| Forum Index > Hearthstone General |
|
BeMannerDuPenner
Germany5638 Posts
no reason to get overexcited about how it helps beginners (which are just as fucked as before, + ~400 dust)or how it gives people another option to play ( since its still p2w and might cost you $ to play in 2 months) for now im glad that they are doing something different but its far far from what some people seem to read into it for whatever reason. | ||
|
Noidberg
United States17 Posts
On June 12 2015 06:24 BeMannerDuPenner wrote: poeple read. we get classic packs for the FIRST FEW BRAWLS, its FREE FOR NOW... no reason to get overexcited about how it helps beginners (which are just as fucked as before, + ~400 dust)or how it gives people another option to play ( since its still p2w and might cost you $ to play in 2 months) for now im glad that they are doing something different but its far far from what some people seem to read into it for whatever reason. Its free. | ||
|
Greenstripe
United States164 Posts
| ||
|
Bannt
United States73 Posts
I couldn't care less about this new kripp-mode. What's so hard about automated tournaments blizz? Arena is more or less tournament mode. Better than being locked to your seat for 3-5 hours anyway. And basically the question is, would you like the old stuff repackaged and shown from a different angle, or would you like new shiny cool stuff. And your answer is old stuff?? well ok then suit yourself. | ||
|
Greenstripe
United States164 Posts
| ||
|
Bannt
United States73 Posts
| ||
|
Greenstripe
United States164 Posts
| ||
|
Bannt
United States73 Posts
Honestly, I can almost imagine them sitting around trying to figure out a cool way to implement a tournament into hearthstone and coming up with arena. Just thinking from a developer perspective. Seriously, think about it. | ||
|
Volband
Hungary6034 Posts
On June 12 2015 13:17 Greenstripe wrote: Frankly I don't see how arena is even remotely comparable. You compete with others in a "tournament" with two loser brackets. It's much better for Blizz in terms of a quasi tournament mode, because given the nature of the arena, it is easy to justify handling out good rewards the further you progress, while people, who are good, but might be lacking the gold/dust to compete in ranked mode yet can just farm it. I see absolutely ZERO reason as to why Blizz should try to make a tournament mode right now (or, ever, really, but all right, after a shitton of new cards and adventures, let's do it), when it has to give shit rewards and it would only entertain a very few percent of their playerbase. It is a bad idea everything-wise, and while Blizzard might have a history of making some horrible balance changes, their marketing is more than good enough to not fall into the trap of believing such a mode would net them anything good compared to other possibilities, like this new game mode or a new adventure. | ||
|
Alpino
Brazil4390 Posts
On June 12 2015 13:21 Bannt wrote: Really? It's more or less a triple elimination tournament against the entire player base. Same pyramid stucture, you just have "tiers" instead of individual placements. And of course the random card thing. Honestly, I can almost imagine them sitting around trying to figure out a cool way to implement a tournament into hearthstone and coming up with arena. Just thinking from a developer perspective. Seriously, think about it. How could they mistake a constructed tournament with a draft tournament | ||
|
shur
Germany35 Posts
On June 12 2015 14:43 Alpino wrote: How could they mistake a constructed tournament with a draft tournament Probably because a constructed tournament would only benefit the top few % of the player base. It would mostly reward players with (nearly) perfect decks. Arena is a tournament mode where every player starts with the same chances (more or less). If they would add a tournament mode, people would be surprised to face even more patron warriors and hunters than in constructed and would start to rage instantly. On that note: people bitch WAY to much about everything! Why not be happy that they implement new stuff and you still don't have to pay? If everything is so terrible then just quit! There are more than enough other good games out there. | ||
|
BlacKcuD
Germany107 Posts
Let's see what comes, but my hopes are kinda diminished. | ||
|
TAMinator
Australia2706 Posts
On June 12 2015 19:27 BlacKcuD wrote: If there is no reward structure similar to Arenas or at least a ladder of some sorts, why even play it? If I want to take a break, I play random decks versus my friends. If you don't have friends, well tough luck, make some on the forums or add people after games. Let's see what comes, but my hopes are kinda diminished. Not everything has to be competitive. This is a mode for people to have fun and try shit that the ladder system would never let them get away with. Cards that are never used might see a comeback (e.g. Hearthstone already teasered a goldshire footman vs dinosaurs thing for the brawl). | ||
|
DrDoom77
United States0 Posts
| ||
|
DrDoom77
United States0 Posts
On June 12 2015 19:27 BlacKcuD wrote: If there is no reward structure similar to Arenas or at least a ladder of some sorts, why even play it? It's a (hopefully) improved casual mode for people who want to finish their daily quests without playing on the ladder. Seems to me that's reason enough to play it. | ||
|
killa_robot
Canada1884 Posts
On June 12 2015 13:17 Greenstripe wrote: Frankly I don't see how arena is even remotely comparable. Only difference would be you make a deck using your existing cards rather than random ones. Organizing tournaments for groups of people to play against each other would be pointless to add to the game, since you can easily arrange that without in-game support. Tournaments with random people would be formatted the exact same way as arena. Really not seeing how people think tournaments would be so different from arena. You face people in tiered rounds, there's an entry cost, you get prizes for doing better, you get eliminated after X losses. Decks used is the only difference, meaning tournaments would only appeal to players who have great decks. So, even all the overlaps aside, your target audience is a small portion of those that play ladder, who want to play for the rewards. Not large enough to bother accommodating. | ||
|
willoc
Canada1530 Posts
| ||
|
RogerChillingworth
Chad3131 Posts
On June 13 2015 05:57 willoc wrote: The game doesn't NEED a tournament mode. The game NEEDS something for casuals since it has almost nothing for them right now. This is good. The entire game is for casuals. It's a casual game. It's pure RNG, not something you can take seriously. It just happens to be popular, so there's money to be had. | ||
|
Kaniol
Poland5551 Posts
On June 13 2015 16:03 RogerChillingworth wrote: The entire game is for casuals. It's a casual game. It's pure RNG, not something you can take seriously. It just happens to be popular, so there's money to be had. Dirty poker casuals can't be taken seriously as well i guess? | ||
|
Mortal
2943 Posts
On June 13 2015 16:11 Kaniol wrote: Dirty poker casuals can't be taken seriously as well i guess? Comparing HS to poker is like comparing SC2 to chess- it's simply a ridiculous way to support a point. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
PiGosaur Cup
Replay Cast
Kung Fu Cup
Replay Cast
The PondCast
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Team League
Replay Cast
CranKy Ducklings
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
