why I hate hearthstone

[Lyaelan]

Noobist, Please read posts before posting replies. It's embarassing to the entire Mmo-C board community....

[Twoddle]

however RNG on actual card effects is HORRIBLE. the worst RNG effect i've faced is when I was down to 8 health, but had total board control with 4 or 5 minions. and the opponent board was wiped clear with an empty hand. i had cards in hand to end it no matter what the player did to the board on his turn. so what does he do... topdecks Ragnaros, slaps it down, and it hits me in the face instead of any of my minions... that kind of loss is so shitty it does not belong in any game claiming to be based on skill.

You can say that but the very good players make their own luck meaning they make the good luck count. For example you are doing very badly in a game and the only way you can win is if you draw a specific card next turn then you should make a play that assumes this card will be drawn.

Then once in a blue moon when that card is drawn you win the game, if you hadn't made the counterintuitive play on the last turn then not even a miracle would have saved you. The average player will look at this and think what a lucky bugger but really it was a just a master player making his own luck.

This happens in backgammon all the time when a player is so far behind that only a high double will save him, he/she should play hoping for those high doubles. Intermediate stuff really but the beginners see it as pure luck.

[TaurenNinja]

Hearthstone even goes into the extreme RNG direction of bringing in more and more RNG effects on the cards themselves.
There is in fact a skill element in playing RNG-based cards because you have to switch your strategy depending on the outcome, and top players will make better decisions there, however I'm wondering how much RNG is too much RNG? I think the cards in GvG have went too far in terms of RNG.

Also it's not really about newbie beating progamer, there is still enough skill elements in the game to be able to differentiate newbie from pro. It's more about how all the progamers have almost equal chances of winning or losing. And the tournaments also don't do enough to compensate for the RNG factor, as most tournaments have "best of 3" matches, which makes it even more random who wins. Or in other terms, the big RNG factor means that HS has a low skill ceiling which is already reached by many, and the outcome between 2 players of high skill level is determined by RNG alone, unless someone makes a mistake, but the chance of a mistake on the top level of play is IMHO lower than the chance of bad RNG killing one player.

[Deleted]

It's pronounced "herfstone"

[Therec]

I used to think the RNG was too high, then I watched MTG tournaments. The type of deck and the luck of the draw determines way more matches than the RNG on certain cards. Sure maybe 1 in 10 are determined b/c someone got perfect RNG on their card rolls, but if card RNG was a huge factor we wouldn't see the same people winning tournaments and ranking the highest. You'll never have much higher than a 70% win rate at any card game, even if you're one of the best in the world. It's the luck of the draw and the fact that 1 deck doesn't beat all. Frankly I'm happy that those that complain there's too much RNG don't play Hearthstone, b/c they're usually the type of people at FNM that get super salty and rage when their "unbeatable" Jeskai Wins deck gets beat by a good draw of a Blue/White heroic deck.

[Hey There Guys its Metro]

Noobist, Please read posts before posting replies. It's embarassing to the entire Mmo-C board community....

I disagree wholeheartedly.

[Mormolyce]

Contrary to what I expected, GvG's increased number of RNG cards is actually causing me to have more fun rather than less. Who'da thunk it?

So, since you can't do much in WoD these days besides raiding, I decided to play a round of hearthstone (last time I played was months ago).
Started an arena run, chose warlock, got pretty mediocre cards but whatever.

First match goes against a paladin. This is how I lost:

I'm down to 5 life, I have an arcane golem in play, it's my turn, he played muster for battle + hero power last turn, thus, his board consists of 4 1/1 (+ 1/1weapon).

I attack face with my arcane golem, then play madder bomber.

1st bomb hits my golem
2nd bomb hits my golem, golem dies
3rd bomb hits my face
4th bomb hits my face
5th bomb hits my face
6th bomb bits my face

I end turn, he attacks with his 1/1 weapon, I die.

Fuck rng in this game.

Ouch! Dem bombs, never where you want 'em :P

[flinchy]

I don't like it because it's either super grindy or 100% P2W

the 'free' bit is just a trap to lure you in, but if you have half a clue you should just realize it's MTG:C (C for crappy or cut-down), with a similar financial commitment, and infinitely less tangibility.

[Deleted]

I have the perfect solution for you, stop playing terrible cards like mad bomber (all of his associates)

[Mormolyce]

I don't like it because it's either super grindy or 100% P2W

the 'free' bit is just a trap to lure you in, but if you have half a clue you should just realize it's MTG:C (C for crappy or cut-down), with a similar financial commitment, and infinitely less tangibility.

I have not bought a single deck and have most of the original cards. Is that possible in MTG?

[Sting]

I have the perfect solution for you, stop playing terrible cards like mad bomber (all of his associates)

It's often the "correct" choice in arena though. There are plenty of rares I'd pick bomber over.
This game has a lot of RNG, that's true, but often enough you can stack the odds in your favor by just playing it smart. Full board of 1 health minions on your side? Better not play that bomber!

[Deleted]

It's often the "correct" choice in arena though.

I presumed the OP was talking about constructed, since it feels utterly inane to play in an RNG play mode if you so dislike RNG. It's largely why I don't play arena.

[Onenutmcgee]

I presumed the OP was talking about constructed, since it feels utterly inane to play in an RNG play mode if you so dislike RNG. It's largely why I don't play arena.

There is some amount of RNG in arena, but how is it that there are players that consistently beat the RNG? I like to watch GuardsmanBob's twitch stream. He pretty much only does arena and I don't think I've ever seen him get less than 7 wins. I've seen him get 10s 11s and 12s a lot. A lot of his losses are RNG losses, some of his wins RNG wins, but way more games are decided by good decision making.

[Deleted]

There is some amount of RNG in arena, but how is it that there are players that consistently beat the RNG? I like to watch GuardsmanBob's twitch stream. He pretty much only does arena and I don't think I've ever seen him get less than 7 wins. I've seen him get 10s 11s and 12s a lot. A lot of his losses are RNG losses, some of his wins RNG wins, but way more games are decided by good decision making.

I am referring to the inherently random nature of the draft, which could, arguably force the OP to play cards like mad bomber; since, as was pointed out, it might simply be the best choice out of the offered cards.

[Deleted]

This is the main issue that kind of turned me off from hearthstone. Obviously RNG exists in card games based on what cards are drawn between the two players, thats where the skill in building a well balanced deck comes in to minimize the effect of this, but it will always be there being the nature of a card game.

however RNG on actual card effects is HORRIBLE. the worst RNG effect i've faced is when I was down to 8 health, but had total board control with 4 or 5 minions. and the opponent board was wiped clear with an empty hand. i had cards in hand to end it no matter what the player did to the board on his turn. so what does he do... topdecks Ragnaros, slaps it down, and it hits me in the face instead of any of my minions... that kind of loss is so shitty it does not belong in any game claiming to be based on skill.

I saw a video on a presentation by Richard Garfield (creator of M:TG) talking about the effects of "random" in games. The main point of the whole thing is that the more RNG there is, the less gap between skill from top players to bottom there is. For example take a game like chess which is probable like 99+% skill and see how often a grandmaster beats a new player to the game. Now take those same two players and have them roll a pair of dice to see who gets a higher roll and see how often that grandmaster wins. obviously extreme examples but the point is the same, heathstones RNG is obviously not in those extremes but somewhere in the middle.

when you introduce randomness to a game it closes that gap between the best and worse players. This is ENCOURAGED by blizzard in hearthstone so bad players still win games, therefore don't get frustrated and quit, they still want to play and spend money. However this degrades the integrity of the game and makes it so stupid scenarios like the one in the OP can still happen in competitive matches.

Perhaps Blizzard doesn't want a huge disparity between the least skilled and most skilled players? In any case providing that there is some level of skill involved (and HS requires a lot of skill) the RNG ultimately balances out. You'll win games due to RNG, lose some due to RNG, and in the majority of games luck will favour both players relatively equally, a skill/the deck will decide.

Also to note is that adapting to random circumstances and controlling RNG is a skill in and of itself.

[Strangewayes]

There's only a few factors determining which players are the best from the worst.

1. Deck knowledge - Knowing which cards the opponent plays lets them theorize what deck they are playing

2. Meta Knowledge - Knowing what are the most popular/powerful decks, letting them tweak their own deck based on current meta matchups

3. Card Counting - Knowing what chance they and the other player has to draw a specific card at a specific time in the match.

Basically the entire premise of the top players theory is to minimize randomness to "lose less" not exactly to "win more"
The reasons the top players are consistently the top players is because they minimize randomness, minimize mistakes, and do it consistently.

The thing is, hard counters and card RNG make sure that players with fewer cards to make a powerful deck and with less consistent play allows them
to win once in a while, making them feel like they aren't as bad against the more skilled player.

It's the perfect sort of game to keep casuals interested.

[Heywes]

When opponent defeats you in pure-skill game you're like "stupid game, i just want to play casually, this guy was a no-life etc."

When opponent defeat you in randomness-including game you're like "fuck this guy, he was worse than me but had luck, next time i win"

Well, which game you are more likely to play again?

The game based around more skill then luck.

The hearthstone games I have played consisted of: first hand having unplayable cards, putting those back in the deck, getting more unplayable cards, then losing half my life before I could even do anything. Fun stuff.

You can improve yourself in games that rely less on luck, those that rely more on luck, well, get lucky mate.

[Raging Penguin]

As much as I like card games, I seriously hate the yugioh affect. Everytime I get some low enough or have a awesome combo in my hands, my opponent manages to pull a miracle out of their ass.

[Sorissa]

I wonder why so many people make topics like these. The rest of us aren't sitting around with baited breath waiting for these blogs-slash-rants about the game. Really. We aren't.

*slams door open*
"I'D LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THAT I HATE THIS GAME"
everyone else: "Uh, okay...?"

[Ham on Rye]

So, since you can't do much in WoD these days besides raiding, I decided to play a round of hearthstone (last time I played was months ago).
Started an arena run, chose warlock, got pretty mediocre cards but whatever.

First match goes against a paladin. This is how I lost:

I'm down to 5 life, I have an arcane golem in play, it's my turn, he played muster for battle + hero power last turn, thus, his board consists of 4 1/1 (+ 1/1weapon).

I attack face with my arcane golem, then play madder bomber.

1st bomb hits my golem
2nd bomb hits my golem, golem dies
3rd bomb hits my face
4th bomb hits my face
5th bomb hits my face
6th bomb bits my face

I end turn, he attacks with his 1/1 weapon, I die.

Fuck rng in this game.

This is the exact reason why I like the game. The RNG makes you have to analyze every RNG card from a risk v reward standpoint. You have to understand you are going to get screwed every so often. Yeah it sucks that you got the really bad end of the deal (and seriously, I doubt that you're even telling the truth about that scenario since the odds are so stacked against that ever happening). But without RNG, a game is just a dance of which you can predict the outcome before it even starts. And that's no fun at all, either.

If you don't like RNG, don't draft RNG cards in your next arena run. Problem solved.