The fundamental flaws with Hearthstone

[RoKPaNda]

highly doubt it, my brother met full golden decks and the top-rank decks often when he started a whole new HS account.

Actually I misspoke, it's new accounts that aren't supposed to get matched up with accounts with extensive collections. I admit I can't find the blue post and it may have just been something they said at Blizzcon, but it's not too hard to see the system in action. Make a new account and you won't see crazy legendary filled decks until much later than usual.

Last season I barely played on my main account, so it sat at rank 15 until near the end of the season. When I started pushing for legend on that account again the decks and player skill levels encountered were much higher than what I was facing at the same ranks on my secondary f2p account. So while I can't provide you with a blue post, it's really not a difficult thing to test once the season is halfway over or so.

[Deleted]

1. As a new player, you have nearly no decent cards.
2. To get decent cards you either need to spend $100+ OR grind for nearly a year
3. When you get decent cards, you beat new players with ease


The game has a horrendous barrier to entry.

Such a shame that this great little game has been ruined by economics.

1+2+3 = You can reach rank 10-15 easily with basic cards, been there, done that and I'm really bad at this type of games.

[shammypie]

Most viable decks only run with 2-3 legendaries. At least that's the way it was in vanilla. Legendaries were crap unless you know how to use them.

A new strategy (or one that's being used more often now) I'm noticing a lot is that people will throw down a legendary that forces someone to use a board clear/CC then they'll throw down an even more powerful legendary once that person has blown their CC/clear.

Not Really new as that strategy has been around since vanilla. It's more people are learning to use it more now. This is prevalent in Control Warrior or any Control/Late Game Decks. While it doesn't work against classes with cc for pdays (priests cough). It's generally accepted that you try to force your opponent to use hard cc on lower minions to keep your minions out longer. For instance against a mage you want to burn both polys on things like sheildmaidens and the juggernaut before playing a rag or ysera. While he can still fireball/frostbolt etc, it will take him multiple spells/cards to take them out and in the mean time you benefit from their passive.

[Dilbon]

And to top it all off, in the ultimate git gud scrub cliche, you make the mistake of thinking epics and legendaries are more powerful than commons and rares.

Yea, you rarely see them played.

[TheDeeGee]

What bothers me most is the Tablet Controls.

Dragging sucks, it should be Tap to Select, and Tap to Attack.

[Deleted]

Yea, you rarely see them played.

Yeah and the decks made entirely out legendaries and epics do so well, it's a surpise they don't catch on more.

[mongoose6]

The shaman ancestor's call deck I use has a ton of legendaries but gets wrecked all the time. Still fun to play though. I think that's another problem people have with the game, they can't have fun without winning. I personally have a blast losing as long as it's done with style.

[Twoddle]

This paragraph right here has so much bullshit crammed into it i'm going to ignore the rest of your post and just rip this apart.

Don't understand this line, I think if I did I might end up a git gud scrub like you, so it's probably for the best.

If I'm beating players with decks full of epics and legendaries how am I a git gud scrub?

Yes, because until you have every card in the game, you can't play the game. This line of argument is so stupid, so beyond stupid its insane. Some of the best decks in the bloody game at the moment cost less a thousand dust to craft.

No there isn't. You see the thing about playing the game, is that you get experience, you learn how to play the game effectively, how to use certain cards in certain situations, how to trade properly, how to predict what your opponent has in his hand, hell how to predict what deck your opponent is playing based on the current meta. That's what makes a player good, that's what gets you into the highest ranks, not having a full gold deck, or spending thousands of dollars buying card packs.

Yes there is, why does this have to be explained? If two players of equal skill play for free for a month then one of them buys all the cards, who is gonna climb the ranks faster and who is gonna stay where they are?

But no, because you are bad at the game, you assume that it's the games fault and that they must be hiding the cards that will make you win behind a paywall.

Who said I was bad at the game? Because I say the game is flawed it logically follows I am bad at the game?

This sentence once again, being a repeat of the first sentence in the paragraph, makes no sense.

No one argues that it is a flaw for Hearthstone to make money, therefore it is a flawed game.

It is flawed in the sense that it is pay to win.

Ah fuck it i'm bored lets do the rest of your post.

A profitable game, a card game no less, putting out an expansion pack with new cards in it? HOW IS THIS A SHOCK TO ANYONE? DO YOU COMPLAIN WHEN ANY OTHER GAME BRINGS OUT AN EXPANSION? "Well i've just finished getting all the achievements in WoW- OH COME ON BLIZZARD WHATS THIS EXPANSION BULLSHIT THATS COME OUT OF THE LEFT FIELD"

This is completely irrelevant to the argument. No one said it was wrong to bring out an expansion. And how is it a shock if I already predicted it?

Right so the rest of your post is arguing about the ability to buy card packs, the expansions and all that, and how you have to spend money to enjoy the game. And then you invalidate everything else you just said by claiming that you love the game and haven't paid a penny for it. And to top it all off, in the ultimate git gud scrub cliche, you make the mistake of thinking epics and legendaries are more powerful than commons and rares.

I didn't invalidate anything am I not allowed to enjoy a flawed game? Plus half of that I didn't even say.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, how does it make the game flawed ... normal games, you HAVE to pay to play. That's the standard. You don't pay, you don't play. Now players see HS and somehow paying for that game seems like a travesty. The last GTA game, how much F2P gameplay did you get out of that game ? How much free gameplay did you get out of the last call of duty ?

***Insult snipped***

If it's pay to win it's a flawed. That's doesn't mean you can't enjoy a flawed game.

[Solmyr13]

Not even reading the thread, same ol' crap:

Find a deck you like and make it. Buy packs with gold; bolster that deck. When you start getting extras, DE them and craft newer cards that bolster your deck.

Easy. The ONLY deck that is absurd to build straight up is Control Warrior.

[Binko]

1+2+3 = You can reach rank 10-15 easily with basic cards, been there, done that and I'm really bad at this type of games.

So what? Why is that even meaningful at all?

Every time one of these topics comes up people respond by claiming you can get to this rank or that rank with starter cards.

But what if you play for fun and excitement and not just to achieve some arbitrary meaningless rank on a pointless ladder? Making a boring deck from the boring starter cards and then grinding it until your eyes bleed from sheer boredom until you reach some silly rank is not fun at all. Having the freedom to try out a multitude of different deck types and explore the most interesting and powerful cards IS fun.

A new Hearthstone player has access to about 20% of the game play options in the game in the form of the starter decks. But this includes 0% of the most exciting and powerful cards. After grinding out a ton of games, buying a bunch of packs or playing a lot of arenas he might have access to 30% or so of the total game options and, if lucky, 1 or 2% of the most powerful ones.

What people are trying to express is that it's simply not that much fun to play dozens or hundreds of Hearthstone games where you only have access to 20 or 30% of the game and 2% or less of the most powerful features against opponents who have access to virtually everything.

Being able to grind out some arbitrary rank does not magically make it an enjoyable experience. Sure, it's the nature of games like this that new players have less than long-time players. But Hearthstone takes it to extremes and it will only get worse over time as new sets are released.

For this game to have long-term success and broad based appeal it will need to find some way to make the experience more enjoyable for newer players. It doesn't help when veteran players just say "go grind out hundreds of boring, mostly losing, games and you will get rank 10-15." Casuals only care about rank if the process of achieving that rank is fun and exciting. Sadly, for new Hearthstone players it generally isn't.

[mongoose6]

So what? Why is that even meaningful at all?

Every time one of these topics comes up people respond by claiming you can get to this rank or that rank with starter cards.

But what if you play for fun and excitement and not just to achieve some arbitrary meaningless rank on a pointless ladder? Making a boring deck from the boring starter cards and then grinding it until your eyes bleed from sheer boredom until you reach some silly rank is not fun at all. Having the freedom to try out a multitude of different deck types and explore the most interesting and powerful cards IS fun.

A new Hearthstone player has access to about 20% of the game play options in the game in the form of the starter decks. But this includes 0% of the most exciting and powerful cards. After grinding out a ton of games, buying a bunch of packs or playing a lot of arenas he might have access to 30% or so of the total game options and, if lucky, 1 or 2% of the most powerful ones.

What people are trying to express is that it's simply not that much fun to play dozens or hundreds of Hearthstone games where you only have access to 20 or 30% of the game and 2% or less of the most powerful features against opponents who have access to virtually everything.

Being able to grind out some arbitrary rank does not magically make it an enjoyable experience. Sure, it's the nature of games like this that new players have less than long-time players. But Hearthstone takes it to extremes and it will only get worse over time as new sets are released.

For this game to have long-term success and broad based appeal it will need to find some way to make the experience more enjoyable for newer players. It doesn't help when veteran players just say "go grind out hundreds of boring, mostly losing, games and you will get rank 10-15." Casuals only care about rank if the process of achieving that rank is fun and exciting. Sadly, for new Hearthstone players it generally isn't.

Holy crap, even though I don't really agree with you, kudos on making a valid point. I can see this as a true complaint about the game, however I still don't see it as a problem because the game is designed to make money and the current system will continue to generate revenue. I WANT blizzard to make money off of hearthstone because I enjoy the game and would hate to see it go all guild wars.

[Deleted]

1+2+3 = You can reach rank 10-15 easily with basic cards, been there, done that and I'm really bad at this type of games.

Completely proving my point.

Someone very skilled and knowledgeable is limited to playing rank 10 players because of gated card system, until they grind the cards over months or use the p2w option.

This hurts the skilled players at the top because they don't have many other players to play against. It makes their wins hollow.

[Faltemer]

You are absolutely right no one is arguing against that and that's what makes the game flawed. As someone mentioned it costs $1000+ to buy the game outright, up until that point there is a correlation between the amount you spend (or the time you've played) and the proportion of games you win. How does that not make a game flawed?

It won't end there either, just when you've played for a year and think you reached equilibrium Blizzard will dangle the carrot again with more expansion packs. The game is hard-wired into making money.

Btw I am not whinging or whining, I love this game. It's especially satisfying when I beat someone with a deck full of legendaries and epics vs my basic deck with a couple of G&G packs and 3 wings of Naxx and I've not spent a penny.

Do you have stats to back that up? Or are just whining to waste people's time? I don't have all the cards, i didn't have nearly all the cards when i hit legendary. I have put $2 in this game to get golden mekk, and have had a positive winning record since 1 month into playing. Which occured because I learned how to play correctly and voila I started to win.

There is nothing flawed with this game, this is how these games work. If you don't understand that then it is clear the only flaw is your terrible terrible logic.

This game by definition is not Pay to win, in any shape or form. Someone could have every card in the game and build terrible decks or play terrible. Paying at best speeds up the process for someone who is already good, but paying to speed up a process isn't paying to win.

[Gourmandise]

No you don't understand, you need every card in the game before you can start to play the game.

Oh. So this is why the players are so massively stupid.

[Deleted]

Do you have stats to back that up? Or are just another whiner/troll wasting people's time? I don't have all the cards, i didn't have nearly all the cards when i hit legendary. I have put $2 in this game to get golden mekk, and have had a positive winning record since 1 month into playing. Which occured because I learned how to play correctly and voila I started to win.

There is nothing flawed with this game, this is how these games work. If you don't understand that then it is clear the only flaw is your terrible terrible logic.

This game by definition is not Pay to win, in any shape or form. Someone could have every card in the game and build terrible decks or play terrible. Paying at best speeds up the process for someone who is already good, but paying to speed up a process isn't paying to win.

What if it took 25 years to grind the cards, but you could skip those 25 years by paying for decks.

That would undoubtedly make it pay 2 win.

What about 5 years?

Yep, still pay to win.

What about 5 months.

Yep again, still pay to win.


The game is pay to win every single moment of your play time until that moment you have the best cards.

It is only at that moment it ceases to be pay to win.

[mongoose6]

What if it took 25 years to grind the cards, but you could skip those 25 years by paying for decks.

That would undoubtedly make it pay 2 win.

What about 5 years?

Yep, still pay to win.

What about 5 months.

Yep again, still pay to win.


The game is pay to win every single moment of your play time until that moment you have the best cards.

It is only at that moment it ceases to be pay to win.

Until you can produce an enjoyable game with regular updates, tech support, and balance fixes that is free of charge to anyone with internet access and also has zero way to recoup the money you've spent on creating the game, your complaints will continue to sound childish.

[Headayke]

Saw the most basic frost mage beat one of the top known hearthstone players and he got wrecked, he was a against the basic lvl 10 mage deck and lost so bad. Don't ask for balance in a game where 3 year old veterans with full legendary and gold hero card loses against the deck you are taught in the tutorial.

Edit: I want to go into detail about why this is bad for the game and the community. It goes 1 of 2 ways.

The basic mage deck is a new player and his first match is against a full legendary deck, gold hero card. He gets absolutely facerolled into oblivion before he knew what was happening.

The legendary, gold carded deck got controlled and wiped out after a long enduring battle against the basic deck showing that the veterans hard work to accumulate all the epic cards and win streak through strategy only to be easily taken down by the tutorial deck seems almost like a waste of time and an embarrassment.

How is this healthy at all? Its a complete pay to win structured game and grinding for that year to get the good cards, is still a waste of time when all I need is the same deck I was taught at the beginning of the game and you get to rank 10 with ease.

[mrgreenthump]

I hate how "pay to win" as a term has gone from buying the very best items in a game and having unfair advantage to everyone who didn't.. to shortening the time to get something, which is still resonably easy to get for free if you know what are doing and have the patience. It's more like "pay for time" for me.

It's somehow fun how gaming has changed. We expect things to be "free" nowdays, and then complain when we need to use money to advance faster and before everyone was perfectly happy to use up to 70 dollars/Euros for a game. Now using 70 dollars in a F2P game is the biggest "crime" of them all. And considering HS is pretty much the most consistent time sink I at least have countered in the past 2 years. I've thousands of hours of a game for free. If you compare that to something like let's say Skyrim, you paid upfront, it had around 200 hours of gameplay if you did everything. By that logic I should have used hundreds on Hearthstone.

[Deleted]

Until you can produce an enjoyable game with regular updates, tech support, and balance fixes that is free of charge to anyone with internet access and also has zero way to recoup the money you've spent on creating the game, your complaints will continue to sound childish.

Nice try. But no cigar.

You've made an admission that the company needs to make money by acknowledging the system in use.

You've exposed the scam In your own words.

It's pay to win exactly as i just described.

Thanks for agreeing.

Ps insults will get you nowhere, but they will get you outsmarted.

[caractacus]

What if it took 25 years to grind the cards, but you could skip those 25 years by paying for decks.

That would undoubtedly make it pay 2 win.

What about 5 years?

Yep, still pay to win.

What about 5 months.

Yep again, still pay to win.


The game is pay to win every single moment of your play time until that moment you have the best cards.

It is only at that moment it ceases to be pay to win.

Your argument is so flawed it is unbelievable. If you don't like the game don't play it by it all means. But please don't darken this forum with your logic fallacies.