total of 80 bucks and get like around 5 legendaries on average.
I don't see any Face Hunter or Secret Paladin or Keleseth Rogue or whatever old deck in current Wild meta.
Hell I don't even see Even Shaman or Jade Druid anymore.
Wild is not a nostalgia place, except for very few (lucky) decks. It cannot be ofc, so why trying to tell us this BS?
We don't even ask for a dynamic meta btw. We just ask for a NON-OPPRESSIVE one with few nearly flawless t1 decks that live in a powerlevel of their own.
I'm also sad they consider new player experience secondary in development because of their population: maybe this is exactly the CAUSE why new players are a minority in the game?!?
If WIld is suspsoed to be for old decks/cards, then WHY are so so many still nerfed/chnages cause of standard even when are wild only?
IF thats their goal, then should unnerfed pretty much evrything thats wild only and revetr chanegs like brugle nto workign with tri class anymore or sonya not workign with quest rogue crystal core aura/buff.
Cause currently its like youc an play old decks/cards, but not that card/deck, that one youc ant either, those cant either, and that one and that and that one.
Damn, this is not the answer I wanted to hear for wild. They could easily nerf the outright broken decks that have a way to high winrate. (Secret mage, raza priest and darkglare warlock). I don't see a problem with those nerfs.
I get that there is no world where you please everyone, but I feel like either wild changes or a rotating format has to come about eventually for a fair amount of players to remain invested. Maybe I am only speaking for myself and no one else feels this way, that is entirely possible, but the fact that I am paying 100 dollar (in Canada) to get an expansion that I don't even get to keep is killing the game for me. I get to keep it in a literal sense but that fact that the wild meta is so utterly over the top makes it so that a huge amount of the cards I receive basically die on rotation, and yet I paid 100 dollars for it when I could have just paid for a new game entirely and kept that game forever. Once again I could be speaking for myself alone and no one else but I don't see a reason to give them 300 dollars a year just so that money can be tossed away two years later.
Why do people bring up Glide so much when new cards come out. This isn't the 5 star card Troggzor the Earthinator, people were mad about glide because it would be terrible for the game if it ever saw play, not that it would see play in every single demon hunter deck which is what i see whenever someone brings up Glide nowadays(Which is everyone's defense when it comes to hearthstone(rez priest isn't bullshit even though it's not fun to play against it's not even tier 0, who cares that everyone is spamming it)). I was one of the loudest who spoke about Glide, if the card ever sees play the game will be worse for it, i still believe that today. Essentially bricking the mulligan which is one of the only ways you can guarrantee a card for a certain turn, either it being aoe against aggro, or a win condition against control. Remember glide. Remember Divine favor. Punishing your opponent for having card advantage the same way Divine Favor did, by screwing your opponent for having a large hand against an aggro opponent, where glide would be most advantageous. The only reason glide never saw play wasn't because it was bad it was because Skull of Gul'dan exists. And now we have Voracious Reader, and all kinds of other aggro BS, so thank god we never have to deal with glide. Now games are over on turn 4 instead, when you play against a demon hunter. And since people always nitpick whenever i post shit like this.
"But clawz demon hunter kills you on turns 5-6 not 4 so your entire argument is wrong."
I can't be bothered to look it up but if memory serves correct, I believe Ben Brode back in the day had said they really don't want to show you losses ever for exactly that reason. If it was him that said it, I hope its the one thing the team keeps from his vision.
I love win loss ratio, and I can easily track that with Hearthstone Deck Tracker so I don't need it in-game, but it definitely would not be good for most players for exactly the reason you described. Positive statistics, and fun ones like how many Murlocs you've played or how many times you killed someone in a single turn, are way better to see. Though one could certainly argue how positive or healthy OTK is, it is a fact of life for card games =D
If it got more players playing, it would likely be a huge win for the mode and would help with possible problems skill-based matchmaking would bring.
Personally, I think they should go the route of "Heroic" Arena and regular, with no rewards for the normal offering like they do for Duels. It can be a very intimidating mode so that alone doesn't make me want to possibly waste gold on it, especially if all I'm gonna get back out of it is a card back that isn't really worth anything to me at this point. It also would mean they didn't have to give out tickets when they want to do special Arena events like dual-class arena for Halloween since they can just run that in the free mode as well. Turn the heroic arena into something more like heroic brawl with more kickass rewards with a higher cost to enter and leave that at the wins-losses matchmaking.
If they were to do more monetization through cosmetics, making Arena free seems like a way better way to earn money. Then again, I don't have access to the data they do so I could be completely wrong on this.
Like someone said last night on The Angry Chicken's 400th episode, I'd rather just draft Magic the Gathering anyway because its better than what Arena is.
Change the matchmaking to be by skill. Sure. And then wait 10 minutes for a game anything higher than 4 wins at low levels.
That reward thing by skill level is probably impossible to implement. Since its easy to tank one's MMR, the lower MMR rewards would likely be bad. And if its bad then no one would want to play arena.
More profile statistics like this would be really cool to see.
One thing I hope that they don't add to this is a total game record telling me the total number of losses I have. I absolutely hate it when games actively tell me how many losses I have because it horribly discourages me from actually playing the game as I don't want to add losses to my record.
Card sounds powerful but it's actually not worth a deck slot. Just compare with Gnomeferatu: same cost but unconditional, with full body, burns the card without any replacement at all (and as a battlecry it can also be repeated with proper synergy).
But yeah, like in Mario Kart or Crash Team Racing, who's ahead can't get the best weapons, just the most trollish ones.
But the chances for duplicates of Races cards are smaller then. It's more likely to get an extra copy of a normal DMF card because there are more of them. The only risk I see is to get one of the new Legendaries before buying the set.
If you get two copies of a common, you gain 70 dust. For one rare, you gain 80 dust. But if you draw an epic or legendary, you risk getting a duplicate instead of a potentially useful DMF epic or legendary, which sets you back by 300 or 1200 dust respectively.
If you're only looking for very specific epics and legendaries, gaming the system like that might be worth it. But if you're trying to build a broad collection you might be better off by making use of the duplicate protection and opening DMF packs after getting the expansion.
New Rogue & Warrior Spell - Nitroboost Poison
luckily the corrupt keyword on this card slows it down somewhat. It's still see plenty of play, in probably both classes
Dean Ayala's Community Q&A #2 - More New Modes Confirmed, Profiles, Mini Sets, Arena, Wild, and More!
Really depends on your definition of fun.
I literally never spend money on Hearthstone and I have tons of fun playing it.
Blizzard is Exploring Adding More Complete Player Profiles to Hearthstone
Honestly, I'm pretty happy with what we have right now. One page displaying class level and total wins serves me fine.
If anything, I'd love to see Griffior's idea of Full Art cards implemented, which is somewhat related to player's profiles (quick example: deal lethal with Leeroy Jenkins 1.000 times to unlock his full art which will be used in game (only) for you). Griffior is the most creative guy I know in this area and this my favorite idea of his :)
One issue with all of this kind of stuff is avoiding to disappoint the longterm players. They either have to implement stuff based on data they're collecting anyway (which we don't know about, but certainly limits the possibilities) or focus on recent stuff like they did with achievements. Quite a challenge I think.
Blizzard is Exploring Adding More Complete Player Profiles to Hearthstone
Or maybe a win rate percentage per season? Not sure if they could retroactively give us stats on every single win/loss since the beginning of time. I'd also be scared to know what those numbers are, coz I've been on quite a few losing streaks in the past x_x
Dean Ayala's Community Q&A #2 - More New Modes Confirmed, Profiles, Mini Sets, Arena, Wild, and More!
I guess we can pretty much wipe out that last lingering hope for a rotating wild system, because its clear that they either don't want to commit to it (let's face it, balancing two systems of standard would mean more manpower), or just plain don't want to do it. Although, with the amount of work they're doing with wild at the moment, I don't see why any of the reasons stated are even remotely substantial.
No shit. I don't want to bring up topics like these for extended discussions but let's face it, hearthstone is expensive to have fun in. I mean, we're talking about paying a total of 80 bucks and get like around 5 legendaries on average.
Dean Ayala's Community Q&A #2 - More New Modes Confirmed, Profiles, Mini Sets, Arena, Wild, and More!
I don't see any Face Hunter or Secret Paladin or Keleseth Rogue or whatever old deck in current Wild meta.
Hell I don't even see Even Shaman or Jade Druid anymore.
Wild is not a nostalgia place, except for very few (lucky) decks. It cannot be ofc, so why trying to tell us this BS?
We don't even ask for a dynamic meta btw. We just ask for a NON-OPPRESSIVE one with few nearly flawless t1 decks that live in a powerlevel of their own.
I'm also sad they consider new player experience secondary in development because of their population: maybe this is exactly the CAUSE why new players are a minority in the game?!?
Dean Ayala's Community Q&A #2 - More New Modes Confirmed, Profiles, Mini Sets, Arena, Wild, and More!
If WIld is suspsoed to be for old decks/cards, then WHY are so so many still nerfed/chnages cause of standard even when are wild only?
IF thats their goal, then should unnerfed pretty much evrything thats wild only and revetr chanegs like brugle nto workign with tri class anymore or sonya not workign with quest rogue crystal core aura/buff.
Cause currently its like youc an play old decks/cards, but not that card/deck, that one youc ant either, those cant either, and that one and that and that one.
Dean Ayala's Community Q&A #2 - More New Modes Confirmed, Profiles, Mini Sets, Arena, Wild, and More!
Damn, this is not the answer I wanted to hear for wild. They could easily nerf the outright broken decks that have a way to high winrate. (Secret mage, raza priest and darkglare warlock). I don't see a problem with those nerfs.
Dean Ayala's Community Q&A #2 - More New Modes Confirmed, Profiles, Mini Sets, Arena, Wild, and More!
I get that there is no world where you please everyone, but I feel like either wild changes or a rotating format has to come about eventually for a fair amount of players to remain invested. Maybe I am only speaking for myself and no one else feels this way, that is entirely possible, but the fact that I am paying 100 dollar (in Canada) to get an expansion that I don't even get to keep is killing the game for me. I get to keep it in a literal sense but that fact that the wild meta is so utterly over the top makes it so that a huge amount of the cards I receive basically die on rotation, and yet I paid 100 dollars for it when I could have just paid for a new game entirely and kept that game forever. Once again I could be speaking for myself alone and no one else but I don't see a reason to give them 300 dollars a year just so that money can be tossed away two years later.
Dean Ayala Could See Hearthstone's Arena With Skill-Based Matchmaking - Is It Right For The Game?
Yeah, no. SBMM ruins everything.
I highly recommend against buying the mini xpac..
Why do people bring up Glide so much when new cards come out. This isn't the 5 star card Troggzor the Earthinator, people were mad about glide because it would be terrible for the game if it ever saw play, not that it would see play in every single demon hunter deck which is what i see whenever someone brings up Glide nowadays(Which is everyone's defense when it comes to hearthstone(rez priest isn't bullshit even though it's not fun to play against it's not even tier 0, who cares that everyone is spamming it)). I was one of the loudest who spoke about Glide, if the card ever sees play the game will be worse for it, i still believe that today. Essentially bricking the mulligan which is one of the only ways you can guarrantee a card for a certain turn, either it being aoe against aggro, or a win condition against control. Remember glide. Remember Divine favor. Punishing your opponent for having card advantage the same way Divine Favor did, by screwing your opponent for having a large hand against an aggro opponent, where glide would be most advantageous. The only reason glide never saw play wasn't because it was bad it was because Skull of Gul'dan exists. And now we have Voracious Reader, and all kinds of other aggro BS, so thank god we never have to deal with glide. Now games are over on turn 4 instead, when you play against a demon hunter. And since people always nitpick whenever i post shit like this.
"But clawz demon hunter kills you on turns 5-6 not 4 so your entire argument is wrong."
Blizzard is Exploring Adding More Complete Player Profiles to Hearthstone
I can't be bothered to look it up but if memory serves correct, I believe Ben Brode back in the day had said they really don't want to show you losses ever for exactly that reason. If it was him that said it, I hope its the one thing the team keeps from his vision.
I love win loss ratio, and I can easily track that with Hearthstone Deck Tracker so I don't need it in-game, but it definitely would not be good for most players for exactly the reason you described. Positive statistics, and fun ones like how many Murlocs you've played or how many times you killed someone in a single turn, are way better to see. Though one could certainly argue how positive or healthy OTK is, it is a fact of life for card games =D
Dean Ayala Could See Hearthstone's Arena With Skill-Based Matchmaking - Is It Right For The Game?
If it got more players playing, it would likely be a huge win for the mode and would help with possible problems skill-based matchmaking would bring.
Personally, I think they should go the route of "Heroic" Arena and regular, with no rewards for the normal offering like they do for Duels. It can be a very intimidating mode so that alone doesn't make me want to possibly waste gold on it, especially if all I'm gonna get back out of it is a card back that isn't really worth anything to me at this point. It also would mean they didn't have to give out tickets when they want to do special Arena events like dual-class arena for Halloween since they can just run that in the free mode as well. Turn the heroic arena into something more like heroic brawl with more kickass rewards with a higher cost to enter and leave that at the wins-losses matchmaking.
If they were to do more monetization through cosmetics, making Arena free seems like a way better way to earn money. Then again, I don't have access to the data they do so I could be completely wrong on this.
Like someone said last night on The Angry Chicken's 400th episode, I'd rather just draft Magic the Gathering anyway because its better than what Arena is.
Dean Ayala's Community Q&A #2 - More New Modes Confirmed, Profiles, Mini Sets, Arena, Wild, and More!
wild still getting disrespected. like i appreciate their stance on it. but at the end of the day it kinda comes off a bit as "we dont care about wild"
Hearthstone Duels Is Getting 10 New Hero Powers, 25 Signature Treasures (Including Dual-Class), and 6 New Regular Treasures
Gorehowl
Dean Ayala Could See Hearthstone's Arena With Skill-Based Matchmaking - Is It Right For The Game?
Change the matchmaking to be by skill. Sure. And then wait 10 minutes for a game anything higher than 4 wins at low levels.
That reward thing by skill level is probably impossible to implement. Since its easy to tank one's MMR, the lower MMR rewards would likely be bad. And if its bad then no one would want to play arena.
Blizzard is Exploring Adding More Complete Player Profiles to Hearthstone
Total number of wins and total number of losses. That is the one thing that you'll either be bragging about or cowering in extreme fear from.
Blizzard is Exploring Adding More Complete Player Profiles to Hearthstone
More profile statistics like this would be really cool to see.
One thing I hope that they don't add to this is a total game record telling me the total number of losses I have. I absolutely hate it when games actively tell me how many losses I have because it horribly discourages me from actually playing the game as I don't want to add losses to my record.
New Neutral Minion - Armor Vendor
Best card of the mini-set, I think. Such a solid card.
New Rogue Spell - Shenanigans
Card sounds powerful but it's actually not worth a deck slot. Just compare with Gnomeferatu: same cost but unconditional, with full body, burns the card without any replacement at all (and as a battlecry it can also be repeated with proper synergy).
But yeah, like in Mario Kart or Crash Team Racing, who's ahead can't get the best weapons, just the most trollish ones.
New Priest & Warlock Spell - Hysteria
same idea, but use shrinkmeister. combo costs 9 with wretched tiller (1), deathspeaker (3), shrinkmeister (2), and hysteria (3).
and you can run 2 of each piece.
New Mage Spell - Conjure Mana Biscuit
This will enable some broken combos that will enrage a lot of players, calling it now. I mean, Mozaki, Master Duelist and Archmage Antonidas are still in Mage, together with Sorcerer's Apprentice...
I highly recommend against buying the mini xpac..
If you get two copies of a common, you gain 70 dust. For one rare, you gain 80 dust. But if you draw an epic or legendary, you risk getting a duplicate instead of a potentially useful DMF epic or legendary, which sets you back by 300 or 1200 dust respectively.
If you're only looking for very specific epics and legendaries, gaming the system like that might be worth it. But if you're trying to build a broad collection you might be better off by making use of the duplicate protection and opening DMF packs after getting the expansion.
Snowpocalypse
* Bows *
Card Design Conversation - Another Door Opens
Season 2 was a really fun season.
Here's to season 3 being even better!