Hearthstone Aims for Simplicity in Both Art and Play

Hearthstone Aims for Simplicity in Both Art and Play

If you've played, or even read about Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft, you probably noticed a trend towards simplicity.

Read Full Article

It certainly can't be easy to make a CCG and I think they did a pretty good job, especially visually.
Not all CCG's have to be MTG to be fun and the most fun I've had was with the WoW CCG doing raids with friends. I've never gotten into making a combo deck, then improving it as you play. It seems to me you just have to deal with odds and try not to overcomplicate what you want to do, instead of swapping out cards constantly, just because it didn't work against one or two decks.

I know people rip on the WoW CCG, but the items and resource system were a lot of fun and added some great variety, in my opinion.

Hearthstone was a bit dissapointing at first and towards the end of the beta when I'd seen pretty much everything there was to it. At the moment, my only interest in it is to watch Totalbiscuits crappy/funny decks that try to pull off a gimmick.
I think they screwed up with the legendaries, which seem too powerful. I'm not sure whether that's support to be part of the simple design or if they don't have a hang for the balance yet...

Encaen:
There's an explosion when you open a pack of cards with debris flying and a visceral feeling that's impressively reminiscent of opening a real-world pack of cards.

Yup, my boosters exploded ALL THE TIME when I played Star Wars CCG back in the day :P

I personally love Hearthstone, for pretty much all the reasons summed up here plus a few more.

Smilomaniac:
Hearthstone was a bit dissapointing at first and towards the end of the beta when I'd seen pretty much everything there was to it. At the moment, my only interest in it is to watch Totalbiscuits crappy/funny decks that try to pull off a gimmick.
I think they screwed up with the legendaries, which seem too powerful. I'm not sure whether that's support to be part of the simple design or if they don't have a hang for the balance yet...

The legends are a tricky issue. The ones that are really 'overpowered' right now are Cairne, Ysera, Rag and a few of the class-specific (Jaraxxus being the most prominent) - but they're all only playable in late-game decks, which means they do nothing against aggro. It's pretty much the same dynamic as Magic: The Gathering has, where control decks set you back hundreds, sometimes even thousands, while there's always a 'Red Deck Wins' available in most formats for a relatively low price.

Though I feel like a lot of these issues with specific cards will be mitigated before long as more cards are added to the pool. In a couple of years, the Hearthstone community will find it pretty funny that a vanilla 4/5 was considered one of the best cards in the game.

SirBryghtside:
The legends are a tricky issue. The ones that are really 'overpowered' right now are Cairne, Ysera, Rag and a few of the class-specific (Jaraxxus being the most prominent) - but they're all only playable in late-game decks, which means they do nothing against aggro. It's pretty much the same dynamic as Magic: The Gathering has, where control decks set you back hundreds, sometimes even thousands, while there's always a 'Red Deck Wins' available in most formats for a relatively low price.

Though I feel like a lot of these issues with specific cards will be mitigated before long as more cards are added to the pool. In a couple of years, the Hearthstone community will find it pretty funny that a vanilla 4/5 was considered one of the best cards in the game.

Are rush and aggro decks the same thing?
Assuming they are, aren't they mostly lower-ladder stuff anyway?
The reason I bring it up, is that it seems far easier to get the cards you need/want through the dust system and the relatively small cardpool, so people will move on from their murloc decks pretty early (with the exception of a few class builds I guess).

I assume you're reffering to the Yeti with the 4/5. Isn't it mostly because it's effective against priests with it's 4 attack that it's considered good?

I haven't played a card game of this style since the original Magic way back in the early - mid 90s. So far, I'm liking Hearthstone. It's giving me just enough Warcraft to sate my desire to get back into WoW. I don't have enough cards to really do anything other than casual play but I'm having fun letting the computer create random decks for me as I try to knock out daily quests. I've not spent any money on it and doubt that I will. I was tempted but then I got my first legendary........a golden Ysera. I promptly lost the first match with it in my deck. I'm terrible but having fun.

Smilomaniac:

SirBryghtside:
The legends are a tricky issue. The ones that are really 'overpowered' right now are Cairne, Ysera, Rag and a few of the class-specific (Jaraxxus being the most prominent) - but they're all only playable in late-game decks, which means they do nothing against aggro. It's pretty much the same dynamic as Magic: The Gathering has, where control decks set you back hundreds, sometimes even thousands, while there's always a 'Red Deck Wins' available in most formats for a relatively low price.

Though I feel like a lot of these issues with specific cards will be mitigated before long as more cards are added to the pool. In a couple of years, the Hearthstone community will find it pretty funny that a vanilla 4/5 was considered one of the best cards in the game.

Are rush and aggro decks the same thing?
Assuming they are, aren't they mostly lower-ladder stuff anyway?
The reason I bring it up, is that it seems far easier to get the cards you need/want through the dust system and the relatively small cardpool, so people will move on from their murloc decks pretty early (with the exception of a few class builds I guess).

I assume you're reffering to the Yeti with the 4/5. Isn't it mostly because it's effective against priests with it's 4 attack that it's considered good?

Its effective against priests because it sits perfectly in the spot known as "all your removal equals shit" space unless they ping it with someone, but then they're just wastin mana. However its also just really good all around. 5 health means that its hard to ping it to death. 4 damage means that trying to ping it to death with monsters will never be cost effective. Its also only 4 mana which means most single target removals aren't cost effective either. Not remotely overpowered in the slightest, but its very useful in pretty much every deck.

Think of it this way, whenever you want to remove an enemy card you always want to use less mana than they used to put the card out. So someone droppin a 6 mana boulderfist ogre is prime target for a 4 mana polymorph + hero power or a straight 5 mana assassinate from a Rogue. However a 4 mana Yeti means that in order to outright kill it you'd need to spend 1 more mana than they spent to put the thing out.

Its a really good card all around.

Smilomaniac:

SirBryghtside:
The legends are a tricky issue. The ones that are really 'overpowered' right now are Cairne, Ysera, Rag and a few of the class-specific (Jaraxxus being the most prominent) - but they're all only playable in late-game decks, which means they do nothing against aggro. It's pretty much the same dynamic as Magic: The Gathering has, where control decks set you back hundreds, sometimes even thousands, while there's always a 'Red Deck Wins' available in most formats for a relatively low price.

Though I feel like a lot of these issues with specific cards will be mitigated before long as more cards are added to the pool. In a couple of years, the Hearthstone community will find it pretty funny that a vanilla 4/5 was considered one of the best cards in the game.

Are rush and aggro decks the same thing?
Assuming they are, aren't they mostly lower-ladder stuff anyway?
The reason I bring it up, is that it seems far easier to get the cards you need/want through the dust system and the relatively small cardpool, so people will move on from their murloc decks pretty early (with the exception of a few class builds I guess).

I managed to get a homebrew Warrior rush deck with 4 rares to rank 5 without much effort last season - not sure how well it would do at getting past that, but you can at least get fairly high. I don't really play that much ladder, so I'm no expert on it, but I feel that rush decks are usually pretty damn effective.

I assume you're reffering to the Yeti with the 4/5. Isn't it mostly because it's effective against priests with it's 4 attack that it's considered good?

That's part of it, but it's to do with the cardpool in general. The highest power 3 mana cards have 4 attack (I'm excluding Magma Rager for obvious reasons), so it'll usually trade with two of those - and there are only two 4 mana creatures with 5 power, Lightspawn and Ancient Brewmaster, which means that the yeti will usually go at least one for one, with a high chance of a two for one. It's the cheapest creature that a player should seriously consider throwing a fireball at. But that also means the yeti will become worse over time, as power creeps, better creatures are released, and more cards have more powerful synergy.

Encaen:
When you select a purchase in the store, there's a cloud of dust when the packs fall on the counter. There's an explosion when you open a pack of cards with debris flying and a visceral feeling that's impressively reminiscent of opening a real-world pack of cards.

Yeah, because clouds of glowy dust, sparks, and flying debris are exactly what I associate with cardboard rectangles in the real world.

shintakie10:
*snip*

SirBryghtside:
*snip*

Thanks for the insight. I knew it was a decent card, but not as good as you've both explained it to be. It also tells me about how little I think ahead in CCG's :/

I'd have to say to me Hearthstone feels like checkers while Scrolls feels like chess.

What I mean is in the complexity and learning required in the games.

In Hearthstone you can lose on a single turn and be able to do nothing about it. What I mean is to give an example I had an enemy priest with a Shield bearer and a buffed Mogu'shan warden on the field so it had higher than normal health.

The enemy then buffed it's health up more, doubled the heath twice then gave its attach value it's health value. I was at 25 health. He used his shield bearer to kill my taunt (Iron fur grizzly) and did an insane 37 damage in a single hit.

In Scrolls because you have to lose 3 idols out of 5 it means chances are you were in a bad way to begin with. There are a few cheap decks based round taking advantage of tricks but they are rare because they rely firstly on random card draws then on random effects on top of that to work them or other tricks. Most of them are counter-able and specifically need 5 turns or so to set up the conditions while in Hearthstone you can turn a 1 attack creature into a 37 damage monster in a single turn.

Basically Hearthstone is seriously unbalanced in parts. With say a legendary that can wipe the board and have 12 12 or the priest deck able to take control of enemy creatures permanently so you not only have to fight all his power creatures but might end up fighting two of your own (or more if he mind vision or draws them from your own deck).

Another issue I have is the cards and world of Hearthstone. In scrolls ad even MTG they have a little extra almost story style bit of exposition on the bottom of some cards, in Hearthstone there is none. So entering Hearthstone and knowing very little about WOW I know none of the lore and the game isn't teaching any of it. So for example in Scrolls it will say a little about the faction or the card at the bottom in extra text.

Then there is the progression. without doing Daily quests you need 30 wins for a pack of 5 cards. 2 dailies often = 1 pack of cards, or you can play Arena and try your luck. in Scrolls a new pack of 10 cards is 4 wins or 10 losses at most while if you lose in Hearthstone you get nothing.
Comparing the two more in scrolls you get 10 cards in the pack which will be 7 common, 2 uncommon 1 rare while in Hearthstone its 1 Rare at least but maybe more. However Rare is not the top card tier in Hearthstone while it is in Scrolls. In Hearthstone the Rarest is an Epic I believe or maybe a legendary. Then in scrolls you can buy individual scrolls at a lower cost or random scrolls for specific factions (sets). Then further to this there's the shop which also displays 8 "just for you scrolls" you can buy with in game currency or you can go into the trading channel and trade for the cards you want. In Hearthstone your locked into specific card costs due to the dust required to make them. You can't trade cards at all.

Then there is my final main issue. There are no communication options beyond emotes in Hearthstone while in Scrolls there is an in game chat system.

It should tell you something that I stopped playing Scrolls but having played Hearthstone a while it convinced me to play Scrolls again as after doing Dailies there wasn't much else in Hearthstone for me.

Don't get me wrong though Scrolls has it's issue too but I think Hearthstone really is hit by being free to play in terms of the progression mechanics. I also get that scrolls costing is unfortunately seen as a negative for it.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here