Knights of the Frozen Throne (HS Expansion)

[Twoddle]

Except what's been discussed to death is how drastic the difference is, not whether it's actually a "flaw" or not, and certainly never if it's still considered a game or not.

Not true. I've discussed it many times both here, in RL and in places where I've been given upvotes on the subject. If you only see from inside the box you will be blind but as I said you are entitled to your opinion.

[Jester Joe]

Not true. I've discussed it many times both here, in RL and in places where I've been given upvotes on the subject. If you only see from inside the box you will be blind but as I said you are entitled to your opinion.

Generally, upvotes don't really prove much aside that people also agree, but that doesn't mean what they're agreeing with is right.

Nor does "fanboy" or calling others "blind" really prove anything. What you want is the equivalent of playing an FPS and saying "Well, why do I have to use a gun? Why am I stuck in first person mode?".

Hearthstone is a CCG. All CCGs operate on the collection part, and there are people who enjoy it. If you don't, then maybe try something else, but asking them to change the genre of the game is a bit too late now.

This isn't really relevant to this new expansion either though.

[Twoddle]

Generally, upvotes don't really prove much aside that people also agree, but that doesn't mean what they're agreeing with is right.

Agreed, it means they agree. Just like people who agree with you aren't necessary right for agreeing with you.

Nor does "fanboy" or calling others "blind" really prove anything. What you want is the equivalent of playing an FPS and saying "Well, why do I have to use a gun? Why am I stuck in first person mode?".

No but it means that you are incapable of seeing it from the other viewpoint. To me and many others CCG's are flawed by nature.

Hearthstone is a CCG. All CCGs operate on the collection part, and there are people who enjoy it. If you don't, then maybe try something else, but asking them to change the genre of the game is a bit too late now.

I enjoy Hearthstone, I never said I didn't but I always knew there was something 'off' about it from the very beginning.

[Pantalaimon]

In the end I think it is safe to say that this expansion will more or less end up like all others (IE people try a lot of cool or funky decks with more of the cards, then most of the cards drop out of competitive play in around a month or so, followed by people complaining about how Blizzard failed to 'fix' all of the old meta issues due to the new expansion meta going stagnate with only 2-4 popular decks left to play on ladder).

[Logwyn]

The best part is, if they add one new class, that means they can add others

Why couldn't they have added more?

[Thelyron]

I'm gonna be like one of those negative nancy "i'm leaving the game and you should too!" shitposters now, gotta do that at least once in your life i guess.

If they don't add a DK class in an expansion themed around all things DK, the game is 100% dead to me. DK versions of existing classes are a fucking joke and definitely don't cut it. Proper DK hero, with matching spells, or gtfo.

[FobManX]

I'm gonna be like one of those negative nancy "i'm leaving the game and you should too!" shitposters now, gotta do that at least once in your life i guess.

If they don't add a DK class in an expansion themed around all things DK, the game is 100% dead to me. DK versions of existing classes are a fucking joke and definitely don't cut it. Proper DK hero, with matching spells, or gtfo.

It has already been said many times why HS won't release a new class. They would be way too behind the other classes as you'd basically have to create 100+ new cards JUST for said class in order for them to be able to match the other classes. Then there would be balance issues on top of that(as if there aren't already).

Being able to turn your hero into a DK version of themselves is pretty cool and should make for more dynamic and interesting gameplay, changing the way current classes work(e.g. the Hunter DK looks more control based compared to the usual aggro playstyle of Hunters).

[Naxere]

I never understood the commonly used arguments against adding a new class:

1. They'd have to redo the UI: So? Can't be that difficult to add another row to the class selector page. A spot for Death Knight, Monk, and Demon Hunter.

2. They'd have to add new basic/classic cards: Designing most of these cards, outside of maybe the Legendary space, should be easy for them at this point. Hearthstone is far less complicated than many of the other CCG that exist, plus they have existing abilities from WoW to draw ideas from. I would argue that they wouldn't even need to go and design 100+ cards (some for Standard and some for Wild). Just start fresh with "these are the first 20ish cards for Death Knights" and their Wild kit will grow from there.

[Kralljin]

The only card warrior needed outside the normal C'thun cards was rare quality. I'm not sure why you think C'thun was that bad in terms of balance honestly, aside from the deck being almost everywhere at the start, it wasn't anything ridiculous, or P2W.

Twins Emps were a big reason why C'thun decks were actually decent.

[Nikkaszal]

I never understood the commonly used arguments against adding a new class:

1. They'd have to redo the UI: So? Can't be that difficult to add another row to the class selector page. A spot for Death Knight, Monk, and Demon Hunter.

2. They'd have to add new basic/classic cards: Designing most of these cards, outside of maybe the Legendary space, should be easy for them at this point. Hearthstone is far less complicated than many of the other CCG that exist, plus they have existing abilities from WoW to draw ideas from. I would argue that they wouldn't even need to go and design 100+ cards (some for Standard and some for Wild). Just start fresh with "these are the first 20ish cards for Death Knights" and their Wild kit will grow from there.

No card design is "easy". It's not just a case of coming up with enough cards to fill out a set. Cards don't exist in a vacuum - they're not balanced against their own design, they're balanced against every other card in the game

[Jester Joe]

Twins Emps were a big reason why C'thun decks were actually decent.

That's true, but if you were running a druid c'thun deck, you could managed pretty well without them also, considering they already had ridiculous taunts and strong minion interaction with C'thun.

[Naxere]

No card design is "easy". It's not just a case of coming up with enough cards to fill out a set. Cards don't exist in a vacuum - they're not balanced against their own design, they're balanced against every other card in the game

This isn't Magic, it's Hearthstone. There's a much smaller design space and interactions you have to worry about (there are no cards you can play on your opponents turn for example). There's 818 cards in Standard Hearthstone at the moment. Compare that to 1,702 for current Standard MtG.

[Bapestar]

I'm gonna be like one of those negative nancy "i'm leaving the game and you should too!" shitposters now, gotta do that at least once in your life i guess.

If they don't add a DK class in an expansion themed around all things DK, the game is 100% dead to me. DK versions of existing classes are a fucking joke and definitely don't cut it. Proper DK hero, with matching spells, or gtfo.

Yea DK versions of existing classes, are nothing more than a copout, to avoid adding a DK class.

[Twoddle]

Yea DK versions of existing classes, are nothing more than a copout, to avoid adding a DK class.

Dunno what all the fuss is about wanting a new class that bad, I'm not really bothered to be honest.

[Pantalaimon]

I never understood the commonly used arguments against adding a new class:

1. They'd have to redo the UI: So? Can't be that difficult to add another row to the class selector page. A spot for Death Knight, Monk, and Demon Hunter.

2. They'd have to add new basic/classic cards: Designing most of these cards, outside of maybe the Legendary space, should be easy for them at this point. Hearthstone is far less complicated than many of the other CCG that exist, plus they have existing abilities from WoW to draw ideas from. I would argue that they wouldn't even need to go and design 100+ cards (some for Standard and some for Wild). Just start fresh with "these are the first 20ish cards for Death Knights" and their Wild kit will grow from there.

You don't seem to understand everything they would have to do with adding even one new class. As I already mentioned earlier in this thread they have to add a new hero power. When you actually think about it that is a massive undertaking that NEEDS to be designed right, much more so than a simple card that might end up too weak or too strong. Never once has a hero power been altered since the live game was released. However, if they designed one that was incredibly OP or so weak that it had no point in existing then that could cause an issue for the first time in the live game.

Additionally, if you do add a new class with a new hero power you better have a damn intentional reason for giving it a specific hero power. We don't need a DK class that ends up with a skeleton or some undead 1/1 spawning knock-off of the pally hero. We don't need a DK that sacrifices some of its soul to deal damage to face to draw a card. On the flipside, we should not get a DK with a hero power that is a direct improvement of an existing hero power, or one that say would be game breaking, such as a 2 mana 'Give all of your minions +1/+1.

Anyone who thinks it would be 'Lawl balancing the game for a new hero & hero power is easy, and carries no risk for breaking aspects of the game if done wrong!' clearly have not properly thought about the above I have mentioned, nor do they understand that a game needs more than the cards themselves to be considered when designing new things to be added to the game.

[Mormolyce]

Honestly adding new classes doesn't pose much of a problem mechanically, Blizzard simply chooses not to.

The biggest impact would be adding a new set of basic/standard cards for the class - that's what, 25 cards? Not a lot to design however they would have lasting impact on the game so they'd have to be carefully tuned.

Having said that, many of the existing basic/standard class cards are fucking ridiculous and should've been adjusted a long time ago, but noooo. Here we are again in 2017 still dealing with insane face Hunter decks that eat your face by turn 7 using just basic bitch cards.

[Jester Joe]

Yea DK versions of existing classes, are nothing more than a copout, to avoid adding a DK class.

Not really.

Pantalaimon puts it pretty well, but also to add onto that, it's far easier to make a hero power stronger when it's tied to having another requirement.

Like, look at Jaraxxus, there's no way a hero could have a hero power to summon a 6/6 as a default thing. But because it's locked behind having to play a 9 mana legendary that caps your HP pool at a lower amount while costing a whole turn to play, it's a lot more fair now. It also forces the hero power to only be usable late game, so your enemy also has more playable answers for those 6/6s that are coming out now.

Same goes for these new "DK Heroes". They can get more creative with the hero powers than they could ever with just a DK class, because they're locked behind having to play another card already to obtain said hero power.

[Mahourai]

Here we are again in 2017 still dealing with insane face Hunter decks that eat your face by turn 7 using just basic bitch cards.

There are no "insane" face hunter decks. In fact face hunter barely exists, and Hunter as a class is the second least played class on ladder, with its only significant representation coming from a mid-range deck, not an aggressive early-game deck.

Hunter representation will likely get even worse because one of the only decks it had a good winrate against was Quest Rogue which should cease to exist.

There is absolutely nothing in Hunter's basic package that needs a nerf.

[Mormolyce]

There are no "insane" face hunter decks. In fact face hunter barely exists, and Hunter as a class is the second least played class on ladder, with its only significant representation coming from a mid-range deck, not an aggressive early-game deck.

Hunter representation will likely get even worse because one of the only decks it had a good winrate against was Quest Rogue which should cease to exist.

There is absolutely nothing in Hunter's basic package that needs a nerf.

Sorry "midrange" Hunters that kill you on turn 7.

[Mahourai]

Sorry "midrange" Hunters that kill you on turn 7.

Oh no, not turn 7.