Hearthstone realm banner
Hearthstone realm avatar Hearthstone realm home

Hearthstone

146 Characters Joined
Create Thread
Hearthstone | Posted by | 6 years, 4 months ago
Discussion

Should the deck size be increased to slow down general tempo?

I'm not gonna lie I've been very annoyed this expansion which is unusual for me and have actually thought about quitting for good. This is not one of "those" threads but I do feel that the tempo of this game is causing problems and whatever nerfs are made will just push something with better tempo to the top. 

Now tempo is a key part of this game, I remember 1 mana Mana Wyrm and I'm not trying to push out aggro at all but I mean even some control  and midrange have a strong aggro presence these days. The only thing I think that would slow down general tempo is to increase the deck size.  Then maybe we might see some more interesting decks, Aggro may have to include more draw to keep their tempo but I really feel something has to be addressed. What are your thoughts? 

13 Share

// join_the_conversation

Sign in to share your thoughts, vote on comments, and connect with the community.

Sign in Create account

Comments

Sort by:
Oldest Newest Top

  • I'm not gonna lie I've been very annoyed this expansion which is unusual for me and have actually thought about quitting for good. This is not one of "those" threads but I do feel that the tempo of this game is causing problems and whatever nerfs are made will just push something with better tempo to the top. 

    Now tempo is a key part of this game, I remember 1 mana Mana Wyrm and I'm not trying to push out aggro at all but I mean even some control  and midrange have a strong aggro presence these days. The only thing I think that would slow down general tempo is to increase the deck size.  Then maybe we might see some more interesting decks, Aggro may have to include more draw to keep their tempo but I really feel something has to be addressed. What are your thoughts? 

  • I personally don't think there should ever be room in the meta for the kind of extreme aggro deck that relies entirely on getting good draw with no skill and just smashing the face as. That's not fun to play with or play against. 

    But IMHO the solution is to moderate the aggro options rather than expand the deck size which would mean that control games would take way too long.

    • I see your point but most controls are carrying a fair amount of draw and even just a slight rise to 34 wouldn't hurt them

  • The game is built and balanced around having a 30 card deck. Just like having 30 life, it's one of the foundations of the game that can't be tweaked without throwing everything out of balance.

    As an additional for-fun side thing? Sure, we can try it out and see if people like it. As a fundamental change to the way the game functions? Absolutely not.

      • That is a very good answer sir and I see your logic but  for me balance is the thing we are having troubles with. The game just has access to powerful cards and game winning combos much quicker than when it's fundamentals we're designed. The decks have more synergies and ready constructed combos than when the game first came out. Remember that 5 mana demon was around that put legenderies in your deck. It was a lot harder to put your mini combos and synergies together. 5 cards was too much so a bit of pre testing has been done already. I think it's a Shame to release 135 cards and not have more time to play around with them. 

  • If you want to add cards to your opponent's deck you can play the new Bad Luck Albatross.

    • My albatross priest approves your comment but they only slow down your opponent so it's not equal

  • I get where you're coming from, but I'll have to disagree.  The entire challenge behind creating a 30 card deck is knowing that you can't include everything that you want.

    In the case of Aggro and Tempo, these decks win or lose long before they run out of cards.  What they don't draw wouldn't matter, since the cards they added to their deck would simply be more aggro or tempo oriented cards (the ones that barely didn't make the cut).

    Midrange decks would probably suffer from such a change.  They rely on very specific value cards to carry them through to the end of the game.  Sometimes relying on 2-3 card combinations, this would only hurt such a strategy.

    Control on the other hand would simply include every board clear that didn't make the cut earlier.  Having even more options to slow the game down and destroy everything your opponent plays might be good in the short term, but is unhealthy for game balance.

    Combo decks would suffer the most.  Having to draw even more cards in order to get exactly what they need to finish the game.  It might just remove the archetype from the game or reduce it to "meme" tier.  

    • I like this answer it is well thought out and I do agree that mid range might get hit the worst but  for me with so many board flooding strategies available you can match the removal as all strategies would be affected by such a change including aggro. just  it might take you longer to get the right cards which I feel is needed now and for the future of the game. 

      we have so many disruption tools right now in standard and at the same time so many power spike tools but we simply can't fit them in  its like the game has become too fast for some of the types of cards they are releasing. I know they want quicker games for their huge mobile market but they are printing enough cards that can swing the game in any strategies favour.

       imo combo would be affected just as the others as again the tools are already their for them to either draw very quickly or to put the cards back in their deck if they draw combo cards  too early but deemed bad as we simply do not have the time or space to include them in our decks.

      i am  not a designer and think that they do a great job with the variety of cards they release but the timing of the game is a little off to really enjoy most of them.

  • Deck size and the tug of war between high tempo and slower control really have nothing to do with each other.

    You'd have to overhaul the mana resource system of the entire game to really address what you're getting at directly.

     

     

    To digress a little I will say that there was once a time when at least one of the tempo playstyles (midrange) almost did not exist in the game at all for many seasons (outside of Midrange Hunter). People also very often have this compulsory need to constantly redirect the game to a main control meta, ignoring that such a meta actually makes combos & OTKs stronger (which I love, but many players hate) and many classes do not have legitimate non-tempo means to build decks around, such as control paladin.

    • I agree with almost all of this and I do play some high tempo decks myself and I find it the same I either steamroll because of  my early hand or I flat out have no replies to some of the tempo switches. is my idea the solution probably not. is there a time orientated problem imo most likely

  • well some very good points all round I think and I wasn't sold on the idea hence why i was asking.

    to the people who downvoted me and will a bit more soon ok so tempo is not a problem yet the most complained about things at the mo are about tempo or the time it takes to do something or the sharp tempo shifts,  so what would you suggest to remedy these problems?

    Nerfs because we are not talking about single cards we are talking about groups of cards that when played together outright win the game if a few of these are in your opening hand you have  pretty much won already.

  • Better than increasing the deck size would be to increase the starting hand size. Just image the changes of starting with 4/5+coin cards in hand. Especially for control decks this would be game-changing *pun intended*.

    Deck size is already fluid (see Rogue, Druid or Priest cards that shuffle cards into your or your opponent's deck), I don't think a bigger starting deck size would be that much better (definitely less consistent).