Big oof from me. I just watched Kripp play PvP in a different video, and if the game launches like this, it will be fundamentally broken. You can't view your opponents' mercenaries' skills or ability trees during combat, and you can't view them before crafting. It'd be like trying to guess if you want to craft a card without being able to read its text, or not being able to know what your opponent's cards do unless you also own them. The key to a good PvP game is players having access to the same pool of cards/skills/abilities. Matchmaking against an opponent with even a couple levels difference on one Mercenary in their party could easily render matches unfair. I understand there's other games like this out there (seems like a big Final Fantasy combat simulator to me), but all the actual Mercenaries gameplay preview I'm watching looks like an extremely unfinished product.
I've definitely been posting grumpier Hearthstone rants lately but this is my platform of choice because of the fantastic community Flux and the others have created. I know I can rant here without an endless stream of responses devolving into profanity (I take my downvotes - and occasional upvotes - with grace).
My biggest issue with Mercenaries is that it was advertised as a mode "not utilizing your collection" implying something similar to Battlegrounds, and instead it actually requires an entirely new collection. Cards ARE an amazing way to organize stats, abilities, and information for games, but when I hear "Hearthstone can be a platform for card games" then I expect NEW teams to be assigned to come up with NEW games. It bothers me that Activision/Blizzard is a giant - we're talking about a company with 8 BILLION in revenues - and the same live-content team for Hearthstone is tasked with developing an entirely new game. Mercenaries might be great, but from the visuals (game board specifically) to the marketing, it feels under-developed. Possibly because it is, in fact, underdeveloped, through no fault of the developers themselves, but something like this probably required a lot more investment from the company as a whole. There's a line that can be drawn from some of the workplace harassment and labor violations - a culture of overworking people - and trying to have the company's flagship auto-battler and RPG battler be made on the fly within an existing IP. While I'm sure it was easier to build them in the Hearthstone client than starting from scratch, I don't think this approach is actually giving the community OR THE DEVELOPERS what they want.
Yep, just like Runeterra. Hearthstone implemented the Tavern Tickets years ago before Runeterra existed, but I know on at least one occasion - pre Rewards-track - I was supposed to have multiple, but I was only able to cash one in. It wasn't tracked anywhere in the client that I could see as a player. I expected them to get more formalized when they started offering them in the Rewards Track, but it's still this quasi-feature that's also easily confused with the Tavern Pass and the Battlegrounds Perks (which offer Tavern Tickets). Formalizing it would be so easy, and put them on par with their main competitor, but instead we get vague hints that Cora might work on something as an individual around Christmas when she should otherwise be taking vacation. For her sake, I'd rather have her go on vacation. Have it be a team priority for the game, not a passion project.
It's been an active hobby and I'm an adult with a stable job so I don't exactly begrudge the $50 I spent every few months. But it's objectively a steep price to pay for what we're getting, and I genuinely think we're getting less and less each expansion. After the final balance patch during Barrens I actually thought the Standard meta was in a fantastic place. But it took literal months. And then United in Stormwind completely ruined the meta again. This has been a consistent cycle of them not play-testing or balancing OBVIOUS broken cards before releasing a set. What if, for example, instead of putting intensive resources into a new game (not a mode), they put that energy into the back-end so they could patch/alter the game on the fly much easier? Having each nerf cycle take a month simply isn't fun, especially when they don't usually get it right on the first try.
Without much work they could 1) Make Tavern Tickets an official in-game currency. 2) Award 1 free Tavern Ticket per week for completing a quest or objective (i.e. complete 2 weekly quests to earn it). For the last several cycles I've been so focused on saving up 2000 gold for the mini-set, that I don't spend my gold on Arena like I used to. They need greater rewards all around, but the two changes above would go a long way towards creating the interest and player base again for Arena and Heroic Duels (I think Casual Duels should be eliminated with easier ways to earn Tavern Tickets).
To clarify, I've bought ever $50 pre-order for years, and have never achieved a full set. I do imagine you'd get there with the $80 bundle. I haven't paid that much for a single video game since Super Mario 3.
You're generally right about how it was advertised. I think what really set me off is the new currency and pack-system. It's one thing to "not use your existing collection" and another thing to have you start building an entirely new one. I'm not against them developing new games, but I am extremely skeptical of "Hearthstone as a platform." It especially feels like Team 5 resources are not going into the CCG because of these new games (not game modes).
I'm just sort of confused at this point. The possibilities for a digital card game over a physical one (as someone who got priced out of playing MtG as a teenager in the late-90s) have always excited me. But at this point it doesn't feel like Team 5 is particularly invested in developing a cutting-edge CCG.
Battlegrounds is an auto-battler, plain and simple. Cards are a great way to organize stats and information, but it's literally a different game. It doesn't follow the same rules and mechanics as a different mode like Dungeon Run, Tavern Brawl, Arena, etc. Mercenaries is literally a different game. Maybe it'll be great, but I think it's fair to complain. It's not a new game mode. It's a new game.
We joke about "small indie company" but it does feel cheap and silly that Activision-Blizzard doesn't have dedicated teams to its premier auto-battler and this new gacha Mercenaries game. Team 5's resources are not going into Hearthstone, the CCG, and it's noticeable:
1) Standard is a mess this expansion - the triangle of aggro/control/combo is deeply broken with combos at the moment.
2) Arena and Duels don't get the kind of support that incentivizes playing them. Tavern tickets still aren't a real currency. Runeterra, for example, gives you a free tavern ticket each week if you complete even a single daily quest. The mini-sets require you to save up too much gold to justify paying the admissions. My Arena play has dropped off dramatically since the mini-sets became a permanent fixture in the game, and the rewards track simply hasn't compensated for them.
3) I'm not sure how much Classic is getting played, but I found it pretty boring after a couple days despite having a complete Classic collection.
4) Wild. Players have been asking for NEW WAYS to use THEIR EXISTING COLLECTION for years and years and years now. I'm not going to even complain about Wild being unbalanced, because of course it is with every single card ever printed available. But they could a) frequently rotate the card pool like Arena; b) have rotating rules-changes longer than a week like Tavern Brawl; c) have a tournament mode with deck bans (like Gauntlets in Runeterra); d) have a dedicated rotating Core Wild set like they have a Core Standard set; e) a combination of all of these ideas. I'm not trying to be flippant about their work, but all of these ideas are relatively easy to implement.
More recently, I have been really bothered by the price of Hearthstone. Paying $50 or $80 to access the full gameplay experience of a single expansion is ludicrous. Basically, I love the MtG-style of gameplay, but there is no reason for games to simulate pack-openings or restrict gameplay based on artificial card scarcity like they do with physical cards (which is still artificial scarcity as well). I have paid for every pre-order for years, and played nearly every day, but I NEVER get every card in an expansion. It literally isn't possible without spending additional money, beyond the pre-orders, on packs. Well, I finally didn't pay the pre-order for United in Stormwind, and it's been an even worse experience - truly pay-to-have-fun.
I was hoping Mercenaries was going to be like Slay The Spire or Dungeon Run on steroids or something that related back to the core cards and gameplay. But nope. It's just a gacha game with its own currency and its own packs. Again, it might be fun, but it's not what I want out of the game that I do play. I stopped playing Hearthstone a week after United in Stormwind, and was hoping to return for Mercenaries. I'll check in again at the next set rotation in April.
I wish they would shed some light on how sets are actually play-tested. We hear a lot about initial design team and final design team, but there are obvious issues on Day 1/Week 1 that would be noticed through even limited play-testing.
Hmm, I was really hoping for some bonus XP on the first 12 levels of Targon. I just started playing again, and have been holding off on leveling up that region thinking that it would get bonus XP now that it's two expansions old. Looking forward to all the new content though.
Most Wanted forces your opponent to draw three if you target them, correct? It's designed for the trap synergy, but it's a very interesting effect to have in the game generally.
I still think the most elegant solution to Il'Gynoth would have been to restrict Mo'arg Artificer to doubling damage instead of multiplying it. The same way that playing two cards that trigger battlecries twice doesn't make them trigger twice again. The effect shouldn't stack. It would require more lifesteal spells in hand to pull of the combo, similar to classic Malygos Druid, than dealing 30-100 damage with a single Felscream Blast.
Kolkar Pack Runner and Darkglare shouldn't be 3/4. Minions should either have premium stats or premium effects, not both. Ignoring Aimed Shot and Stealer of Souls is a bad idea. The former should only be able to target minions, and the latter needs at least a 1-mana nerf short of a rework. They also missed the mark on Il'gynoth decks. Mo'arg Artificer needs to have its effect not stack, similar to how "your Battlecries trigger twice" text on cards doesn't stack. I see no difference or contradiction in Artificer's text functioning the same way (damage is restricted to doubling, not multiplying).
Edit: Ok, Manifest is literally Discover while Invoke was specifically Celestial cards. It was super confusing since the exemplar card included a Celestial pick as one of the Manifest options.
I'm actually completely confused as to what the difference is.
No one wants tradeable cards. I'm so tired of these games replicating IRL CCG scarcity into the gameplay experience. I don't care if I ever open a pack again. The game is most fun when you have the most cards to play with, and the most contexts/modes to play them in. There are so many ways to get the gameplay to drive daily participation without making people chase packs. I know this was under the "Dreamland" section and will never happen, but uh, dream better man.
Directly messing with Standard ladder, even for a limited time, is a terrible idea. People have been asking for a tournament mode forever, and then I finally started playing Runeterra a couple weeks ago, and Gauntlets are exactly what Hearthstone needs. You could argue that it's similar to ranked, but it's a very different experience. Basically pick three decks, you and your opponent ban one, and then first to win with their remaining two decks advances to another match sort of like Arena. The more you win, the more XP you get, and some of them can even qualify you for official tournaments. Hearthstone is such an amazing game engine, but I feel like they're really behind the curve on what they could be doing with it. I know LoR gameplay isn't for everyone (I usually prefer Hearthstone), but their game client, game modes, rewards, and cosmetics are superior. What Team 5 should do is mess with Wild ladder. Rotate the legal Wild card pool every two months. It doesn't need to be every card every printed all at the same time. They could balance the mode without changing individual cards. Simply don't allow certain combos depending on the rotation.
I've been playing for the last 2+ weeks and taking a break from Hearthstone. There are things I love about the mechanics, but I still have a hard time judging cards. It seems like a strong early game wins the day no matter what style of deck you're playing. Early chip damage easily puts your opponent in lethal range for those explosive turns when a Champion levels up. I can't imagine including any unit that costs more than 6. Aggro rules the day I suppose, but it's been a nice change of pace from QuestStone.
Good stats for the cost.
Big oof from me. I just watched Kripp play PvP in a different video, and if the game launches like this, it will be fundamentally broken. You can't view your opponents' mercenaries' skills or ability trees during combat, and you can't view them before crafting. It'd be like trying to guess if you want to craft a card without being able to read its text, or not being able to know what your opponent's cards do unless you also own them. The key to a good PvP game is players having access to the same pool of cards/skills/abilities. Matchmaking against an opponent with even a couple levels difference on one Mercenary in their party could easily render matches unfair. I understand there's other games like this out there (seems like a big Final Fantasy combat simulator to me), but all the actual Mercenaries gameplay preview I'm watching looks like an extremely unfinished product.
Is the patch live? My client updated, but I don't have access to Pyke or Nami in the Scourge.,
I've definitely been posting grumpier Hearthstone rants lately but this is my platform of choice because of the fantastic community Flux and the others have created. I know I can rant here without an endless stream of responses devolving into profanity (I take my downvotes - and occasional upvotes - with grace).
My biggest issue with Mercenaries is that it was advertised as a mode "not utilizing your collection" implying something similar to Battlegrounds, and instead it actually requires an entirely new collection. Cards ARE an amazing way to organize stats, abilities, and information for games, but when I hear "Hearthstone can be a platform for card games" then I expect NEW teams to be assigned to come up with NEW games. It bothers me that Activision/Blizzard is a giant - we're talking about a company with 8 BILLION in revenues - and the same live-content team for Hearthstone is tasked with developing an entirely new game. Mercenaries might be great, but from the visuals (game board specifically) to the marketing, it feels under-developed. Possibly because it is, in fact, underdeveloped, through no fault of the developers themselves, but something like this probably required a lot more investment from the company as a whole. There's a line that can be drawn from some of the workplace harassment and labor violations - a culture of overworking people - and trying to have the company's flagship auto-battler and RPG battler be made on the fly within an existing IP. While I'm sure it was easier to build them in the Hearthstone client than starting from scratch, I don't think this approach is actually giving the community OR THE DEVELOPERS what they want.
Yep, just like Runeterra. Hearthstone implemented the Tavern Tickets years ago before Runeterra existed, but I know on at least one occasion - pre Rewards-track - I was supposed to have multiple, but I was only able to cash one in. It wasn't tracked anywhere in the client that I could see as a player. I expected them to get more formalized when they started offering them in the Rewards Track, but it's still this quasi-feature that's also easily confused with the Tavern Pass and the Battlegrounds Perks (which offer Tavern Tickets). Formalizing it would be so easy, and put them on par with their main competitor, but instead we get vague hints that Cora might work on something as an individual around Christmas when she should otherwise be taking vacation. For her sake, I'd rather have her go on vacation. Have it be a team priority for the game, not a passion project.
It's been an active hobby and I'm an adult with a stable job so I don't exactly begrudge the $50 I spent every few months. But it's objectively a steep price to pay for what we're getting, and I genuinely think we're getting less and less each expansion. After the final balance patch during Barrens I actually thought the Standard meta was in a fantastic place. But it took literal months. And then United in Stormwind completely ruined the meta again. This has been a consistent cycle of them not play-testing or balancing OBVIOUS broken cards before releasing a set. What if, for example, instead of putting intensive resources into a new game (not a mode), they put that energy into the back-end so they could patch/alter the game on the fly much easier? Having each nerf cycle take a month simply isn't fun, especially when they don't usually get it right on the first try.
Without much work they could 1) Make Tavern Tickets an official in-game currency. 2) Award 1 free Tavern Ticket per week for completing a quest or objective (i.e. complete 2 weekly quests to earn it). For the last several cycles I've been so focused on saving up 2000 gold for the mini-set, that I don't spend my gold on Arena like I used to. They need greater rewards all around, but the two changes above would go a long way towards creating the interest and player base again for Arena and Heroic Duels (I think Casual Duels should be eliminated with easier ways to earn Tavern Tickets).
To clarify, I've bought ever $50 pre-order for years, and have never achieved a full set. I do imagine you'd get there with the $80 bundle. I haven't paid that much for a single video game since Super Mario 3.
You're generally right about how it was advertised. I think what really set me off is the new currency and pack-system. It's one thing to "not use your existing collection" and another thing to have you start building an entirely new one. I'm not against them developing new games, but I am extremely skeptical of "Hearthstone as a platform." It especially feels like Team 5 resources are not going into the CCG because of these new games (not game modes).
I'm just sort of confused at this point. The possibilities for a digital card game over a physical one (as someone who got priced out of playing MtG as a teenager in the late-90s) have always excited me. But at this point it doesn't feel like Team 5 is particularly invested in developing a cutting-edge CCG.
Battlegrounds is an auto-battler, plain and simple. Cards are a great way to organize stats and information, but it's literally a different game. It doesn't follow the same rules and mechanics as a different mode like Dungeon Run, Tavern Brawl, Arena, etc. Mercenaries is literally a different game. Maybe it'll be great, but I think it's fair to complain. It's not a new game mode. It's a new game.
We joke about "small indie company" but it does feel cheap and silly that Activision-Blizzard doesn't have dedicated teams to its premier auto-battler and this new gacha Mercenaries game. Team 5's resources are not going into Hearthstone, the CCG, and it's noticeable:
1) Standard is a mess this expansion - the triangle of aggro/control/combo is deeply broken with combos at the moment.
2) Arena and Duels don't get the kind of support that incentivizes playing them. Tavern tickets still aren't a real currency. Runeterra, for example, gives you a free tavern ticket each week if you complete even a single daily quest. The mini-sets require you to save up too much gold to justify paying the admissions. My Arena play has dropped off dramatically since the mini-sets became a permanent fixture in the game, and the rewards track simply hasn't compensated for them.
3) I'm not sure how much Classic is getting played, but I found it pretty boring after a couple days despite having a complete Classic collection.
4) Wild. Players have been asking for NEW WAYS to use THEIR EXISTING COLLECTION for years and years and years now. I'm not going to even complain about Wild being unbalanced, because of course it is with every single card ever printed available. But they could a) frequently rotate the card pool like Arena; b) have rotating rules-changes longer than a week like Tavern Brawl; c) have a tournament mode with deck bans (like Gauntlets in Runeterra); d) have a dedicated rotating Core Wild set like they have a Core Standard set; e) a combination of all of these ideas. I'm not trying to be flippant about their work, but all of these ideas are relatively easy to implement.
More recently, I have been really bothered by the price of Hearthstone. Paying $50 or $80 to access the full gameplay experience of a single expansion is ludicrous. Basically, I love the MtG-style of gameplay, but there is no reason for games to simulate pack-openings or restrict gameplay based on artificial card scarcity like they do with physical cards (which is still artificial scarcity as well). I have paid for every pre-order for years, and played nearly every day, but I NEVER get every card in an expansion. It literally isn't possible without spending additional money, beyond the pre-orders, on packs. Well, I finally didn't pay the pre-order for United in Stormwind, and it's been an even worse experience - truly pay-to-have-fun.
I was hoping Mercenaries was going to be like Slay The Spire or Dungeon Run on steroids or something that related back to the core cards and gameplay. But nope. It's just a gacha game with its own currency and its own packs. Again, it might be fun, but it's not what I want out of the game that I do play. I stopped playing Hearthstone a week after United in Stormwind, and was hoping to return for Mercenaries. I'll check in again at the next set rotation in April.
I wish they would shed some light on how sets are actually play-tested. We hear a lot about initial design team and final design team, but there are obvious issues on Day 1/Week 1 that would be noticed through even limited play-testing.
Hmm, I was really hoping for some bonus XP on the first 12 levels of Targon. I just started playing again, and have been holding off on leveling up that region thinking that it would get bonus XP now that it's two expansions old. Looking forward to all the new content though.
Most Wanted forces your opponent to draw three if you target them, correct? It's designed for the trap synergy, but it's a very interesting effect to have in the game generally.
I still think the most elegant solution to Il'Gynoth would have been to restrict Mo'arg Artificer to doubling damage instead of multiplying it. The same way that playing two cards that trigger battlecries twice doesn't make them trigger twice again. The effect shouldn't stack. It would require more lifesteal spells in hand to pull of the combo, similar to classic Malygos Druid, than dealing 30-100 damage with a single Felscream Blast.
Kolkar Pack Runner and Darkglare shouldn't be 3/4. Minions should either have premium stats or premium effects, not both. Ignoring Aimed Shot and Stealer of Souls is a bad idea. The former should only be able to target minions, and the latter needs at least a 1-mana nerf short of a rework. They also missed the mark on Il'gynoth decks. Mo'arg Artificer needs to have its effect not stack, similar to how "your Battlecries trigger twice" text on cards doesn't stack. I see no difference or contradiction in Artificer's text functioning the same way (damage is restricted to doubling, not multiplying).
Aimed shot should read, "Deal 3 damage to a minion." I would reduce Pack Runner to a 2/2 and otherwise keep it the same.
Edit: Ok, Manifest is literally Discover while Invoke was specifically Celestial cards. It was super confusing since the exemplar card included a Celestial pick as one of the Manifest options.
I'm actually completely confused as to what the difference is.
No one wants tradeable cards. I'm so tired of these games replicating IRL CCG scarcity into the gameplay experience. I don't care if I ever open a pack again. The game is most fun when you have the most cards to play with, and the most contexts/modes to play them in. There are so many ways to get the gameplay to drive daily participation without making people chase packs. I know this was under the "Dreamland" section and will never happen, but uh, dream better man.
Directly messing with Standard ladder, even for a limited time, is a terrible idea. People have been asking for a tournament mode forever, and then I finally started playing Runeterra a couple weeks ago, and Gauntlets are exactly what Hearthstone needs. You could argue that it's similar to ranked, but it's a very different experience. Basically pick three decks, you and your opponent ban one, and then first to win with their remaining two decks advances to another match sort of like Arena. The more you win, the more XP you get, and some of them can even qualify you for official tournaments. Hearthstone is such an amazing game engine, but I feel like they're really behind the curve on what they could be doing with it. I know LoR gameplay isn't for everyone (I usually prefer Hearthstone), but their game client, game modes, rewards, and cosmetics are superior. What Team 5 should do is mess with Wild ladder. Rotate the legal Wild card pool every two months. It doesn't need to be every card every printed all at the same time. They could balance the mode without changing individual cards. Simply don't allow certain combos depending on the rotation.
I've been playing for the last 2+ weeks and taking a break from Hearthstone. There are things I love about the mechanics, but I still have a hard time judging cards. It seems like a strong early game wins the day no matter what style of deck you're playing. Early chip damage easily puts your opponent in lethal range for those explosive turns when a Champion levels up. I can't imagine including any unit that costs more than 6. Aggro rules the day I suppose, but it's been a nice change of pace from QuestStone.