Hearthstone isn’t the game it once was

Play Mode Discussion
Prev 1 4 5 6 Next
the VS report


Please supply the superior alternative. I'm always willing to improve an analysis by adding better information. The VS reports - while not perfect - are the most fact-centered data that I'm aware of. What information do you have access too that improves on it?

Keep in mind that only actual information and data are acceptable. Opinions, feelings, vague recollections, stuff you heard in a Reddit thread, random thoughts from someone's Twitch stream, anecdotes, rumors, and salty rants are not data.

There's 3 kinds of people who typically reject data out of hand. The emotional, the biased, and Whiners.
08/19/2018 12:53 PMPosted by Narius3rd
I just want to say I have loved hearthstone from the beginning, but sadly I hate to say the last two expansions have really broken the game. Sure you occasionally can have a fun game but far to often you just watch some crazy combo end you. Sad.


Thanks for making this thread so I didn't have to. I agree, way too much focus on gimmicks and combo BS from the last two expansions. Don't even get me started on RNG generating cards. I miss when the only thing you had to do was out-value your opponent. Now it's just "Who can get their combo first." or "Who is playing combo at all."

There's no mid-range or Control anymore. It's just Hard Aggro or combo decks, it's disgusting and sad to see the game degenerate to the state it's currently in.
08/23/2018 08:51 AMPosted by Asuba
There's no mid-range or Control anymore. It's just Hard Aggro or combo decks, it's disgusting and sad to see the game degenerate to the state it's currently in.

There is Midrange:
Even Shaman, DR Hunter, DR Rogue, Midrange Hunter (newer deck), Midrange Shaman. Yes, it is contained within Hunter and Shaman more or less but they've historically been the classes best able to push Midrange in general.

Control is doing decently well right now:
Baku Warrior is tier 2 bordering tier 1 it appears because there is so much aggro and it is well designed to deal with the most common combo deck in Malygod Druid
BSM is tier 2 for due to the aggro and it being the only Control deck that doesn't hate DR opponents
Even Warlock and Control Warlock are VERY strong choices (both tier 1 decks)

Combo, if we include Kingsbane, is roughly 12% of the meta right now. That is lower than WW and has been declining. They gave aggro some more tools and those tools are translating into a meta being dictated by aggro right now which gives Control a strong place.

Midrange currently exists because it is decent against a lot of decks and those MR decks I listed above have one common deck to feast on in addition to generally low polarization of matchups. Outside of very specific matchups you don't feel incredibly OP when playing those MR decks but you also generally feel like you have a gameplan to a win. They're just kind of the consistent slow and steady wins the race decks right now.
Midrange doesn't mean "Have cards that cost more than 4 mana." It means "Having a diverse gameplan that sometimes means controlling the board and grinding it out."

If your decks wins by going face, all the time, it's not midrange.
08/23/2018 10:05 AMPosted by PresJPolk
Midrange doesn't mean "Have cards that cost more than 4 mana." It means "Having a diverse gameplan that sometimes means controlling the board and grinding it out."

If your decks wins by going face, all the time, it's not midrange.

In general it means altering between an aggressive strategy against Control decks and a controlling strategy against aggressive decks. That is, from experience, to an exact 'tee' (never got this reference, lol) what the two Shaman decks and DR Rogue want to do. They'll focus solely on board against an aggressive deck trying to control the opponent's tempo or adopt a very aggressive strategy against decks that can outvalue/AoE the board states easily.

If you want to move from a timing to that flex definition then I'll substitute out Hunter, which i will grant is somewhat inflexible in it's gameplan, with Even Warlock which does retain that flex focus. I've stated numerous times that, to me, Even Warlock is really hard to define as it is a Control deck with MR timing windows and a huge 10-mana power card.
I've heard people call Zoo mid-range. I think they are pawns of the Lich King.

"I play Imp, Coin, Doctor, Happy Ghoul x2 on Turn 1 for 11/9 worth of stats, and this isn't even my Aggressive Deck ..."
08/23/2018 09:26 AMPosted by Lykotic
08/23/2018 08:51 AMPosted by Asuba
There's no mid-range or Control anymore. It's just Hard Aggro or combo decks, it's disgusting and sad to see the game degenerate to the state it's currently in.

There is Midrange:
Even Shaman, DR Hunter, DR Rogue, Midrange Hunter (newer deck), Midrange Shaman. Yes, it is contained within Hunter and Shaman more or less but they've historically been the classes best able to push Midrange in general.


Umm...Hunter has historically been the FACE class lol. Paladin and Shaman are the midrange classes by definition.
08/23/2018 10:36 AMPosted by Bobb
I've heard people call Zoo mid-range. I think they are pawns of the Lich King.

"I play Imp, Coin, Doctor, Happy Ghoul x2 on Turn 1 for 11/9 worth of stats, and this isn't even my Aggressive Deck ..."

Depends on the Zoo deck. The current iteration I would definitely classify as aggro. Some previous versions have involved a lot more beefy minions.

08/23/2018 10:52 AMPosted by DirtyDel
Umm...Hunter has historically been the FACE class lol. Paladin and Shaman are the midrange classes by definition.

After they nerfed most of the tools of SMOrc Hunter I'd say it has tended to be an aggressive MR class. I will fully admit thought that I forgot Paladin, lol
Still no idea what to classify Miracle rogue as, as all of its bodies are definitely midrange minions, and it's cut the auctioneer combo elements. Just you can use the looming threat of burn to justify face attacks and force even aggressive decks onto the defensive where a conventional midrange deck would live or die by the boardstate.
08/23/2018 10:05 AMPosted by PresJPolk
Midrange doesn't mean "Have cards that cost more than 4 mana." It means "Having a diverse gameplan that sometimes means controlling the board and grinding it out."

If your decks wins by going face, all the time, it's not midrange.


It depends on the opponent of the Midrange deck. If the opponent is a control deck, the Midrange is going to play just like an aggro deck 9 times out of 10, because trying to outvalue a control deck is the height of stupidity for Midrange.

Conversely, against aggro, the Midrange deck will almost always play for board control, because trying to race an aggro deck is equally stupid.

As a result of this, if you’re control or combo, every Midrange deck will try to aggro you into the dirt. But rest assured, there are plenty of matchups where they play like a control deck with a more aggressive curve.
08/22/2018 01:20 PMPosted by TheRiddler
When college ends I fear you may be shocked at how the corporate world actually works. Because what you describe exists NOWHERE!


Having worked in the corporate worlds for years, I can with quiet authority and dignity declare factually that it exists pretty much everywhere to varying degrees.

What you just learned Kierkegaards deontological argument and the perfect example of a false premise?


Learned that stuff when I was in 8th grade ... likely whilst you were still yet merely a hungry glitter in your father's eye.

if you see a patent like this and decide nothing to see here.


To start, it's not a patent ... it's an application for a patent. Second, it's not for Blizzard Entertainment ... it's for the parent publishing company Activision. Third, the application describes a method for cooperative FPS player grouping ... not CCG match fixing. So yes - there really isn't anything here to see in relationship to Hearthstone. To assert otherwise is the very epitome of an ad hoc ergo proper hoc logic failure.

congrats you just failed logic


Amusingly, this is irony exemplified.


So you never worked in the corporate world is what your saying, lol I get it you think your college dreams of a corporation will come true, you are so sure of it. Safe spaces just like your campus.

NOPE NOPE

That's why they call the show where they fund new business ventures SHARK TANK, instead of sesame street puppet hour.

An adult can tell when they are talking to a kid, zero cynicism with bright bushy tailed dreams, don't worry the world will beat that naivety out of you.
08/22/2018 01:20 PMPosted by TheRiddler
...

Having worked in the corporate worlds for years, I can with quiet authority and dignity declare factually that it exists pretty much everywhere to varying degrees.

...

Learned that stuff when I was in 8th grade ... likely whilst you were still yet merely a hungry glitter in your father's eye.

...

To start, it's not a patent ... it's an application for a patent. Second, it's not for Blizzard Entertainment ... it's for the parent publishing company Activision. Third, the application describes a method for cooperative FPS player grouping ... not CCG match fixing. So yes - there really isn't anything here to see in relationship to Hearthstone. To assert otherwise is the very epitome of an ad hoc ergo proper hoc logic failure.

...

Amusingly, this is irony exemplified.


So you never worked in the corporate world is what your saying, lol I get it you think your college dreams of a corporation will come true, you are so sure of it. Safe spaces just like your campus.

NOPE NOPE

That's why they call the show where they fund new business ventures SHARK TANK, instead of sesame street puppet hour.

An adult can tell when they are talking to a kid, zero cynicism with bright bushy tailed dreams, don't worry the world will beat that naivety out of you.


I dunno about him, but I’m 30 years myself, and I think that it’s your perception of the world that needs work, not his. Reason is, I trust Blizzard to do one thing above all others: look out for their own self-interests.

Their number one self-interest? Profit. Any time that someone talks about how Blizzard must have ‘clearly’ rigged the matchmaker, I think they’re complete idiots.

Reason One: If people were able to conclusively prove that Blizzard had manipulated the matchmaker to rig the results of matches, there’d be hell to play. Lawyers would get involved, they’d lose millions, probably billions. The consequences would be nightmarish for them.

Reason Two: Right now, we have a lot of people playing a lot of games and tracking those games, and nobody has been able to find anything that would be distinguishable from exactly what a normal matchmaker is supposed to do.

(And here’s why that matters, if the result is indistinguishable from what a normal matchmaker is supposed to do, then what’s the point of rigging it?)

Reason Three: why go through all the effort to rig things given the possible consequences when they could create new hero portraits, card backs, or expansions and make that money perfectly legitimately?

In summary, it’s not that I think that they are saints (they want our money), but that there isn’t enough benefit for Blizzard to rig it, given the risks they would have to take.
08/23/2018 01:56 PMPosted by Khaldun
Reason Two: Right now, we have a lot of people playing a lot of games and tracking those games, and nobody has been able to find anything that would be distinguishable from exactly what a normal matchmaker is supposed to do.

Just to add, I believe data aggregation found three abnormalities in the past:
+ The draw rate for Nat Pagle
+ The Tri-Class MSoG Neutral Legendary cards being over-represented
+ The pity timers
08/23/2018 07:15 AMPosted by TheRiddler
matchups are more polarized than ever


Based on what evidence? The VS report does not support your statement.

https://www.vicioussyndicate.com/drr/matchup-chart-data-reaper-report/

There are some polar matches when you look at the entire grid of potential matches. However, those with very strong leanings (the "Oppressive" and "Dominating" matchups) are vastly outweighed by matches that are even or lean only slightly in one direction. Out of 288 possible matchups on the grid, only 35 are Oppressive or Dominating ... about 12%.

And believe it or not ... that's OK. CCGs are games where those kind of bad matchups are not a sign of a "problem". If 50% of all matches were Oppressive then that's different, but a small number of bad matchups is inevitable. Not every deck can (or should!) have a 50/50 chance against every other deck. That's not how CCGs work.

Some people may "feel" that the meta is polar, but feelings are irrelevant. The only thing that matters is actual, provable, impartial facts. And so far the facts do not show a meta that is "more polarized than ever". Regardless, we're still very early in the meta and it's too soon to make blanket condemnations.


So everything Blizzard does is magical and they never do anything wrong.

Why do you feel the need to type anything else when this your opinion 100% of the time on any topic. you don't have to waste our time with a buncha crap.

Just copy and paste your shillboy logic and leave it at that. Not like you have anything original to say about anything.
<span class="truncated">...</span>

So you never worked in the corporate world is what your saying, lol I get it you think your college dreams of a corporation will come true, you are so sure of it. Safe spaces just like your campus.

NOPE NOPE

That's why they call the show where they fund new business ventures SHARK TANK, instead of sesame street puppet hour.

An adult can tell when they are talking to a kid, zero cynicism with bright bushy tailed dreams, don't worry the world will beat that naivety out of you.


I dunno about him, but I’m 30 years myself, and I think that it’s your perception of the world that needs work, not his. Reason is, I trust Blizzard to do one thing above all others: look out for their own self-interests.

Their number one self-interest? Profit. Any time that someone talks about how Blizzard must have ‘clearly’ rigged the matchmaker, I think they’re complete idiots.

Reason One: If people were able to conclusively prove that Blizzard had manipulated the matchmaker to rig the results of matches, there’d be hell to play. Lawyers would get involved, they’d lose millions, probably billions. The consequences would be nightmarish for them.

Reason Two: Right now, we have a lot of people playing a lot of games and tracking those games, and nobody has been able to find anything that would be distinguishable from exactly what a normal matchmaker is supposed to do.

(And here’s why that matters, if the result is indistinguishable from what a normal matchmaker is supposed to do, then what’s the point of rigging it?)

Reason Three: why go through all the effort to rig things given the possible consequences when they could create new hero portraits, card backs, or expansions and make that money perfectly legitimately?

In summary, it’s not that I think that they are saints (they want our money), but that there isn’t enough benefit for Blizzard to rig it, given the risks they would have to take.

Maybe you should read about the CEO of the company before you make these uniformed decisions.

Because i bet you know nothing about the man.
<span class="truncated">...</span>

I dunno about him, but I’m 30 years myself, and I think that it’s your perception of the world that needs work, not his. Reason is, I trust Blizzard to do one thing above all others: look out for their own self-interests.

Their number one self-interest? Profit. Any time that someone talks about how Blizzard must have ‘clearly’ rigged the matchmaker, I think they’re complete idiots.

Reason One: If people were able to conclusively prove that Blizzard had manipulated the matchmaker to rig the results of matches, there’d be hell to play. Lawyers would get involved, they’d lose millions, probably billions. The consequences would be nightmarish for them.

Reason Two: Right now, we have a lot of people playing a lot of games and tracking those games, and nobody has been able to find anything that would be distinguishable from exactly what a normal matchmaker is supposed to do.

(And here’s why that matters, if the result is indistinguishable from what a normal matchmaker is supposed to do, then what’s the point of rigging it?)

Reason Three: why go through all the effort to rig things given the possible consequences when they could create new hero portraits, card backs, or expansions and make that money perfectly legitimately?

In summary, it’s not that I think that they are saints (they want our money), but that there isn’t enough benefit for Blizzard to rig it, given the risks they would have to take.


I stopped reading at "I trust Blizzard"

Anyone who trusts a company, any company is too feebly minded for me to debate on any topic.

Next time you wanna ride Sasquatch over a rainbow just to say silly crap that most 8th graders are smart enough to know is BS, stop yourself. Everything you say NOW will only cause you tremendous embarrassment later when you finally join the rest of us in the real world.

Can't have a battle of wits with an unarmed man, feels too much like bullying.


So you don’t trust Blizzard to be greedy and act in their own self-interest? Wow, I didn’t know you had such faith in humanity. O.o
a) Nice edit and yeah you obviously misread Khaldun. He is assuming Blizzard would act in the long-term interest of shareholders, who their technically most responsible to, and not the short-term interest of day traders.

08/23/2018 02:47 PMPosted by Fallen
Maybe you should read about the CEO of the company before you make these uniformed decisions.

That is probably the strongest argument you have about underhanded monetization strategies. For those that don't know Kocheck (sp?) basically views video games as a product to be put into a commodity-style revenue system.
08/23/2018 02:54 PMPosted by Khaldun
...

I stopped reading at "I trust Blizzard"

Anyone who trusts a company, any company is too feebly minded for me to debate on any topic.

Next time you wanna ride Sasquatch over a rainbow just to say silly crap that most 8th graders are smart enough to know is BS, stop yourself. Everything you say NOW will only cause you tremendous embarrassment later when you finally join the rest of us in the real world.

Can't have a battle of wits with an unarmed man, feels too much like bullying.


Do you don’t trust Blizzard to be greedy and act in their own self-interest? Wow, I didn’t know you had such faith in humanity. O.o


Ok let me show you why your logic is all jacked up real quick.

They rabidly go after any thread with Rigged on every forum and shut it down.
Why bother if theres nothing to see here?

They are the least transparent company with stats of all time they show us nothing on how they report data.

They have a PATENT for rigging, that shows it is indeed more profitable.

There are no laws governing games in america like none, they can tell you anything it's legal, they can put in gambling software, it's legal. No downside.

Public perception you say, look at these forums lol look at the resources they devote to swaying public opinion. Jesse has locked over 1000 threads over it's rigged. While letting every other topic under the sun go unless it was inappropriate or clear trolling.

They own the mods on three other sites too who rabidly lock any it's rigged thread as well.

I can honestly post hundreds of threads that all go the same way. Trolls come in a break every CoC rule we have, Jesse ignores them lets them run wild. If they fail and people start saying "yea it's rigged" he locks the thread 100% of the time.

Common Sense should tell you people with nothing to hide, don't try so hard to HIDE SOMETHING!
08/23/2018 03:02 PMPosted by Lykotic
a) Nice edit and yeah you obviously misread Khaldun. He is assuming Blizzard would act in the long-term interest of shareholders, who their technically most responsible to, and not the short-term interest of day traders.

08/23/2018 02:47 PMPosted by Fallen
Maybe you should read about the CEO of the company before you make these uniformed decisions.

That is probably the strongest argument you have about underhanded monetization strategies. For those that don't know Kocheck (sp?) basically views video games as a product to be put into a commodity-style revenue system.


Which is the huge tremendous irony here because I keep hearing the company wouldn't do that when meanwhile the CEO is THE EXACT TYPE OF PERSON TO DO THAT!

He's the literal example of the perfect fit for someone who would do all those things.
So everything Blizzard does is magical and they never do anything wrong.


Certainly not, but no one said that so such a representation goes into the Strawman category. And the absence of any attempt to refute the substance of my arguments puts everything else said into the Failed Debater category.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum