Fact: By 2020, Hearthstone is going to kill the competitive scene for MTG. The secondary market will crash do to a sharp decrease in demand . Legacy is already dying in the US due to this reason. Hearthstone does MTG better. WOTC has no way to compete with the marginal value that Hearthstone provides to its players. I suggest you get out while you can.
>>47192155
I don't like card games so whatever. Fine I guess?
>>47192155
Totally agree, Mah Nigga.
Unfortunately, most people that have spent over a few grand in cardboard won't agree, and will complain loudly.
>>47192226
The common retort you get is that you can sell your magic cards. Yeah you can but you're now going to be spending most of your time following the MTG Stock market. You shouldn't have to sell out $200 every three months to continue playing a game competitively. Not when there are games that I can now pretty much play for free now. Games I can play wherever I am, at anytime I want. MTGO is boring as fuck to watch on Stream. Even fucking Kibler is all about the Hearthstone.
>>47192155
>a digital game will compete with a physical game
unless you're talking about MtGO in which case you can't kill what's already dead
>The secondary market will crash do to a sharp decrease in demand
Never happening. MtG could be dead and gone for a hundred years and Tarmogoyf's price would still climb.
I never really got into MTG (did yugioh way back in the day, before the GX shit even happened), but what's the deal with it being so expensive?
Is every expansion just better than the last or what? Why do MTG players literally have boxes of unviable cards?
>>47192320
>>a digital game will compete with a physical game
They are both card games that can be played competitively. With the changes to the Pro players club and the increasing barrier to entry, many people would rather play Hearthstone competitively. Your scrub ass wouldn't understand.
>>47192155
Legacy is dying specifically because the market keeps climbing and refuses to crash. It was also always the least popular format, even when it was called Type 1.5 and Extended still existed.
Newer players always prefer newer formats, such as Standard, Modern, and the old Extended. In fact, that's usually the order they advance in. Rarely do players end up or jump straight in to Legacy or Vintage.
I have 0 interest in HS its way to random and has no real way to interact with the opponent. Nobody is going to argue that WOTC doesn't suck at anything digital but physical magic is just a deeper more interesting game. HS is flashy and easy to pick up but lacks any real depth.
>>47192359
Counterpoint: Hearthstone fucking sucks shit. I tried it for a week, then uninstalled and never looked back. I can't be the only one.
>>47192352
Yes and no. Modern cards tend to be much more powerful on average than older cards, but older cards had a higher frequency of broken bullshit. Thus we end up with the worst of both worlds where some old cards are literally worth tens of thousands of dollars, but you also still need to keep buying every set to keep up with the joneses
>>47192352
Cause all the bulk that is in sets for Limited. The standard rotation makes the newest sets valuable. As time goes on, older cards that see play in Legacy, EDH and Modern go up because demand increases but supply is fixed until Wizards does a reprint. Sometimes a reprint increases the demand even more than the increase in supply, Goyf is a bitch like that.
Yu-gi-oh is even worse if will believe it. People complained when Blizzard announced Standard but its a lot better than the yu-gi-oh way of banlists and reprints.
>>47192399
Judging by the number of people playing it, you are the only one.
>>47192429
>a free to play game has more players than a pay to play one
stop the fucking presses
>>47192399
Normally that's an argument of people who just aren't good at card games, HS is babby mode.
Sorry you couldn't win with basic decks, I guess.
>>47192427
Arguably you don't have to spend money on Hearthstone either, you build up gold pretty quickly.
>>47192386
Most of the bad RNG is no longer in standard. Its not a game like Magic where you constantly pass priority. Secrets are basically like Trap cards in Yu-Gi-Oh. Its more of a game of board control.
>>47192399
You're not. There are a lot of scrubs who get into the game with no idea how they should even approach it. I take it you got rekt a lot.
>>47192155
That fact sounds suspiciously like an opinion.
>>47192352
Most of the expense comes from the secondary market in singles that you need to invest in to get a good deck if you want to compete at a meaningful level beyond the kitchen table.
>Is every expansion just better than the last or what?
Magic fans will constantly declare the current set the worst ever, then look back in retrospect and say they were pretty alright. But contemporary Magic is actually considered a little slow and hard to pull of combos with, compared to previous years.
>Why do MTG players literally have boxes of unviable card?
Unviable is a tricky term and might not always be true, especially in the wider formats like Modern, because as more cards come out and are added to the library of cards available for play, that recontextualises the cards that came before it. Say, for instance, you have a card that kills all creatures on the fieldd with the subtype "Orc". It's a real corner-case card that isn't not be worth the ink spent to print because we'll say it came out in a set where there were only a few Orc cards. But say a few years down the line a new set comes out full of Orc cards and Orc tribal effects (meaning spells that get better the more Orcs you have). Suddenly that Orc-killer spell got a bit more useful.
Plus, sometimes it's just fun to brew up stuff for shits and giggles even if you know it's not strictly "good". Like, every Blue player has that deck stuffed full of every counterspell they can manage, just because they are horrible monsters and enjoy frustrating their opponents more than they enjoy actually playing Magic.
>>47192470
Exactly. I dusted most of my stuff that rotated and I was able to build a ton of decks without having to drop $50 to preorder packs. Basically just buy the current adventures and you're set.
>>47192470
>You build up gold pretty quickly
At absolute best, you're buying a pack a day unless you're doing the horrific grinding of 10 gold for 3 wins with terrible cards that aren't winning very much.
You're even worse off if you're playing that fucking vomit of a "limited" format. RNG on top of RNG, no thanks.
That pack a day is earning you maybe 1 legendary in a month, if you're dusting dupes. In a system where you're not playing the best decks without these legendaries, saying that you can earn your way up is a neat idea, but suffering through it is not fucking worth it. Either way you're going to end up paying money, and I'd rather pay money into a good game than a random number generator with a pretty skin.
>>47192352
Short answer: Jews.
Long answer: JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWS.
I wish I were joking. The secondhand market is held captive by a bunch of greedy faggots who have been steadily escalating prices on everything over the last two years. Sure, there are are always really good cards that are more expensive than the rest, but the prices of those cards have been getting more and more extreme for no good reason.
This has also had the side effect of bringing in people who try to play MtG like investment banking, who then hoard and buy out cards to make prices go up. In an attempt to squeeze these cunts for every possible dollar, the vendors have taken to upping prices.
And then there's the tournament issue. Nothing wrong with the Pro Tour and Grand Prix, those are cool. The problem is that the decklists of the top eight players are published and then prices go haywire. There's actually a really great recent example, a card called Secure the Wastes. A couple weeks ago, it was a $2 card. A month before that, it was $1. If I remember right, it was included in one of the starter decks, so there's no shortage of these things. Secure the Wastes has been a junk rare since it was printed, what, almost a year ago?
Until last week.
Someone did really well at a tournament and he was packing a couple copies of Secure the Wastes. It is now a $7 card. Just two weeks ago you could get four for what now buys you one.
>>47192521
I dusted so much stuff recently, I ended up using it on dumb shit like the new corrupted Hogger. Dusted a bunch of shit tier GvG legendaries, too.
No sense in holding onto shit like Gahzrilla or Neptulon. Obviously I kept the good ones like Dr. Boom for when I get an urge to play Wild, but Standard is truly a godsend.
>>47192529
Dust your golden cards, dust legendaries you won't use. I literally dusted four (4) Anubaraks because I just kept pulling those fuckers from boosters.
>>47192470
>Normally that's an argument of people who just aren't good at card games
Nice assumption, shithead. I've been playing competitive card cards for twelve years. But that's a great attempt to dismiss my statement.
>HS is babby mode
This is the exact reason why it sucks shit. Can't interact with your opponent, can't do anything when it's not your turn, 50-60% of cards are the equivalent of "colorless" in MTG terms, tons of effects are random so you can't plan around them, etc. The excuses and apologies that I'm sure you're already typing aren't going to matter, these facts about the game made me hate it.
>>47192529
Invest in the current adventures, dust the garbage, build zoo. Can't even build a land base in standard for $50.
>>47192537
Tournament results don't cause dust values for Hearthstone cards to go up. The influx of YUGIOH niggers also increased theft and counterfeit cards. MTG is kill.
>>47192572
You're someone who's been playing for a long time, and have a different perspective. If you're brand new to Hearthstone right now, you have a steep fucking hill to climb if you don't want to pay money, and it's just not worth it. I think my numbers hold up, but since we don't know the open rates for legendaries/epics we can't say for sure. Last I heard it was 1/40 packs have a legendary on average, so 40 days before dust, we'll call it a month with dust to be generous. Per legendary.
>>47192588
Fuck you hitler. Also part of the skill involved in Hearthstone is planning turns ahead. I'm sorry your dumb ass needs instant speed removal and counterspells to compensate for your lack of skill. Go drop $400 on your Jaces.
>>47192593
You can build plenty of standard decks for $50, I did it every standard "season" for a while every time I got the urge to play magic. The best part was I wasn't always forced into mindless garbage like Zoo, which you pretty much are in hearthstone.
>>47192459
We could compare money made if you'd prefer?
>>47192588
>literally this mad
stay bad, kid
try not to get cheeto dust on your pretty pieces of cardstock
>>47192628
The game is F R E E
There's no barrier to entry, and Blizz literally invited over 1,000,000 to the closed beta in 2013. If you're just now jumping on the bandwagon, don't complain because you're starting from square one.
>>47192643
>face hunter and freeze mage can literally be played with basic cards
???
>>47192635
It's a combination of several things:
1. He doesn't understand tempo
2. He can't build a deck
3. No referees to bribe with cheetos/mt dew
4. He can't use his body odor to distract people over the internet
>>47192320
You can do 70 games a day whenever you are with your whole card collection transferring on whatever phone/tablet/pc you are using.
Yeah you ARE right, MtG can't even come close to compete.
By playing heartstone a year you probably have played more games than MtG fags those 10 last years.
>>47192628
it's 1/20, just use google bro,
You can go legendary with basic decks, and they roll out cards so everyone is on the same level every few months.
Good. Let it die, then maybe I can buy the cards I want to play with my friends and family on holidays.
>>47192635
how can you plan turns ahead when every other card just rolls a bunch of dice?
>>47192710
Yes, the game is "free"
But please continue to ignore the very real numbers I posted about actually getting into the game.
I can get into Magic for less, and it's objectively a better game. If you're trying to say "Oh well tough shit" to new players because they didn't join 3 years ago, let me know how well your game grows over time.
Blizzard exploited a very popular model right now and at the time of release. You don't release a game, you release a platform for free, then charge people to play on that platform. It generates a shitload more money and for longer, but the game is not really free if you want to enjoy it.
If you're the kind of person who enjoys grinding out card games heavily not in your favor because the other person has been playing for 3 years, hoping for your pittance every 3 wins, then by all means continue. I'll not be fooled by the "free" tag and just get more value out of the money.
And this (mostly) objective, don't get me started on how Hearthstone is a disgustingly simple card game where the primary strategy is "hope and pray" more than any other, specifically designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator and youtube videos.
>>47192399
Hearthstone would be better if it were simply a digital version of the WoW TCG. Maybe do some rebalancing, otherwise I agree with this anon, Hearthstone a shit.
>>47192755
You know what's in your deck, you know your combos, you mulligan for a good opening hand.
>>47192771
>Magic is objectively better
>HS is lowest common denominator compared to magic
>not being able to buy victory by outright purchasing decks is a bad thing
o i am laffin
>>47192771
You know they regularly roll out entire expansion (and creating new) of the competitive modes every few months so that people start on the same level right ? you wouldn't shitpost without actually knowing that ?
>>47192799
When you say regularly, you do mean they only recently just did that, right? And that people aren't starting on the same level, since that new mode includes classic cards of which there are powerful epics and legendaries that people still use, right?
So I wonder, who is shitposting?
>>47192797
>Buying decks in magic is buying victory
I'm glad we're both laffin, everyone's having a good time
>>47192155
I've played HS since release and I can tell you this is absolutely wrong.
Blizzard is incompetent, and it's rather visible down to the card nerfs and the fact they felt a 4 mana 7/7 was a somehow-good idea(and don't even get me started on Reno Jackson). The game has no form of interaction. A lot of things that happen are rarely ever under your control, and if you just happen to lose to it then that's that. That, coupled with cards riddled with RNG make a lot of outcomes frustrating. If you've ever played pre-Standard, you'd probably know how it felt to pop a shredder and see a Doomsayer you can't deal with pop out. Or the well-calculated lethal where your opponent played Yahtzee with his Boombots and got the exact numbers needed to win. Or we could talk about HS today, where the Discover mechanic gives you more RNG but with a limited scope of what you can pick to give an illusory veil of controllable variance. Or we could discuss that was and still is hoping to god Ragnaros hits the right card when the turn ends. And it's all to appeal to the game's target audience - casual fuckboys who go on their designated app store, download free games, and have no fucking clue what the term "add x to your mana pool" means.
Even if MTG magically died, HS is going to be stuck in it's own bubble as Blizzard's premier eSports game, sitting amongst the ranks of League of Shitters and CS:NO. Some other game like FoW is going to take it's place.
>>47192820
Nah it's pretty regular.
They added Tavern Brawl, 3 Expansions, and 3 adventures all pretty evenly spaced out.
Don't be a salty mongoloid if you don't actually have any clue. I mean, real talk deluded mtg fags are probably on par with 40kuck shitposters and you should just be ignored.
I mean, the fact that you can literally get cards for free in HS makes in better than The Gathering Jews right off the bat. I don't have to "PAY" to do tavern brawls and I can "EARN" arena runs, again without paying a cent.
Meanwhile you pay to draft, pay for boosters, pay to get raped, pay to abort your goyf rapebaby, pay more. I mean seriously The Gathering Jews can go and stay gone.
>>47192980
>playing rag.
spotted the casual
>>47193020
Back in my days, Rag was pretty much the auto-include Lego. Sylvannas sat on the throne with him, but she was only ever good with control lists. And half of the time when you played Rag, you were trying to slide in a sneaky lethal.
You younglings have it a lot better these days.
>>47193004
I fail to see how any of those, except Tavern Brawl, is forcing everyone to start on the same level.
And Tavern Brawl is the most cancerous thing I have ever seen come out of a card game. If you seriously think an RNG game mode where you play RNG cards and flip the coin to see if you won, but spend 15 minutes waiting for the coin to land is fun, then you are the exact target audience of Hearthstone anyway: A fucking mongo who couldn't comprehend M:TG despite years of dumbing down.
Then again, you'd have to be a fucking mongo to think that Hearthstone is a free game and that Blizzard is doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. Earn arena runs, what a laugh.
>>47192980
>4 mana 7/7 was a somehow-good idea
There are many ways to effectively deal with it.
The RNG in Hearthstone is nothing compared to the amount of games decided by mana flood or screw.
>>47193145
>The RNG in Hearthstone is nothing compared to the amount of games decided by mana flood or screw.
Loving
Every
Laugh
>>47193053
Yea I hear you, he's actually still decent but he's no Boom or god frobid Yogg which is the new hot shit and completely stupid.
>>47193063
Well I've played the game since Beta and haven't spent a penny on it. So it is what is it magic cuck.
And the point of TB is RNG heaven, which is the whole idea. So that dudes with no cards can play dudes with lots of cards since only one in every five brawls makes you actually build a deck.
Know what I'm saying?
And yea you can get arena runs for free. When was the last time you got to attend a magic event and take home cards without paying any money?
I mean, I like that you're upset but you're still a retarded cuck y'feeling me famalamana.
>>47193145
>mana flood or screw
two things that should never happen unless you're a fucking mongoloid and can't mana bases properly
>>47192980
>someone just lost to shaman
how you doing, shieldbearer? good thing you can't lose those stars
>>47193188
To be fair having mana at all is mongoloid tier game design.
>>47193188
>88
Whats with all the nazis in this thread. Go mull to 4 so you can drop Eye of Ugin and win on turn 4. Sooooo deeeep annnnnnnnd skiiiiiiiiiillful.
>mtg players complain they can't act during the other dudes turn.
>upset they can't cancerspell every card for the entire game.
Get mad you shitters.
>>47193225
>Eye of Ugin
Anon...
>>47193200
It's not that it's hard to deal with, but it's a pain to in a lot of cases, especially on turn 4. And if you just can't manage to deal with or stop it you just outright lose the game.
And Overload is not an issue considering there are currently two cheap methods of getting rid of it. Even then, Overload 2 is barely a cost.
>>47193259
But its more skillful if I can cast my sells whenever I want or flash my creatures in eot.
>>47193180
>Its another if I keep calling them a cuck they're obviously wrong episode
This is why these threads are a failure every time.
Hearthstone would be great if they took every single instance of the word "random" and removed that card.
I really do enjoy the concept of hero powers and removing mana screw, but then they had to go and add another way to RNG free wins for less skilled players
>>47192359
What changes to the pro club?
>>47193347
>Can't handle the bantz.
Why do you post on 4chan.
>>47193371
Man some of the random effects are totally out of control too. Get a 1/1 Tinyfin or a Gorrash? Totally fine bruv!
>>47192179
First post best post.
Also, miniature and tabletop games did not die after videogames became a normie thing.
>>47193293
that's a very uncomfortable position there.
>>47193438
this.
just because new medium comes along, doesn't mean old ones die.
>>47192155
Comp mtg doesn't matter. Wizards will keep printing money because 10 year olds fucking love kitchen table and play computer games as da separate thing
>>47192155
Market research says 95% of magic players never go to fnm. HS can't compete with selling starter decks and packs in Walmart the money is in people that don't know or care about the secondary market
>>47193294
I do like the Flash summons. What was that Flash legendary Teferi? He was neat.
>>47193573
I got u senpai
>>47192155
>Fact: By 2020, Hearthstone is going to kill the competitive scene for MTG.
Magic, yugioh, and Pokemon have been the top 3 best selling card games for the past 10+ years and yet we don't see a single one of them keeling over to die yet. You know why? Because multiple card games can exist without killing a long-standing competitor.
>>47193611
Dayum. I need this in my U/G hexproof, shroud, anti-control deck. Any counterspell deck instantly dies of you can get this card out.
>>47193647
Yea he's tight.
>>47193611
My man!
>>47193200
Well theres that 7/7 erryone gets from league.
Good for, for instance silencing or feeding to a demon...
>tfw people actually happily pick a side between two shit companies.
Stay terrible, /tg/
>>47194803
Got a recommendation for a better gane then, sport?
>>47192155
>it's another Dwight overreacts over a conspiracy theory episode.
>>47192155
HS will be dead to all but the most brainwashed of blizzard fags by 2020 due to the incompetence of blizzard combined with activision's moneygrubbing
>>47193180
> or god frobid Yogg which is the new hot shit and completely stupid.
I don't believe anyone seriously plays Yogg outside of fucking around. The fact of the matter is he's only any good at end game, and if you play him when your deck is low he has a pretty high chance of dealing serious fatigue damage to whoever plays him.
I mean, yeah. There's a chance he just pyroblasts your opponent three times and you win. There's a much higher chance you draw twelve cards into fatigue and explode spectacularly.
>>47192155
Can you give me the experiments to how you reached that fact so I could peer review it?
>>47192459
Well, there is magic duels...
>>47194895
Not him, but i will try.
On PC there is Hex (not-magic that magic online should learn from)and pokemon tcgo, on android there is mabinogi duel
>>47192491
>Game of board control
>The strongest decks consistently don't give a shit about the board
>>47192491
It plays like battleship magic and you know it. I watched my friend play against a cthun deck and it was just babies first voltron. Hearthstone cannot beat magic simply because activision blizzard is about to take a few big hits in the comming year when all their games but overwatch dont sell well. That loss has to be recouperated out of somewhere and it will affect hearthstone and wow development.
>>47193611
>binary gender
>>47194938
>it's an episode episode
Episode my episode brother
>>47192155
HS is fun but RNG as fuck. Im still a scrub (been playing for like 2 weeks) but i had games when it went from 25 vs 5 hp to 0 vs 30 just because of a randome effect.
I've spent about $12 dollars total on Magic Cards and got a few Commander decks and a shitton of other miscellaneous cards. What's a good way to off load them and make my money back?
>>47196540
ebay Or your LGS
>>47192155
>Fact: By 2020,
It's already happening NOW, anon.
>>47195006
He's probably going to be curve topping face aggro decks, who would basically see him as Sprint with added rng.
>>47192386
Not having to deal with smelly fatties throwing tantrums is a plus.
>>47192155
>By 2020, Hearthstone is going to kill the competitive scene for MTG.
GoodCasual MTG is best MTG
>>47192155
Fact: My driver's license photo looks exactly like the guy in OP's pic, if not that exact pic.
Fact: A pretty girl in a deli said it looked just like him, and that he was cute.
Fact: I have no idea what to do with this.
>>47196716
Acquire poon.
>>47196721
Putting aside other factors, said poon regards that dude as attractive.
Not sure where she falls on the Don't Stick Your Dick in Crazy line.
Hearthstone will never kill magic simply due to the fact that Magic is as much a social game as it is a competitive card game.
People can't just get together to play hearthstone, yet once a week I meet up with friends and go play magic.
>>47192155
So it's 2 weeks after the latest expansion, meta was stale after day 5 and excitement died out with many players returning to slumber. Do you think it's right time to shill for Hearthstone when interest in it plummets? I have 5 friends who have been playing Hearthstone since its release. Only 2 of them logged in for Whispers release, none of them played Hearthstone in 4 days.
>>47192359
You don't seem to understand that one is digital, the other physical. Some people would never play a physical card game, other would never play a digital card games.
What's the value in a digital card game anyways? Is there a 1 in 200 chance your $4 booster pack contains a $200 land? Is there any chance to regain the money you spent into the hobby?
>>47197366
Some games allow this, yes. Usually Its much lower price tho
>>47196462
WoW Development has been dead in the water since at least Cataclysm, nothing is changing there.
D3 and SC2 communities are perpetually getting screwed and LotV was just a kick in the face on all fronts, not to mention the choked-off competetive scene.
Thing is WoW, D3 and SC2 are complete afterthoughts by now. Heroes of the Storm does decently enough. It's low effort game where it's easy to turn a profit. But even better than HotS at this is Hearthstone: The game has practically zero effort put into it. Balance is shit, bugs don't get fixed in forever, expansions are small and riddled with garbage that you can shit out in an afternoon. And holy shit does it make money.
Blizzard is pretty much the worst company out there. They have perfected the art of dazzling people, their games are completely hollow, but damn if they don't look good and feel polished.
That's why Overwatch is going to sell like crazy at launch, even though it's an incredibly shallow game and a complete fucking joke for value.
>>47194895
Duelyst is pretty cool.
>>47196421
>Hex
I don't want to try it after seeing fetish guro bunnies
>>47192155
Me and everybody I know completely stopped playing hearthstone after a few months... Though we also stopped playing mtg after a few years
>>47192628
m8 I've played like half a month's worth of this game since I got it a year ago and even I have enough cards to make multiple decklists that have great winrates
and this is AFTER the standard change that nullified a good amount of the cards I got early on
>>47192155
It will keep new players froming coming in, but it won't kill the current game.
Wizards needs to reboot MTGO and try to appeal to new players again.
>>47192628
I shoved $150 into hearthstone and now I have a near full set if cards.
Any boosters I win are straight dust at this point.
Meanwhile to be inmediately competitive in mtg it takes a good $400 at least to jump in unless you just draft for a couple blocks.
>>47196421
Pokemon tcg is probably the best online tcg software ever made. Which is really sad considering how few people must play it.
>>47196768
This.
When I break from hearthstone I don't care. When I break from magic, I miss going to the shop and chilling with the other players.
>>47192155
The only thing hearthstone does better than MTG is their software was made for people in 2016. MTGs software was made for people in 1996.
Hearthstone its self is a very simple and boring game made for dumb people. So let the dumb people play it and let the thinking men keep playing magic. Magic will keep on as it always has.
>>47197509
> Blizzard is pretty much the worst company out there.
This is the same Blizzard that made Diablo 2.
This is the same Blizzard that made Starcraft: Brood War and Warcraft 3.
Hell, this is the same Blizzard that made Rock'n'Roll Racing and The Lost Vikings.
I hate this world. How have the mighty fallen.
>>47198329
>This is the same Blizzard that made Diablo 2.
No, that was Blizzard north.
>>47198278
>So let the dumb people play it and let the thinking men keep playing magic.
>>47198329
>This is the same Blizzard that made Starcraft: Brood War and Warcraft 3.
Hell, this is the same Blizzard that made Rock'n'Roll Racing and The Lost Vikings.
Also, No. that was Blizzard. Which is a company that no longer exists.
>>47196666
While I witness your quads, I still have to disagree.
There's too great a chance Yog fucks you over for him to be consistent. If he doesn't clear away your board then he draws into fatigue or he buffs the enemy board or he just nukes your own face.
There's so much that can go wrong when playing Yog that he almost always hurts you more than he really helps.
Can someone explain this "Hearthstone is an RNG" meme? I've only played both casually, but both games rely on randomized card order, so I don't quite get the big deal. Or is this just one of those things where a Youtube personality said it and now everyone repeats it?
If MTG falls it will be from infighting from all the players. The player base has gotten so large with different values among the formats that future sets can't meet (can't have good creature removal, counterspells, land destruction, prison effects, dredge, storm, threshold, annhilator or burn anymore). Reprints being bound by the secondary markets will make prices go every higher. The enfranchised and rich will say this is good, keeps the riffraff out of the "real" formats. Have nots will get tired of this shit and Wizards shitting on them all the time. More and more Chinese fakes will enter the pool. Wizards will crack down harder, disenfranchised players will rebel and seek better fakes. Eventually the resources to seek out fakes will be too much.The market collapses. With no way to move packs anymore, Wizards closes its doors. Dead. Game.
>>47198426
About 90% of cards in Hearthstone include the word random so predicting possible lines of play multiple turns ahead, even on your current turn becomes nearly impossible. For instance if your opener is terribad and your only way to get back in the game is to get a 2-for-1 (let's imagine your playing vs midrange hunter who dumped 2 Fiery Bats with coin) with Arcane Missiles which proceeds to deal all 3 to your opponent's face instead can decide a game right there and then. In MTG the only random factor in the game is your deck's order (which especially in eternal formats isn't really a backbreaker given the power of card filtering and playing 4-ofs of every key card in a 60-card deck), all your spells and creatures do exactly what you choose them to do so most of the time when something doesn't go your way you get to blame yourself instead of the RNG.
This is missing the important fact that people play magic to have fun, not make money.
Why do people assume that Legacy is dying?
>>47198477
I agree. The worst thing a company can do is what the players want. The best thing they can do is listen to what the want and take it in to consideration.
I think the only reason it has stayed around is that it never pandered to the dullwitted. If anything it gotten more complex. if they never try to simplify, homogenize or casualize magic, that will he its death throws. Restricting things like what your mentioned is brushing the surface though.
>>47198426
There are random effects baked into more cards in Hearthstone.
Some examples:
Knife Juggler: deal 1 damage to a random enemy (minions or hero) every time you summon a minion.
Yogg Saron: Cast a random spell for every spell you've cast this game (targets selected randomly)
Arcane Missiles: Deal 3 damage split randomly among all enemies.
Hearthstone is built from the ground up to be a casual game. Something you load up on your phone and screw around on. The random element is there to keep things fresh.
Somehow it got traction as an esport. I dunno how.
>>47198577
Mind you, I don't personally think that some amount of randomness is a bad thing.
But then, come from Battletech, where the name of the game is 'Play the odds' rather than expecting anything to go as you planned.
>>47198577
Because its so boring to play, that the real money is in getting payed for people to watch you play and type words lke "EPIC" in the chat box. Would you play it unless you were getting payed to do so?
I didnt think so.
Hearthstone has been around for a while. Why only now is it the mtg killer?
>>47198605
Paid. Not payed, paid.
>>47198619
Your lucky im even coherent right now.
>>47192155
Thin end of the wedge fallacy. The thread.
>FACT
you don't know what this word means it seems.
>>47198613
Because it has more people viewing it on twitch. That is literally the only reason. Wizards could fix this by improving their software but for some reason they like the Windows 3.1 style.
>>47198629
you're*
>>47198729
Hearthstone is popular to watch on twitch cause of RNG messing with personalities. No one watches it for competitive reason.
>>47192980
>FoW ever becoming bigger than mtg
My sides are metaphorically in orbit anon
>>47198644
Look at the image. He's emulating the speech pattern of a character from a TV show who would declare "Fact" before stating what was usually either an opinion or an outlandish fact that didn't seem to have bearing on the topic at hand.
>>47198783
I would say that people watch it because watching these sort of card games are fun to watch. And healthstone at least looks better than dogshit, unlike magic online.
>>47198799
Oh my god that's horrible, what can men do against such reckless faggotry ?
>>47198879
Two choices:
1: Board up your windows, hunker down and wait for they storm to blow over.
Or:
2. Get your harpoon gun and start whaling.
>>47199014
White whale holy graal brother
Hearthstone ain't fun. It doesn't allow me to go to a game shop and play with friendd and meet people irl.
Blizzard does what Wizards of the Don't
Mtg is a social activity, it is more than just the cardsand games.
When i played hearthstone, i was completely unable to interact with the other person, might as wellhave been playing an AI.
It would end up being hilariously if blizzard reveals a few years down the road the opponents we just AI all along.
MtG cards have too much text in them.
>>47199819
I dont like small scale pvp in video games. 5v5, 1v1, ect. I dont know why, feels a little bad when I win perhaps.
But in person I have no such problems. I feel nothing for beating a 13 year olds cheese deck anymore than a 40 year olds power 9. So being able to play real cards makes a big difference.
Having said that, I would not watch magic online because it looks like shit. I would more likely watch hearthstone because it does not offend my eyes. Im no the one playing so what do I care about playing it?
>>47199861
At least its not yugioh tier of text walls
>>47199819
Except when it comes to the one thing thats important....varietyhow can a game that had so many different hero's for the classes only have 9 heros represent them?
>>47192306
prices are also going to drop once no one plays anymore
MtG is a dated and flawed game by the standards of modern game design.
It had a great run, but really, it is past time for it to die.
>>47200373
Just cause shits old doesn't mean it's bad
Honestly, I've also lost interest in hearthstone with this expac. Before release, I'd thought of C'thun as a nice high cost boardwipe and swapped in some cards to setup a control c'thun deck.
However, the issue is that C'thun and N'Zoth are simply cancer. I know that if my Twilight Elders manage to last more than a couple rounds each or if I combo Pyro and the 3/6 Twilight priest card, my C'thun will inevitably win me the game in any case.
Can't even go back to hardcontrol because N'Zoth rogue can't be played against for value and all the C'thun deck have a wide array of high value cards (Looking at you, twin emps).
I hoped C'thun would net me a control priest that had a more flexible 10-cost card, not that it would basically leave priest between C'thun focused decks and OTK combos.
>>47192155
So a digital game based off of a failed physical card game is going to surpass and ultimately kill the OG card game that has been going strong and gaining more players for 23 years....Magic is the card game that other games measure themselves against, and no one is winning yet... How high are you op?
>>47200373
Special Actions are kind of dumb, but outside of that I would need specific examples of what the game does wrong.
>>47200678
Yeah but it's not good either. There's better as time goes on.
>>47198329
>>47198402
>>47198413
I'm going to join the autism and point out that Rock'n'Roll Racing was made by "Silicon and Synapse" - this was before the company renamed themselves "Blizzard"
>>47200745
C'Thun is basically old paladin, play every thing on curve and you win.
So fucking dull.
>>47192155
But, can you play Commander in Heartstone?
>>47198577
>Somehow it got traction as an esport. I dunno how.
Because it can be actually fun to watch, and is easy to follow along and understand since it's a casual game.
>>47201675
Hearthstone is more similar to EDH than it is to other formats in magic, you choose a class before you start building your deck and you always have access to the spell that class gives you.
>Playing Hearthstone right now
AMA I guess
>>47192155
Although I think it's going to take even more of a dive, I don't think it's going to kill it. Hearthstone is online and actually has a generally different playstyle to it.
>Magic, not even guaranteed a good mana pool. Hearthstone, more mana every turn.
This difference alone makes it so you have two completely different games. Hearth, guaranteed mana, makes all deck flourish when it has a good curve to it. Whereas magic can have a variety that can roll with lower amounts of mana or higher amounts in each deck.
Then there's a difference in community. Magic has real cards to work with. People can meet up, play games, exchange cards, gloat about which card they got from a pack 3ish years ago. They can admire art on the cards, lore behind it, and just cream on eachother because they have something to physically collect. Hearthstone does not have that. The community is, generally, snobs walking around with their phones glowering over eachother with a card they have. They can duel, show off cards, maybe discuss playstyles, and then that's it. WoW lore is dumb (coming from someone who used to follow it) and there's never any real discussion about it, especially with hearthstone.
It may become less prevalent, it won't die out.
>>47201964
It crashed nvm
>>47192155
Magic is for faggots, hence why I never got into it.
Don't think you're immune to death either Hearthstone cunts, some day the HOT NEW THING will be born to kill your card game.
>>47192155
Fact: Facts are only true for the present.
>>47192155
Fact : No one will ever understand why kids love the taste of cinnamon toast crunch
>>47202286
>>47201964
>Ama
>nvm
ugh
>>47201530
I'm still waiting for the better. Lord knows, I want to switch games, but there just aren't any alternatives. Japanese card games are garbage, Netrunner is decent, but can only be played 1v1 and I love my multiplayer every now and then, and everything else is either dead or trash.
And so I'm left with not playing anything, apart from the occasional round of Pauper or EDH.
>>47199861
That's a lie and you know it. Even though both games have had instances where the text took up as much space as a set of legal documents, Magic has at least gotten better at trying to compact everything in a very simple way. Meanwhile Konami continues to print shit like pic related, and can't ass themselves to make it any shorter.
You might not be alive in 2020
MtG could stand up if it actually made competent digital counterparts that had similar card distribution to Hearthstone (Read: Not charging players hundreds just to keep up)
>>47203453
YUP
or by letting players play limited for free, but they don't get to keep cards online.
>>47192155
>Pro players having higher enter fees for the future
>Chinamen supplying the demand WoTC does not want to
>Stupidly high standard prices
mtg has it's days counted, faggets
>All this salt from poorfags who can't afford magic cards
>>47203453
The pure potential wasted in MTGO makes me sad
>>47203107
wait, is that an AT Field?
I like both, and I don't play competitive MTG. So this is fine.
>>47192155
If anything kills magic it would be something like Hex(which is just magic +). Hearthstone is just too different of a game (no trading cards, mechanics etc) to replace magic.
>>47201682
Not really...
Like most things that are "esports" now, the developing company followed the same rules that the first company who did this did. That company is Riot Games.
No one would give a flying fuck about League of Legends if Riot hadn't injected millions of dollars into an esports scene that had no business existing. The only real reason people began considering it legitimate is because "Well if it's this big / has this much money in it, it must be good!"
Repeat for every "esport" (Which fucking hurts me to say, jesus fucking christ this is the dumbest shit ever) that currently exists. Hearthstone, Starcraft 2, Dota 2, CS:NO, etc.
Are new players still getting into Magic at the same rate, or are more of them going to Hearthstone? Players age out or lose interest eventually, the game's future relies on new blood. It'd be interesting to see if there are any numbers out there on this.
>>47207596
MtG has never been bigger, but it's heard to trust self reported numbers from any company.
that being said comparing MtG to HS is like apples to pears. If you go by player growth HS is obviously going to win because it's F2P. If you go by player retention it's going to get weird because a returning player to MtG is most likely spending much more money on the product while a "returning" player for HS would include people who log on for dailies and play up to an hour a day. HS has a wider playerbase that's easier to pick up games with but you are limited to canned chat interactions and also have no option to play the game face to face. HS has phenomenally less cards than MtG but it's also much younger, it includes RNG elements but is in a format where you can reasonably include interesting stuff like that (and other neat oddball stuff like a legend that limits a player's turn time).
any honest comparison is probably going to obviously tell you HS is a better digital card game while MtG is a better physical one. The only real conclusion here is HS is better than MtGO which is not a hard bar to pass.
who gives a fuck
they're both p2w shit
>>47197509
I can agree with all of your points except the last one. Overwatch is fucking amazing.
>>47203453
Mtg more than makes up for it by having a game that's actually worth playing
>>47208082
MtG sales were down all of 2015. Part of that was BFZ being terrible, I'm sure, but I'd bet part is people switching over to Hearthstone for their fix. I know I've basically quit playing Magic since I can play HS instead.
I find the economics of MtG way more interesting than the game.
Do you think Dutch tulip collectors had these same conversations?
>>47207596
It's telling that the new head is a guy with lot of tech experience. Odds are good Hasbro isn't happy with the fact that Hearthstone is already making more money per year than MtG.
>>47208426
There are more interesting and more profitable markets out there. If that's why you stay, it's a bad reason.
>>47197509
>even though it's an incredibly shallow game and a complete fucking joke for value
bruh It's a fun class based shooter for 40 bux and more content updates for free. I'm tired of TF2 and RoTCW:ET is mostly dead, I think.
>>47208450
I didn't mean to give the impression I played this stupid shit. I just like to come on /tg/ and gawk.
>>47207538
>Dota 2
It's actually my understanding that Dota 2 gets most of its tournaments/prize money from the community and sponsors. I think valve only puts up the starting bucks for the International.
>>47209115
The International is the most blatant example of what I'm talking about. Again, it doesn't matter where it ends up, the entire foundation is flawed and only existed because the company poured money into it, and people assumed it was good because there was money being poured into it. The time that people realize they're playing fucking video games and these sponsors aren't actually making that much money is the time the bubble bursts. It's already happened with Starcraft 2 over in Korea, sponsors pulled out and the game instantly died because there was no real interest outside money.
>>47209654
Where does the money for the big E-Sports games come from? People don't pay to watch it, is it really all sponsors?
>>47209882
They have insanely dedicated viewership numbers. Sponsors want that bad.
>>47209893
I really wonder how many people that watch are watching close enough or paying enough attention to buy whatever is being sponsored. I know I don't, but that might not be everyone.
>>47209928
Even 1% is huge.
>>47209654
>Typing about stuff you don't know about.
Except the International is run by Valve in the black. They don't need outside sponsors due to the success of their Compendium sales.
SC2 is run by Kespa. Lately more so Blizzard, but they needed the sponsors and stuff to run those tournaments because unlike Dota that's mostly paid for by fans and cosmetics. And League, which is largely paid for by Riot since they have a money making business through their (again) micro-transactions.
>>47209893
>Sponsors want that bad.
Nope.
The reason people take notice of Esports is because it is HUGE in the 18-35 demographic which for a long time has been considered the "King" due to the propensity of that demo to spend their disposable income on toys and games instead of saving.
Same reason people always say MMA is bigger than Boxing despite boxing commanding higher purses and ppv numbers. That coveted 18-35 demographic.
Again, don't talk if you don't know what you're talking about champ.
>>47209935
It really isn't.
Sponsors are paying big bux to be shown on this shit, but no one is buying extra RAZR mice because they saw it on some dota tournament
Its a net negative for those sponsors, and when they realize and bail, all the money is gone.
As a guy that plays hearth stone, I can't imagine anyone enjoying it more than magic, even with the best cards and top performing decks it's way too rng.
Playing aggro is boring as fuck and control is basically fucking solitaire, and tournaments literally hinge on rng.
I understand the casual aspect is appealing, but man I cant bring myself to do more than my three quests and a tavern brawl for the deck.
Arena might be the only spot where some game awareness is shown as having a proper curve and some synergy is pretty vital, but yet again rng decides all.
>>47209997
I enjoy it more than Magic. I can play it whenever I want, I don't have to deal with neckbeards, and it doesn't cost me nearly as much money. It might not be a better game, but that's partially because of the limited cardpool and that'll get better. It's just a more enjoyable over all experience.
>>47210040
How so? I'm honestly asking how a game entirely decided by RNG most of the time is even remotely enjoyable?
>>47210040
I have the opposite reaction. I play magic because I enjoy the community, I like going to the card shop and hanging out. Hearthstone has no social interaction at all, so it just doesn't appeal to me.
>>47210054
I would argue that it's not actually much more RNG than magic. The individual cards have a higher instance of it, but it's impossible to get manascrewed, which removes a lot of the times you get fucked over by chance.
I also think that people overestimate the impact of RNG in hearthstone, usually. There are a handful of top tier cards that use it, but they have significantly dropped since GVG rotated out.
>>47210068
I've never understood the appeal of going to a card shop. It's always been something I have to deal with to play the game.
>>47210093
Don't you have friends at the card shop, or friends who you go to the card shop with?
Maybe you have a shit shop, but my store owners are great, and for the most part the patrons are also pretty fun to hang out with. I only started playing magic seriously when my buds would all go play FNM. I think thats the main draw of magic.
>>47192155
Suuuurrrreeee.
Let me remind you about Team Fortress 2.
TF2 is a class based arena shooter with multiple game modes that largely revolve around simple objectives, like collecting beer off the corpses of your fallen enemies so you can deliver it to small UFO's, which proceed to get the mother ship drunk, causing it to crash into a harbor. *I am not making that up.* TF2 is old, by vidya standards, almost 8 years old now.
So, naturally, there's been a lot of challengers trying to make a "better" TF2.
EA took it's Battlefield series, and made "Battlefield Heroes" when TF2 was but a young thing. That game has slid into a quiet grave, with nothing really new since 2013, and lots of very empty servers.
Splash Damage promised class-based free-running arena shooting in Brink! But between awful bugs, small weapon counts, and mediocre maps, the game only managed to squeeze out one promised DLC before dying completely.
Then there was the Monday Night Combat series, which had a fanbase so toxic that it was utterly unapproachable. The game really went down the toilets when the developer started recruiting players to use their machines as bitcoin miners in exchange for in-game items.
Finally, let us remember Loadout, with sophomoric humor and a body positive female character model, the PC / PS4 title was amazingly promising, until the PS4 launch when, inexplicably, the PC dev team was all sacked, and many of the PC features were permanently shut down with no explanation. So, while Loadout might have a few more years in it on the PS4, it's not even on life support on PC.
So, do you really think that Hearthstone, a game with no physical presence, with such a small number of released cards and so few mechanics to work with, do you really think that it will "destroy" the reigning King? The sole survivor of the original Trading Card Game Wars? Do the Wizards of the Coast fear the Blizzards who dropped Ghost? I doubt it.
>>47210093
Oh, you're the kind of person who complains about mana screw. You just enjoy the RNG giving you free wins when you're not as skilled at the game. Got it.
Good players/decks get mana screwed something like 5% of games. Hearthstone games are decided by RNG alone more than 50% of the time.
>>47210115
I've been to a lot of shops, pretty much always with friends. In every case, I would have preferred to be playing with friends at one of our homes. I like my friends, but the majority of magic players are not that fun to hang with, in my experience.
>>47210150
Those are some good numbers anon. They definitely prove your point and don't require anything to back them up.
>>47210159
The mana screw numbers are actually researchable, go look that shit up.
Obviously we can't look at every single Hearthstone game, but considering that so many cards literally have the word "random" on them, 50% is a pretty safe bet.
>>47210159
>numbers
We could look at Hearthstone competitive tournament decks, see how many of the cards involved have some kind of RNG mechanic attached to them, like summoning a random (X) or damaging either you or the opponent.
Likewise, we can look at MtG tournaments, and see when or if players got "mana screwed".
>>47210173
>go look it up
Ah yes, the bastion of the proofless.
And you're solidly making up 50%. How many cards see pro play that say random? I'm betting less than 10.
>>47210179
Cool, so do it. You're the one making the assertion that Hearthstone has terrible RNG problems.
>>47210191
I'm not that anon though, I'm the anon with the TF2 analogy.
>>47210191
Yeah, I'll go ahead and do hours of research to prove a point on the internet. I'll get right on that.
>>47210205
Kek, so predictable
>>47210202
I don't think the TF2 analogy works very well, either, though, since Hearthstone has already caught up to Magic in number of players.
>>47196678
Where do you live where you encounter this?
>>47210279
Where do you live that you don't?
Mtg players even outdo the 40kids with how out of touch they are when it comes to personal hygiene and proper public behaviour.
>>47210292
I've never had this problem in the Northeast or the Southeast
I don't run the treadmill. If I can play my friend over lunch at work I'm happy.
>>47210292
This. These days all the stores have serious policies about it, but you can only do so much.
>hearthstone will destroy mtg bruh
Kay.
Magic has always been a nerds game. Normiea get into it now and then, but its always been a herd staple.
I dont give two shakes of a squirrels dick if hearthstone has more players or makes more money, magics community remains the same and is one of the only few games I dont have to worry about going mainstream and killing the community or the entire fucking genre.
Thanks wow for mmos being dead for over a decade, appreciate it blizz.
>>47210356
You don't think that a movie and WotC's constant push to promote diversity is going to bring in normies?
>>47210324
It's seriously weird. I can go into any of my cities dozen hobby shops and there will always, without fail be some fatlus taking up an entire table.
Not playing a game mind you. He's just sitting there with his deck. Or with his cards spread out in front of him, hooing and hawing while he eats a hoagie stuffed with slim jims. No belt so his asscrack is flapping in the wind, and you can't get within five feet of him in case he;
a) Fixes you with the death stare like you're a piece of deep fried chicken that has entered his orbit.
b) Screams at you for coming near his cards.
c) Wafts his corpulent body odor over you like some High Tide wheeny deck.
Always a different guy, but the it's always the same thing. It's like there's a cult of mtg playing fatasses or something.
>>47210305
You're probably one of the people we're talking about.
>>47210380
I dont think it matters, and I don't think he said anything about that
>>47210395
Im pretty sure you're just talking shit at this point
>>47210395
It's honestly the only place I consistently see people that big. Sure, there are plenty of fat people, but only card stores always have someone who looks like they're well over 300 pounds.
>>47210380
Nope.
I honestly dont know what wizard could do at this point to have that kind of success, even a watered down hearthstone style game wouldn't do it.
>>47210407
>>47210418
I think a movie, if popular, stands a good chance of bringing in a lot of normal people. And clearly that's what Wizards wants to do, because that's where the money is. Honestly, it seems likely that it will either go mainstream or die, because for basically any company, stasis is effectively decay.
>>47210407
It's sad because I'm actually 100% serious.
>>47210409
It is a very strange phenomenon.
>>47210191
I'll start this post(s) by saying that I know as soon as you're BTFO, you'll call me some kind of idiotxdbaited for actually looking it up for you, you monogloid.
http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?15270-Land-draw-statistical-odds
Let's define mana screw. In your first 2 turns, you probably want 3-4 lands in most decks, aggressive probably are fine with 3, control decks don't mind being a bit flooded. So in 9 cards, with a good mana base and not being a mongo with your shuffling, your chance of not reaching this is about 6.82%. If you're getting consistently mana screwed, take a better look at your base or fucking shuffle better. 90% of the time someone is bitching about screw, it's because they shuffle like retards.
Let's compare this to recent Hearthstone top decks, found here http://www.hearthstonetopdeck.com/. We can't compare every single situation, deck, and game. However, N'zoth Paladin has 6/30 cards with the word "random" on them. N'Zoth himself doesn't say random, but if he can't bring back everything, he'll do it randomly, so I think it's fair to say 6.5. Priest has 7 (Discover a deathrattle is a random deathrattle.), The zoo deck is pretty good about this, with only 2 cards that fall into this. So 15/45 cards, or a fucking third, literally say or imply "RANDOM" on the card.
I don't know what world you live in, but 6.82% < 33% in mine. Hearthstone's mechanics are entirely based in RNG to appeal to casual babies who couldn't get gud in a real card game. Mana screw doesn't get worse if we look into it further, but ho boy Hearthstone's bullshit does. Too bad we can't because Blizzard hides that data, probably to prevent autists like me from calling out how shit their game is.
>>47210465
As someone who hasn't played a game of Hearthstone in his life, perhaps the PRNG they use just has low entropy?
>>47210409
Its kind of required by law to have at least one fattalo in any 'nerd' oriented locale. When your entire business model Is focused ob nerd culture, your going to see at least every variance of that demographic.
Just avoid the dude, your not required to interact with him, and if his fat miasma stench is wafting fucking complain about it.
Its like the people that complain about this kind of shit cant handle basic human interactions themselves.
Can anyone say a heathstone tournament was won by skill and not rng, ever?
>>47210465
Eh, to get gud at magic usually means you just spent more money than the other guy.
I mean same in hearthstone. Good players have all the cards.
They're CCGs, the nature of the beast is that you spend money to stay relevant.
Except in mtg you have no choice but to spend money and in HS you can scrape a pretty good deck together for free.
Both require skill, to say one doesn't and one does is just being disingenuous and erodes your position.
Arguing that the game is based on RNG is fine as long as you accept that all CCGs are RNG machines by nature of being CCGs in the first place.
Though I would agree with you. Cards with random effects are pretty naff and I'm not a fan. I can see the casual appeal of them.
>>47210465
I'm assuming we're looking at Chakki's decks since he won dreamhack.
N'zoth Paladin:
Rag light
Rag fire
Sylvanas
Kodo's don't count, since you use humility and aldor peacekeeper to always guarantee the kill. N'zoth doesn't count since there aren't enough deathrattles in the deck to force it to be random.
Control Warrior:
Sylvanas
Double Brawl
Priest:
Sylvanas
Shifting Shade
Technically Museum Curator, but I don't think it should count, since Discover isn't pure RNG, and is a really good skill-testing mechanic.
Zoo:
Soulfire
Knife Juggler
Technically Dark Peddler, but again Discover is good.
>>47210465
This isn't even mentioning the fact that when you count cards that say random, discovers, and randomly targeting battlecries/deathrattles, over 25% of hearthstone's total cards (224/877) have their mechanics decided purely by chance.
>>47210448
I had no idea they were making a movie.
>>47210538
We should only be looking at top tier decks, and we shouldn't count Discover as RNG. Joust, sure.
>>47210531
>Kodos dont count
It literally says random on the card, stop moving goalposts
Nzoth certainly does count, you aren't always going to have the perfect board
Discover is pure RNG, unless I can specifically state what card I want and get it.
>>47210558
I didn't even count Joust holy shit, or Spare Parts. What a clusterfuck
>>47210564
N'zoth makes no sense to count, because in the deck he's running it's never random.
Kodos are never used in a way that is actually random. I'm not moving goalposts, I'm classifying moments when the game will be decided by RNG.
Discover is no more RNG than card draw, so if we count it, we should count every draw spell in magic.
>>47210526
In magic casual, sure. In a tournament setting its 99% people that have paid just as much as the guy across from them, and then it all comes down to deck formation, a little luck on draw, and some skill. But like 90% of that is deck formation.
A large portion of hearthstone is rng, nearly every deck will have at the very least one or two cards that are completely out of your control on how it resolves.
>>47210590
I would bet between 3-5 cards in every hearthstone deck have some RNG, and a lot of the time, you can turn it into a certainty instead of random. RNG decides games, there's no doubt about that, but it's oversold.
>>47210582
Card Draw is predetermined by the cards you chose to put in the deck. You don't get to choose what's in your discover pile.
If you're playing against some kind of zoo shit, or someone who has multiple targets for Kodo, how are you going to choose what it hits? Oh wait, it's random and you can't.
Your opponent Leeroy'd you and now you don't have the board space for your Nzoth to get full effect, so Sylvannas or whatever is chosen to not come back, you lose the game on that. How is that not RNG? Again, this is why I chose not to look into specific situations where RNG will decide your game no matter how good you were, because we'd be here all fucking night.
>>47210582
The difference between Discover and mtg draw, is that you technically 'know' what you will draw based on what's in your deck. Discover literally just give you random cards.
I play HS over mtg but that's how I would understand it.
The Mage 2 card draw card isn't a rng card for example because there's a 'pre-determined' conclusion that you've prepared into your deck. While a Museum Curator for example gives you cards out of thin air.
>>47210582
Dude, just stop. You're defending a game that gives no shits about you. Hearthstone is objectively fucking awful and designed with that RNG in mind so 8 year olds can have fun too.
>>47210614
>>47210611
>Discover is completely random, you never know!
This isn't true. Discover a 1 cost card has a limited pool, and people know every card in it. Same for 3, deathrattles, mage spells, all of it. It's just as predetermined.
>>47210590
> In a tournament setting its 99% people that have paid just as much as the guy across from them, and then it all comes down to deck formation, a little luck on draw, and some skill. But like 90% of that is deck formation.
I'd argue that's the same for hearthstone, at least at the high end tourney scene.
Not sure what point you're trying to make here sorry.
>>47210630
>I won't put X in my deck, that way I won't draw it.
>Y will always be in your discover pool, whether you like it or not
They're not the same, and arguing that they are makes you look retarded and that you left MTG because you couldn't deckbuild.
>>47210630
That's actually a good point.
>>47210629
> You're defending a game that gives no shits about you.
Cause mtg is any different...
Poorly played sir. You failed debate club.
>>47210643
You can't guarantee that you'll get a specific card, but let's say you're playing Dark Peddler. You need one extra damage, and you know you can count on Mortal Coil, Elven Archer, and Stonetusk boar. Those are as good of odds, as if you were running them in your deck. Better a lot of the time. You need four damage? You've got two cards in that pool. Discover requires knowing your odds and playing to your outs appropriately, and it's a great mechanic for a digital card game.
>>47210630
are you fucking stupid?
>rolling a six sided die isn't random because i know what the 6 possible outcomes are
just because you know what the 1 drops in the game are doesn't make Discover any less random.
>>47210746
And I have 20 cards left in my deck. I can choose between that pool of randomness, or the Discover pool of randomness. Same difference.
>>47210752
except in magic you can manipulate your draws with things like tutors, brainstorm, scry, fateseal, dredge, etc. hell, your opponent can manipulate your draws and the top of your deck as well (it is the entire basis of the lantern control deck).
drawing a card is not always a random event. Discover will always be a completely, 100% random event.
>>47210526
>Except in mtg you have no choice but to spend money and in HS you can scrape a pretty good deck together for free
>in HS you can scrape a pretty good deck together for free
>for free
>free
Do you know how long it takes? I would much rather PAY for the cards that I need. I have been playing on and off since the start of 2013, and I still don't have enough cards to make a half-decent deck. That's because pretty much every competitively viable (or at least half-decent) deck has a fuckload of legendaries. And those legendaries take a long-ass time to get, if you want to play for free. And even if you pay, there's no guarantee that you'll get the card you want just by opening packs. The only way to guarantee getting the card you want is to open so many fucking packs that you can scrounge together enough dust to get a single fucking legendary. And, let's review, disenchanting a common (each pack is guaranteed at least 4 commons and a rare) will give you 5 dust. A legendary costs 1600 dust. Now imagine a deck that contains upwards of 8-9 legendaries. That's a lot of playing + collecting.
I would much rather pay Blizzard directly to just give me the card I want, rather than having to deal with the bullshit pack opening. In mtg, I can't get my cards for free, but I CAN get the ones that I want in a timely manner. And if I pay, I'm guaranteed to get the card I want.
>>47210817
Discover is also manipulated. You're offered three options and pick one. I won't deny that magic currently has greater options for complex deck building. Hearthstone is a young game, and they don't put out cards at the same rate as Magic.
>>47210827
You can build every deck in Hearthstone for less than the cost of one modern deck, I'd bet.
>>47210855
This is true.
However, let's be real and say we're not going to want to play this card game for a long time. We'll get bored. I get bored of my modern deck? I sell it, probably for more than I bought it for if cards weren't banned/reprinted. I've done it a few times.
Hearthstone? Nope. They're not even yours, they're still technically Blizzard's property. You can't even trade them!
>>47210827
>Do you know how long it takes?
Not very long.
They're called murlocs.
My Murloc deck pretty much uses 1 lego or did untill standard came out lol. But anyway, Murk is a free lego. Sometimes Boom, but I found him to slow for murlocs since I usually win by turn 4-5.
An entire murloc collection costs maybe as much as one lego. Maybe a lil more can't remember, but it's easily the cheapest 'fun' deck to play.
Get gud scrub.
>>47210634
The point is that even in pro level cream of the crop play there is still going to be card playa that are almost entirely out of the players control for how it effects the board.
Sure, magic has rng that is inherent to every card game, the draw, but hs has cards that have rng literally built in.
There have been plenty of progames that were not decided by skill but how lucky they were with the rng element built into their cards.
>>47210887
There's a difference between getting bored of one deck and getting bored of every deck, though.
>>47210888
>I turned my dudes sideways and he died LOL
This is about as fun as it is in Magic, which is to say, it really fucking isn't.
>>47210900
Oh, you said every deck. I misread.
I don't think you can get every card in Hearthstone for the price of a Modern deck. Isn't it something like $500 for a reasonable shot to get every card, if you include dust? Some Modern decks cost that much, but not if you're not playing Goyf or some shit like that.
>>47210827
You're talking out of your ass. Many of the best current hearthstone decks run only 0-2 legendaries. Go check out the Shaman and Warlock decks from the most recent tournament
http://www.hearthpwn.com/news/1455-dreamhack-austin-2016-deck-lists-last-week-in
In general, control-type decks like warrior tend to be more legendary heavy because their intention is to keep the game going until fatigue and there are lots of high cost legendaries.
>>47210923
That's basically what I meant. I'm sure there are cheaper Modern decks, but for a lot of them, you could get every card. Seems worth it to me. Plus, I've spent a lot less than that, and mostly just enjoyed getting free packs from Tavern Brawls, Quests, and Arena. If you're good at Arena, f2p is really easy.
>>47210901
I played mtg with guys who ignored formats and just used every card they could.
Suffice to say play against a b/w or blue/black ivory tower, polar sphere, black vise, wrack.etc.loads of counter, force of will, megrims, phantom knights.
Wew lad.
Suffice to say it was about as unfun as a game could be.
>>47210923
I dont think it gets that extreme, but I haven't given a dime to blizz for hearthstone. You could probably craft any deck you want for a hundred bucks.
>>47198172
>My game is not kill
>My game just has no new players
>My game also has players leaving... and no new players to replace them
>>47210953
Fair enough. Yeah, Hearthstone is probably more economical than magic, even Standard. Now if only it weren't so awful to play. I don't know if it's the lack of control, the randomness on cards, or the sheer imbalance of 1 drops, but I just can't enjoy sitting down for a day of hearthstone like I can with magic. Maybe if they allowed sideboards...
