|
On September 09 2013 18:54 Goldfish wrote:
I just heard about this game (well I heard about it earlier but just remembered after Tastosis mentioned it again on one of the recent GSLs).
How does this game compare to MTG in terms of mechanics - do you think there are certain things done better in this game compared to MTG or maybe they're just too different to compare or it depends on preferences?
They two are different in many aspects, so they're hard to compare. Some things are nice and some are... different. Hearthstone is much less complex at this point and is aimed at a casual audience. However, future cards may add complexity and mechanics as was the case with Magic. The most fundamental difference, in my opinion, is the lack of reactionary play. There is no way to do anything outside of your own turn and there is no such thing as instants, doing something in response, or the stack.
|
Awesome a Hearthstone forum! Grats to us nerds.
Don't forget the Facebook 200 key giveaway today guys. 12:30 PDT aka 3:30 EST is when you should be spam refreshing on BlizzardCS' page to send a message.
|
One thing's for certain: the people who do obtain a key this way are the people with no life - and enough time to thoroughly test the game.
|
So, hello guys, this is my first post here and I'm afraid it's going to have some negativity in it.
I've never been much of a TCG guy, I have a small collection of MTG cards and I've enjoyed a few games but one of my problems has always been that you have to invest a lot of money to get a decent deck. I have roughly 400 cards and the decks I can build with it are very weak, and lack some very 'key' cards.
When I heard about Hearthstone, to be perfectly honest I was one of those guys who were disappointed... A card game for the computer, really? One of those... But after watching it for a bit, notably on Totalbiscuit's channel, I found it at the very least intriguing and perhaps worth checking out. A nice-looking TCG with a reasonable learning curve for the basics, I could get into that and play a couple of games here and there.
However, and I'm sure this has been discussed to death: the business model, while it makes perfect sense for a TCG, worries me. It looks like this game could turn out to be the mother of all p2w games. My buddy, who's a lot more enthusiastic about the game than myself, has been following the 'scene' quite a bit, and he says that it's extremely helpful to blow some money to get some cards early on to get yourself a decent deck. Also, apparently certain classes are highly dependent on certain cards.
I guess it's unreasonable to expect every game to be balanced and reward skilled players with wins, but it's still nice. By the way, I'm not dismissing the inherent randomness of TCG's as not skill or whatever, seriously making a deck typically hangs on some formal or informal understanding of statistics.
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage. My point is, if I do get into it, I hope I'll have a way to enjoy the game and to track my progression. And hopefully, my 'startup' cards won't be a dumb hunk of trash without any fun 'highlights'. One of the greatest downfalls of these free to play games is that they fail to impress new players by having a slow start which hints at an exciting endgame that feels too far away and seems unreachable in a timely fashion.
|
On September 10 2013 02:42 Djzapz wrote:
So, hello guys, this is my first post here and I'm afraid it's going to have some negativity in it.
I've never been much of a TCG guy, I have a small collection of MTG cards and I've enjoyed a few games but one of my problems has always been that you have to invest a lot of money to get a decent deck. I have roughly 400 cards and the decks I can build with it are very weak, and lack some very 'key' cards.
When I heard about Hearthstone, to be perfectly honest I was one of those guys who were disappointed... A card game for the computer, really? One of those... But after watching it for a bit, notably on Totalbiscuit's channel, I found it at the very least intriguing and perhaps worth checking out. A nice-looking TCG with a reasonable learning curve for the basics, I could get into that and play a couple of games here and there.
However, and I'm sure this has been discussed to death: the business model, while it makes perfect sense for a TCG, worries me. It looks like this game could turn out to be the mother of all p2w games. My buddy, who's a lot more enthusiastic about the game than myself, has been following the 'scene' quite a bit, and he says that it's extremely helpful to blow some money to get some cards early on to get yourself a decent deck. Also, apparently certain classes are highly dependent on certain cards.
I guess it's unreasonable to expect every game to be balanced and reward skilled players with wins, but it's still nice. By the way, I'm not dismissing the inherent randomness of TCG's as not skill or whatever, seriously making a deck typically hangs on some formal or informal understanding of statistics.
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage. My point is, if I do get into it, I hope I'll have a way to enjoy the game and to track my progression. And hopefully, my 'startup' cards won't be a dumb hunk of trash.
So, just like MTG and any other TCG.
|
On September 10 2013 02:42 Djzapz wrote:
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage.
Well, people seem to favor the arena game mode over the constructed game mode as it currently stands in the beta. That means the pay to win factor will be limited at best. Also, I don't necessarily agree with the game being pay to win, as you can just as well grind the cards you want.
|
On September 10 2013 02:42 Djzapz wrote:
So, hello guys, this is my first post here and I'm afraid it's going to have some negativity in it.
I've never been much of a TCG guy, I have a small collection of MTG cards and I've enjoyed a few games but one of my problems has always been that you have to invest a lot of money to get a decent deck. I have roughly 400 cards and the decks I can build with it are very weak, and lack some very 'key' cards.
When I heard about Hearthstone, to be perfectly honest I was one of those guys who were disappointed... A card game for the computer, really? One of those... But after watching it for a bit, notably on Totalbiscuit's channel, I found it at the very least intriguing and perhaps worth checking out. A nice-looking TCG with a reasonable learning curve for the basics, I could get into that and play a couple of games here and there.
However, and I'm sure this has been discussed to death: the business model, while it makes perfect sense for a TCG, worries me. It looks like this game could turn out to be the mother of all p2w games. My buddy, who's a lot more enthusiastic about the game than myself, has been following the 'scene' quite a bit, and he says that it's extremely helpful to blow some money to get some cards early on to get yourself a decent deck. Also, apparently certain classes are highly dependent on certain cards.
I guess it's unreasonable to expect every game to be balanced and reward skilled players with wins, but it's still nice. By the way, I'm not dismissing the inherent randomness of TCG's as not skill or whatever, seriously making a deck typically hangs on some formal or informal understanding of statistics.
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage. My point is, if I do get into it, I hope I'll have a way to enjoy the game and to track my progression. And hopefully, my 'startup' cards won't be a dumb hunk of trash without any fun 'highlights'. One of the greatest downfalls of these free to play games is that they fail to impress new players by having a slow start which hints at an exciting endgame that feels too far away and seems unreachable in a timely fashion.
arena, the only real competitive outlet is made through standard pooled decks with no advantage to 1 player or another based on cards in your actual collection.
if you play constructed (your own card collection) you could be at a disadvantage to people who have bought a lot of card packs and have a ton of great cards.
|
On September 10 2013 02:47 Serek wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2013 02:42 Djzapz wrote:
So, hello guys, this is my first post here and I'm afraid it's going to have some negativity in it.
I've never been much of a TCG guy, I have a small collection of MTG cards and I've enjoyed a few games but one of my problems has always been that you have to invest a lot of money to get a decent deck. I have roughly 400 cards and the decks I can build with it are very weak, and lack some very 'key' cards.
When I heard about Hearthstone, to be perfectly honest I was one of those guys who were disappointed... A card game for the computer, really? One of those... But after watching it for a bit, notably on Totalbiscuit's channel, I found it at the very least intriguing and perhaps worth checking out. A nice-looking TCG with a reasonable learning curve for the basics, I could get into that and play a couple of games here and there.
However, and I'm sure this has been discussed to death: the business model, while it makes perfect sense for a TCG, worries me. It looks like this game could turn out to be the mother of all p2w games. My buddy, who's a lot more enthusiastic about the game than myself, has been following the 'scene' quite a bit, and he says that it's extremely helpful to blow some money to get some cards early on to get yourself a decent deck. Also, apparently certain classes are highly dependent on certain cards.
I guess it's unreasonable to expect every game to be balanced and reward skilled players with wins, but it's still nice. By the way, I'm not dismissing the inherent randomness of TCG's as not skill or whatever, seriously making a deck typically hangs on some formal or informal understanding of statistics.
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage. My point is, if I do get into it, I hope I'll have a way to enjoy the game and to track my progression. And hopefully, my 'startup' cards won't be a dumb hunk of trash. So, just like MTG and any other TCG.
Yes I did mention that, thanks for highlighting it in a passive aggressive manner. However there are other concerns which you haven't responded to.
I'll add that I think it's too bad that they couldn't modernize this type of game to fit the digital era. It used to be that cards had to be bought because they were physical and so they needed to be printed, packaged, shipped and sold. It would be nice to have a pure TCG that's more about the game and less about collecting.
I'll admit that I appreciate having my physical MTG cards even though it's a tiny collection. But I'm more interested in Hearthstone's gameplay than the illusion that I own the little pictures which are displayed on my screen.
On September 10 2013 02:50 crms wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2013 02:42 Djzapz wrote:
So, hello guys, this is my first post here and I'm afraid it's going to have some negativity in it.
I've never been much of a TCG guy, I have a small collection of MTG cards and I've enjoyed a few games but one of my problems has always been that you have to invest a lot of money to get a decent deck. I have roughly 400 cards and the decks I can build with it are very weak, and lack some very 'key' cards.
When I heard about Hearthstone, to be perfectly honest I was one of those guys who were disappointed... A card game for the computer, really? One of those... But after watching it for a bit, notably on Totalbiscuit's channel, I found it at the very least intriguing and perhaps worth checking out. A nice-looking TCG with a reasonable learning curve for the basics, I could get into that and play a couple of games here and there.
However, and I'm sure this has been discussed to death: the business model, while it makes perfect sense for a TCG, worries me. It looks like this game could turn out to be the mother of all p2w games. My buddy, who's a lot more enthusiastic about the game than myself, has been following the 'scene' quite a bit, and he says that it's extremely helpful to blow some money to get some cards early on to get yourself a decent deck. Also, apparently certain classes are highly dependent on certain cards.
I guess it's unreasonable to expect every game to be balanced and reward skilled players with wins, but it's still nice. By the way, I'm not dismissing the inherent randomness of TCG's as not skill or whatever, seriously making a deck typically hangs on some formal or informal understanding of statistics.
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage. My point is, if I do get into it, I hope I'll have a way to enjoy the game and to track my progression. And hopefully, my 'startup' cards won't be a dumb hunk of trash without any fun 'highlights'. One of the greatest downfalls of these free to play games is that they fail to impress new players by having a slow start which hints at an exciting endgame that feels too far away and seems unreachable in a timely fashion. arena, the only real competitive outlet is made through standard pooled decks with no advantage to 1 player or another based on cards in your actual collection. if you play constructed (your own card collection) you could be at a disadvantage to people who have bought a lot of card packs and have a ton of great cards.
Guess that pretty much settles my concerns then. That's pretty exciting ^_^. Is there some sort of 'ladder' or matchmaking for playing with the standard pooled decks?
Forgive me for my ignorance btw, I've watched games but I know nothing about the various modes or anything.
|
On September 09 2013 22:34 aseq wrote:
One thing's for certain: the people who do obtain a key this way are the people with no life - and enough time to thoroughly test the game.
I didn`t know refreshing a facebook page for 60 seconds means you have no life...
Ahh. I love the Priest art the most, but I dislike all of the priest specific cards. Such a dilema.
Also I kinda wish instead of buying card packs, you would start with the cards, but be able to purchase holographic, foil, or golden versions of them for real money, kinda like how league of legends does it. Though I`m not sure if enough people would want to buy them like that. I definitely would though, I`m a sucker for vanity haha
|
On September 10 2013 02:42 Djzapz wrote:
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage.
Long story short for you, TCG aren't your type of game then. It's inherent to the game.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
So a Warlock just used Hellfire(or w/e) to kill us both(we each had 3 hp and it deals 4 damage to All characters) and the game was a defeat.
thats kinda interesting, guess the guy who plays the card to win wins in a draw scenario.
|
On September 10 2013 07:10 Zooper31 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2013 02:42 Djzapz wrote:
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage. Long story short for you, TCG aren't your type of game then. It's inherent to the game.
People above your post explained why that wasn't necessarily the case (arena mode). Also, having to buy cards is not inherent to TCG in a digital era... There's nothing wrong in wanting a "purer" form of competition, which Hearthstone seems to offer. Why so angry?
I don't know why there are folks like you x_x. Clumsily overly defensive of what you like to the point where you might repulse people who would otherwise be interested in your games too..
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
Basically you prefer the Dota model over the LoL model, however the Dota model also makes significantly less money (its less addicting too). I highly doubt Blizzard would let this slip, Arena however is a good option, I like it more then played mode right now.
|
On September 10 2013 07:38 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2013 07:10 Zooper31 wrote:On September 10 2013 02:42 Djzapz wrote:
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage. Long story short for you, TCG aren't your type of game then. It's inherent to the game. People above your post explained why that wasn't necessarily the case (arena mode). Also, having to buy cards is not inherent to TCG in a digital era... There's nothing wrong in wanting a "purer" form of competition, which Hearthstone seems to offer. Why so angry? I don't know why there are folks like you x_x. Clumsily overly defensive of what you like to the point where you might repulse people who would otherwise be interested in your games too..
Unless you are good at the game you can't play arena indefinitely and will eventually have to either buy gold or play normal drafted games where its p2w. Arena costs money/gold to enter.
I was just expressing my opinion, people keep asking the same questions and accusing the game of something it can't change about itself. Frustrating mostly is all. And you don't have to buy cards, you can simply play the game and get cards that way like a normal person.
|
On September 10 2013 07:49 Zooper31 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2013 07:38 Djzapz wrote:On September 10 2013 07:10 Zooper31 wrote:On September 10 2013 02:42 Djzapz wrote:
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage. Long story short for you, TCG aren't your type of game then. It's inherent to the game. People above your post explained why that wasn't necessarily the case (arena mode). Also, having to buy cards is not inherent to TCG in a digital era... There's nothing wrong in wanting a "purer" form of competition, which Hearthstone seems to offer. Why so angry? I don't know why there are folks like you x_x. Clumsily overly defensive of what you like to the point where you might repulse people who would otherwise be interested in your games too.. Unless you are good at the game you can't play arena indefinitely and will eventually have to either buy gold or play normal drafted games where its p2w. Arena costs money/gold to enter. I was just expressing my opinion, people keep asking the same questions and accusing the game of something it can't change about itself. Frustrating mostly is all. And you don't have to buy cards, you can simply play the game and get cards that way like a normal person.
OOC, why can't you play arena indefinitely? What's preventing it?
And yes you can play the game and get cards slowly, but here's what would happen - I'm pretty decent at games and I'm competitive so when I put some effort into something, I'll probably get fairly decent - and I'll run into morons who can beat me because they have superior cards because they spent a lot of money on the game to make up for their lacking cognitive skills.
That's not to say I'd get great, far from it. I'd never be relevant. But that's still what would happen, basically. And it'll happen to a lot of people who play casually, letting cards slowly trickle in, while others pay for a shortcut.
And I don't think anything's wrong with building collections and playing with your custom deck made from your collection, it's just not for me. With arenas, at least there's something for me in this game.
|
On September 10 2013 07:55 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2013 07:49 Zooper31 wrote:On September 10 2013 07:38 Djzapz wrote:On September 10 2013 07:10 Zooper31 wrote:On September 10 2013 02:42 Djzapz wrote:
Long story short, I just don't like that people who spend a bunch of money will have a marked advantage. Long story short for you, TCG aren't your type of game then. It's inherent to the game. People above your post explained why that wasn't necessarily the case (arena mode). Also, having to buy cards is not inherent to TCG in a digital era... There's nothing wrong in wanting a "purer" form of competition, which Hearthstone seems to offer. Why so angry? I don't know why there are folks like you x_x. Clumsily overly defensive of what you like to the point where you might repulse people who would otherwise be interested in your games too.. Unless you are good at the game you can't play arena indefinitely and will eventually have to either buy gold or play normal drafted games where its p2w. Arena costs money/gold to enter. I was just expressing my opinion, people keep asking the same questions and accusing the game of something it can't change about itself. Frustrating mostly is all. And you don't have to buy cards, you can simply play the game and get cards that way like a normal person. OOC, why can't you play arena indefinitely? What's preventing it?
Because it costs $1.99 or 150 gold (ingame currency) and unless you win at least 7 games (9 is most you can win) you won't earn enough gold to play again. At 7 wins you generally (read almost always) get AT LEAST 150g for a re-buy. I think at 9 wins you can get up to 450gold if you get max gold drop. So if you aren't that great you'll likely only win 1-5 games in your arena sessions (once you lose 3x, you're OUT) and not earn enough gold to be self sustaining.
You can also earn gold by playing normally and doing daily quests etc.
I don't mind the system overall but I think that:
1) Arena cost is too high per session in gold and real money.
2) Gold accrual is too slow through normal grinding/daily quests.
I think a slight tweak to the two issues and the system would be just fine.
|
Ah, bummer. I'll try it out but I guess I'm not too optimistic given my preferences  .
Games are short enough that $2 for 7 games will rack up fast, especially since I'm not likely to do very well for a LONG time against people who feel they're good enough to pay that!
|
Huge opt-in wave just happened for NA. Got one finally. Good luck everyone!
|
My huge concern for this game is whether or not Blizzard will be able to balance it. Based on their history with WOW and Starcraft I'm not hugely hopeful... : |
|
On September 10 2013 11:35 Bigtony wrote:
My huge concern for this game is whether or not Blizzard will be able to balance it. Based on their history with WOW and Starcraft I'm not hugely hopeful... : |
Except every class doesn't have 20+ hero spells, and 3 different specializations, on top of the cards haha. I feel blizzard will be able to balance it, especially when they start adding more and more cards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
