Effects of MTG Arena?

Play Mode Discussion
Prev 1 5 6 7 9 Next
Mtg is slower since defender chooses how attackers are dealt damage. This naturally curbs aggression sonewhat. Stalemates can easily occur where both sides dont want to attack.

Mtg lets u do things on opp turn as well which is interactive but slows game further.

Combinations of colors for your deck and more cards leads to mch more varied decks and fresh experience.

Hearthstone faster paced but less complicated. Mtg has oodles of keywords and is complicated.

Mtg has land cards so you arnt guaranteed to be able to play anything for a whole game if u mull and draw bad.

I can boil it down to this:

Like hearthstone aggro smorc decks? Play hearthstone

Like hearthstone control slugfests? You might enjoy mtg.
I just wanted to add that I do agree with a previous poster that Arena would be good as a total replacement for physical MTG.

Speeding up FNM, no matter how much, is a great value to players.

In fact, if you're a magic die hard then obviously this game is the stuff. My posts probably reflect that I seem to hate Arena. I hate people who even dream it's some kind of magical improvement to hearthstone.

Arena is a great magic the gathering game. Heck, that should go without saying (or would if WotC hadn't performed miserably at all their digital offerings so far). Here's my positive thing to say:

If you wanted digital online magic the gathering, and are feeling reservation because they historically butchered those games, then never fear. Arena is not going to disappoint. You should really be playing it. It took like...15 years of digital release, but they figured it out. Mostly. Theres always room to improve. It's just a smaller gap by far now.
10/07/2018 04:30 PMPosted by Grimm

You start with two free mythic wild cards which is the equivalent of TWO legendarys (not 1/2 as you stated).

You can get random wildcards from packs, and every pack opened also advances the counter towards another free uncommon, rare and mythic rare wild card btw.

Just doing the daily quests rewards enough gold for 1.5 packs, 5 free cards (random) and the weekly quest rewards 3 free packs. This is in addition to the complete decks you get as rewards (10 given out in the first 2 weeks of open beta alone) which are all quite good decks.

As for not being able to "dust" cards, each copy of a card beyond the 4th advances a hidden counter that when full rewards the player with a plethora of wild cards (both rare and mythic).

There is no reason to ever spend a dime on MTG:A unless you want to play sealed or draft (via gems) and even then the break even point is quite achievable in those formats (plus you keep all cards you draft for both those formats).

It takes know where near "months and months" as you stated to become competitive, Since open beta (as a FTP) I'm already silver rank 3. Care to guess how long it takes a FTP to get to rank 5 in HS? If you said less than a year then you're delusional.

If you prefer HS then that's your privilege of course (and more power to you) but please refrain from attempting to sway others by posting things that are simply not true.


I do not prefer either game, grew up collecting MTG cards and played it all the time, and it is the main reason why I like hearthstone in the first place. I'm not trying to sway anyone in any direction, I was merely stating my experience, nor am I stating things that are not true.

You do not start with 2 free mythic wild cards, you start with one. I said FTP have 2 because if they did every daily quest since open beta started (which I have) and opened all their packs, they unlocked a second one at this point. I said these are the equivalent of half of a hearthstone legendary, because you can only have one legendary in a hearthstone deck, but you can have 4 of the same mythic in an MTG deck, and most competitive meta decks run 4 of the same mythic. So I need to craft 4 mythics in MTG for every 1 legendary in hearthstone.

As for the "free single cards" they are rather insignificant and will never really advance meta deck construction except by sheer dumb luck.

Lets break this down. In MTG arena standard there are currently 1218 unique cards (i'm excluding basic lands). Unfortunately you need 4 of each for most decks and for your hidden vault progress reward, so really there are 4872 cards to collect in MTG arena right now.

In HS standard there are currently 1044 unique cards (including the 133 basic that everyone gets for free). Taking into account that you need 2 of everything except legendary cards, but ignoring the 133 base set, there are currently 1676 cards to collect in standard HS right now. Of those 1676, 441 of them are classic cards which will always be in standard and not rotate out (except hall of fame shenanigans)

So there are nearly three times as many cards to collect in MTG arena as in hearthstone. Also, the hidden vault reward progress for collecting cards past the 4th one is 1 mythic, 2 rare, and 3 uncommon wild cards. The progress of the vault varies based on what duplicate you get, you need 900 common, 300 uncommon, 180 rare, or 90 mythic rares duplicates to open it. I'm not going to post all the math, but it equates to requiring 30 duplicates of the same rarity in order to get a wildcard of that same rarity. So if I get 30 duplicate mythics in MTG past the 4th copy i need, I have earned 1 additional mythic. I would hardly call that a "plethora".

As for being "delusional" about a FTP hearthstone player getting to rank 5 in under a year, I logged on to the asia server last month which I have basically no cards, never spent any money, dusted all the free stuff, made a budget zoolock deck, and hit legend, so no, I'm not delusional.

All that being said, once again, I play both games currently, I don't plan on quitting either of them in the foreseeable future, I'm not trying to sway anyone in any direction, I'm merely stating my experiences and conclusions.
Complaining about mana flood/screw seems kinda dumb since draw RNG is inherent in all card games.

It's worse in HS now, even in consistent deck like zoolock. It runs 15 one mana cards, of which 5 of them are "unplayable" (+2/+2 buff, soulfire and the legendary spell). It's basically game over if you fail to draw relevant 1 drops (or 1 in 30, keleseth) in your first 2 turns. Don't even need to mention other decks since the variance is way higher and you're dependent on a few key cards every other matchups (eg. mossy against giggling/spreading plague, DKs, etc).

Regarding MTGA, I don't think it will impact HS that much. It attracts a very different crowd (mainly competitive players) and the F2P aspect is much weaker than HS. The cost is the main hurdle but HS success has given birth to a lot of new card game players, I wouldn't be surprised some of them are willing to take the plunge into MTGA (or artifact).

Overall, UI is great, aesthetics is gorgeous and the client feels smooth to run and play. The only complaint is the lack of a history bar since things can get pretty complicated for people new to MTG.
10/07/2018 10:41 PMPosted by Chiong
Complaining about mana flood/screw seems kinda dumb since draw RNG is inherent in all card games.

It's worse in HS now, even in consistent deck like zoolock. It runs 15 one mana cards, of which 5 of them are "unplayable" (+2/+2 buff, soulfire and the legendary spell). It's basically game over if you fail to draw relevant 1 drops (or 1 in 30, keleseth) in your first 2 turns. Don't even need to mention other decks since the variance is way higher and you're dependent on a few key cards every other matchups (eg. mossy against giggling/spreading plague, DKs, etc).

Regarding MTGA, I don't think it will impact HS that much. It attracts a very different crowd (mainly competitive players) and the F2P aspect is much weaker than HS. The cost is the main hurdle but HS success has given birth to a lot of new card game players, I wouldn't be surprised some of them are willing to take the plunge into MTGA (or artifact).

Overall, UI is great, aesthetics is gorgeous and the client feels smooth to run and play. The only complaint is the lack of a history bar since things can get pretty complicated for people new to MTG.


There is a difference between a Knife Juggler hitting an unwanted target and basically losing the game before it even starts, because you had to mulligan to 5. There is good RNG and there is bad RNG. This is bad RNG.

And I don't get your Zoo example. 11/30 are hits and you get 8! draws including mulligan and draws for turn. The odds of completely whiffing are ridiculously low and even if you do, you at least get to do something on turn 2.
I think that challenge can only be a good thing - especially when it comes to areas in which companies have a monopole on something.
HS has been the top virtual cardgame basically since its release and was fcing stingy with all free stuff (and pretty much overpriced) but came a long way of becoming more rewarding and open with "free cards" and actually very generous events (like that "every quest is 100+ for a week" stuff).

If MTGA and Artifact now compete for the throne, this can only be a good thing for consumers. HS will not die since what the game does is too specific (rng cardgame with a closed economy) but it will loose some players which will make Blizz to want to lure them back.
10/07/2018 10:41 PMPosted by Chiong
Complaining about mana flood/screw seems kinda dumb since draw RNG is inherent in all card games.


Land cards and colors are extra opportunities to get rng hosed. You might draw white cards and only islands or draw blue cards and only plains or such. It cost ppl tourament games in mtg.

How many hearthstone tourney players lost to land flood or shortage? Zero.

The bottom line is that land cards were one of mtgs worst features but it was required for design of game.

Hearthstone puts alot of rng in its cards and this is part of its worst feature in regard to tourney players. The majority of hearthstone players are non streamers and non tourney players and they like rng cards but do the majority of mtg players like the land system? I dint and it was part of reason I quit.
I'm done arguing this as we're all going in circles - HS shouldn't suffer from Arenas existence, and Arena is in a very good spot to do well for themselves.

Although do find it funny that the majority of people talking about Arena are acknowledging the pros and the cons, while people dismissing it are praising HS as if it saved TCGs and being a little bit rude if I'm honest. Might say something about the difference in maturity between the player bases.
10/04/2018 11:40 AMPosted by Brandybuck
Are we as a community worried about the release of MTG Arena?


If you have any sense of how competition works, then yes. Anyone telling you otherwise is either blind to how fickle gaming communities are or is fanboying this game too hard, or both.

Hearthstone has been hiking up in price for years now. People are eventually going to look at MTG and be like "well if I'm gonna dump hundreds of dollars into a card game, it will be one that gives consistent wins" MTG in this case makes more sense to.

Signs that blizzard has considered this possibility you ask? Just wait and see if they all of sudden start releasing more consistent cards that are less rng based.
Personally I like and play both HS and MtG:A, and I reckon they both do a pretty decent job of giving you a good game experience without having to cost a fortune.

Obviously they will provide some competition with each other, but I don't think either will struggle to find enough players, they are sufficiently different that I want to choose one or the other, they both have their merits depending on what I feel like at the time.

It's pretty daft to say one is "better" than the other, obviously many will have a preference, but both games have their strengths and weaknessses.

Probably won't go down too well here, but I think both games have their F2P economy in a decent place, from my experience you can play both without spending any money and have a great time, but spending a bit of extra cash speeds up your collection building quite a bit, which feels fair enough to me, they need to pay their staff somehow!

Artifact is the other interesting development (and Reynoodles new offering Bazaar looks worth investigating too), I'm sceptical they will find enough folks willing to pump $50-100 (which is what I predict it will cost for a competitive deck) to try the game, from what I have seen so far the gameplay looks pretty boring, just piles of stats bumping into each other, and some of the design decisions make zero sense to me, why are the hero spells not locked to having the hero on the board?Why no levelling heroes? What's all this buffing towers mallarky?

The fact that Artifact is absolutely NOT a casual game is also a weird decision imo, maybe there will be enough ultra competitive players out there, but it's definitely not the sort of game you sit down to knock out a quick 5min fun match, hitting the play button means 20-30 mins of maths!
HS is trash compare to MtG.
- No way to stop combo train
- RNG fiesta (remmember Yogg-saron at world championship?)
- No clue devs
- Terrible balance
Blizz should be worried about all the games coming out.

If they use a bundle of users to each game that comes out, that's going to massively fragment their userbase. As the meta continues to be stale, polarizing and boring, they will lose more and more users.
After 100 games of mtga I refreshed my memory why I stopped playing that game.

In mtg you are fighting the game more than anything else. Stalemates, mana flood, mana starve, power creep more than any other card game, commons are trash, constant concede with both players on 20 life.

Hearthstone is 1000x times more complex game. Mtg is a joke. They really should have changed rules drasticaly like 15 years ago when I started playing like getting 8 cards starting hand to reduce mana issues instead they did nothing but print power creeps.

I still kinda like legacy and modern though. Standard is borefest.
I think it's interesting when people comment about "non-games" in MTG due to mana flood/screw when similar "non-games" are pretty abundant in HS.

https://www.vicioussyndicate.com/meta-polarity-and-its-impact-on-hearthstone

VS just released a meta polarity report that justify what players have been feeling and yes, the polarization is at the worst ever.

My guess is until rotation happens, we are likely to see this polarization continue (or even worsen).
About the legendaries vs mythics complaint

Magic gaurentees a rare or mythic in every pack you open. That is the equivalent of if hearthstone were to gaurentee at least one epic or legend per pack. Sure you can get multiples but it's super rare. In the long run mtg will have a new player build up their collection faster. At the same time once you have nothing but dupes it adds to the wildcard generation instead automatically. So you will stockpile those wildcards faster for newer content more likely. Also since many expansions are themed you can easily skip them if you don't like their options for stuff you are playing. Meanwhile HS pretty much forces you to get every single expansion (yes even witchwood) if you want all the card you will need to make the deck you want.

Arena is going to let their players have way more control over acquiring the cards they want in all honesty. I have an arena deck right now that runs only 2 mythics due to wildcards and I dont even need them to win matches. Outside of Tefari, karn, and the !@#$ show of mono red over the last 2 years mythics arent actually all that important to a mtg deck compared to hearthstone and their current legendary scene.
10/08/2018 12:15 PMPosted by Zlumpy
About the legendaries vs mythics complaint

Magic gaurentees a rare or mythic in every pack you open. That is the equivalent of if hearthstone were to gaurentee at least one epic or legend per pack. Sure you can get multiples but it's super rare. In the long run mtg will have a new player build up their collection faster. At the same time once you have nothing but dupes it adds to the wildcard generation instead automatically. So you will stockpile those wildcards faster for newer content more likely. Also since many expansions are themed you can easily skip them if you don't like their options for stuff you are playing. Meanwhile HS pretty much forces you to get every single expansion (yes even witchwood) if you want all the card you will need to make the deck you want.

Arena is going to let their players have way more control over acquiring the cards they want in all honesty. I have an arena deck right now that runs only 2 mythics due to wildcards and I dont even need them to win matches. Outside of Tefari, karn, and the !@#$ show of mono red over the last 2 years mythics arent actually all that important to a mtg deck compared to hearthstone and their current legendary scene.
........mythics are critical in competative magic, moreso for control players to be fair as certain aggro decks hardly require any. If they don't seem to be now it is because the playerbase is much smaller and netdecking hasn't fully set in yet. So enjoy it while it lasts. Google top MTG decks right now, and say with a straight face mythics aren't critical. You saying that tells me you must be brand new to MTG lol. They also cut the usual 15 cards irl to 8, which is a pretty anti consumer move to be frank (pack size). Heck I just googled the top BR aggro deck, and aggro is cheaper normally, and it still runs 4 mythics. 2 copies of two different ones.
10/08/2018 12:15 PMPosted by Zlumpy
Outside of Tefari, karn, and the !@#$ show of mono red over the last 2 years mythics arent actually all that important to a mtg deck compared to hearthstone and their current legendary scene.


Depends on the deck. If for example you want to play Boros Angels then you will need a lot of mythics. Other decks like Mono-Blue Aggro don't need any Mythics and very few rares.

In that it is similar to HS and the current legendary scene. There are decks like Zoo that don't need many if any legendaries and there are the more control decks like Odd Warrior that need a lot of legendaries.
10/08/2018 11:34 AMPosted by Pilnystudent

Hearthstone is 1000x times more complex game.

LOL
Looking over the meta still haven't checked out MTG's in forever. Esper control requires at least 5 mythics to be optimized, and 4 of those are just copies of a single mythic walker. Also the set sizes in mtg are much larger so you are more likely to not pull what you want as well.
10/08/2018 11:34 AMPosted by Pilnystudent
After 100 games of mtga I refreshed my memory why I stopped playing that game.

In mtg you are fighting the game more than anything else. Stalemates, mana flood, mana starve, power creep more than any other card game, commons are trash, constant concede with both players on 20 life.

Hearthstone is 1000x times more complex game. Mtg is a joke. They really should have changed rules drasticaly like 15 years ago when I started playing like getting 8 cards starting hand to reduce mana issues instead they did nothing but print power creeps.

I still kinda like legacy and modern though. Standard is borefest.


I agree with a lot of what you say and was also a proponent of 8 card starting hand and even up to 9 to alleviate mana screw and flood.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum