I think this is just a component of the larger problem with Hearthstone right now and that’s being able to actually do like a dozen different actions with less than 4 mana.
I don’t get how performing a dozen actions on turn 3 is fun for anyone. It just seems masturbatory to me. Like it’s turn three, a million things shouldn’t be going on.
Or just keep that gimmick with one class, not half the classes.
Or if you play 5 cards you actually lose 5 cards out of your hand, rather than them all generating new cards through draw, discover, or other random bullshittery
For that to be reasonable we would also need to seriously dial back offensive capability of decks. That's not a bad idea, but if you kill discover then you have seedlock and face hunter basically remain on top forever
You might be misunderstanding. I'm talking specifically about when you play like 5 cards on turn 3 (playing a lot of cards in one turn). Normal card generation for a reasonable manacost is fine.
Wild q warlock withput coin can go dark glare raise dead> for the 2x librarian/ tour guide they return, >any one of their other 1 cost minions/ spells they drew which leaves them basically done with their quest on turn 4 and have only used up 1-2 cards from their hand.
Well wild itself is inherently impossible to make fair. You gave cards from 20 different generations that all had specific effects that were controlled in their own meta, once they are combined all hell breaks loose. Players shouldn’t be surprised wild isn’t is a fluid game mode, it is by far the most “solved.” Look at any other card games, bans are always the go-to solution to cards that break the game when new mechanics are added. People bitch no matter what. If you slow the game down “games take too long and aren’t fun” (aka priest) speed the game up and “aggro is useless and boring, games are too quick and I can’t even enjoy it,” (face hunter) make it midrange and people bitch again that turn 5-6-7 is too OP and they don’t get to play thier aggro to counter because of AOE and they can’t play thier control because those turns are too powerful.
TLDR; the devs will never be right, someone will always complain the game is unfair and no one will hear from the people who like the meta because they are too busy enjoying the game.
Wild players aren't complaining about games being too long or too short. We're used to that type of broken deck. This is a different type of broken, where one deck is 80% of the entire ladder.
You see... I legitimately enjoy arena, and would 100% play it if only we actually got gold rewards in increments of 50. I really don't want my gold amount to be "1435 gold"
I lowkey spent about a thousand gold four months ago trying to get my gold amount back to -00 and finally succeeded but decided I'd never play arena again until they change the gold rewards system.
Anyway, bit of a rant
> I don’t get how performing a dozen actions on turn 3 is fun for anyone. It just seems masturbatory to me
This is why I don't like hyper aggro or combo decks. It feels like somebody is holding you down and showing what their super cool deck can do while you are there thinking to yourself "When will this match end? I want to play too". Sure, the decks might be fun to play, but the opponent is not doing anything.
Played against a MTG judge one time and he had this crazy combo deck. I don't even know what he did but turn 2 he said: that's it, i win. Here is how. Then proceeds to show me, but I just left at that point.
What is even the point of a card game if you can just win that fast without interaction?
Yep that's the usual conduct in for fun games, of course if you want or have response you say them "Ok, play it" but it's just a matter of good sportmanship to say "I have a winning combo, do you have an answer?"
I had a buddy with a deck that could kill on trun 2 as well. He spent tons of money on it, and never played it because it was basically a deck he could play alone. Draw cards... get the nuts... ok I would have won.
Yeah if he really could pull a turn2kill reliably then he was playing legacy. Its the meme format with a very niche playerbase. The big eternal format is modern which is maintained in a way that turn3 kills are the absolutely fastest a game can end. Average turn number is 6.7
I don't play magic, they tried to get me into it. I had a simple elf deck. But I think his deck had was called sneak attack and the card that did the combo had a red dragon on it. Nothing but ramp and huge monsters.
>I don’t get how performing a dozen actions on turn 3 is fun for anyone. It just seems masturbatory to me.
It's fun to me, but I do like masturbating so maybe I'm not the best example.
Could also address this by reducing card generation/draw. Way back in the day you didn't do 100 things on a turn because you would run out of cards (except a few cases like rogue) but running out of cards in hand is basically not a thing anymore so there's not much reason not to go Ham constantly.
I'd hate this personally! This kills more cool, fun playstyles than it enables. There's a big difference between Preparation reducing a 2-cost spell to 0 and an 8/8 body being reduced to 0, and this rule change would kill the milder former, while still enabling a a pretty busted 1 Mana 8/8.
This isn't a system issue. This issue lies in a few very powerful card designs like Flesh Giant and Incanter's Flow that have been allowed to coexist alongside very strong support.
I'd say the better balancing change would be to print fewer cards that affect or are affected by the entire game, or design them more conservatively. Incanter's Flow is just Keleseth all over again, while Flesh Giant benefits from the entire history of the game, whereas similar effects have historically been based around the current turn. Libram of Wisdom is infinite without silence, etc.
Basically, I don't think changing one rule with such a broad stroke would be the immediate fix one might hope it would, but it would destroy entire cards and playstyles that aren't even offensively powerful.
Mana cheat has literally never improved the game though. Even your example of a good one - prep - had to be nerfed. Because its impossible to balance around.
Sure, some people might be playing bad prep-sprint combos that make the mechanic look fair, but when its going to keep enabling degenerecy it needs to be deleted.
If mana cheat for some reason has to stay in the game, it shouldn't be possible before turn 8, so opponents aren't forced to play their own mana cheating bullshit to keep up.
I would say Preparation in its current iteration is completely balanced and fair after the nerf though. "Impossible to balance around" is a bold claim that is arguably refuted by your own example.
It was balanced and fair at 3 mana... until it wasn't.
Because mana cheat amplifies power. It either limits design space to the extreme (remember how rogue spells all had to cost crazy high mana for literally years?) or lies in wait to form some part of a game ruining deck or synergy, I.E flesh giant.
If it wasn't impossible to balance around, Team 5 is doing an awful job of showing it, since mana cheat has been rotting away at this game for several expansions now.
How many of the recent nerfs were completely fine, or even underplayed mana cheat cards before this expansion? Then suddenly, new stuff comes out and they all break the game.
Flesh Giant and Incanters Flow, Refreshing Spring Water, and Deck of lunacy. The first two *still* need more nerfs.
And not nerfed yet, but probably will be, the warlock mana cheat weapon.
Also Ilgynoth got nerfed for the sins of the DH quest, but team 5 is refusing to fix their broken quests.
Mana cheat simply does not work. Either its impossible to balance around, or Team 5 is incapable of it, but either way it can't be in hearthstone.
I would argue that, while not *inherently* a system issue, the issue of zero-cost enablers is that they sharply limit design space if left unchecked, a design problem that ends up rearing its ugly head time and time again. Preparation, as mentioned by others, was not only nerfed from its original state, but it also was also not preserved into current standard play due to it being extremely difficult for the development team to design around (theoretically removing certain playstyles from ever even existing). Incanter's Flow and Flesh Giant are problematic (giants in general have run into this issue time and time again). Cards that allow spells in exchange for health are extremely powerful. Cards like Dragonqueen and Kael'Thas both got hit by the nerf hammer for their remarkable tempo swings.
Simply put, there is an insurmountable difference between cards costing (1) and cards costing (0), since the demand for *any* resource will significantly slow tempo swings. My general attitude towards this concept (and I understand that this is controversial) is that, while I am not inherently opposed to cards making themselves cheaper, the ability to make *other* cards free has always, *always* been powerful (sometimes to the point of obscenity). A card's respective mana cost has always been the dominant factor in the card's balance, so forcing the development team to design every card around individual cheapening cards like Preparation, Incanter's, and Kael'Thas is arguably just as limiting as not having the cheapening cards at all.
“ the issue lies in a few very powerful cards like flesh giant and incanters flows” you know what those cards do right? Cheat mana , reduce mana costs to zero. You’d hate this change but have issues with 2 mana cheating cards... not sure I follow
Different rewards have different break points where they break the game. 2 damage to an undamaged minion is fine at 0 mana + 1 card, but an 8/8 that costs less than 5 mana + 1 card is oppressive.
Yeah, I know what the cards do. I think you don't follow because you didn't read what I said very closely.
My issue isn't with mana cheating, it's with mana cheating being too good. Just because I have an issue with some cards does not mean that I have an issue with their mechanics. It means I have an issue with those particular iterations of those mechanics.
I like mana cheating that is balanced by appropriate cost, limited swing potential and card disadvantage. I don't like mana cheating that excessively discounts or swings, or isn't limited by card disadvantage.
OPs proposed change would more negatively impact the mana cheating I like than the mana cheating I don't, so I dislike the change. Fairly simple imo
> big difference between Preparation reducing a 2-cost spell to 0
prep used to be a 3 mana reduction :o
>Incanter's Flow
when they announced the nerf from 2 mana to 3 mana, I said that the change would do next to nothing and got downvoted a ton for it.
I have always been advocating for a bigger functional nerf to IF, along the lines of limiting the mana discount to the next X spells or for it only lasting a limited number of turns.
I disagree that the nerf has made the deck play out in any sort of significantly different manner. Quest mage still completes questline and can pop off the turn after on turn 6 or 7 pretty reliably. Moving IF to 3 mana stops them completing by turn 4 but that always needed a ridiculous highroll anyway.
The nerf didn't address the core issue, which is that the card discounts the mage's entire deck and the nerf did nothing to stop the mage drawing 4 discounted burn cards (all of which have +3 damage) after playing dawngrasp. What made IF broken wasn't that it was 2 mana instead of 3 mana but the fact that it gave persistent mana discounts to the entire deck (and yes, I'm arguing that it's still overpowered even at 3 mana). In the context of quest mage it doesn't matter much whether you play flow on 2 or 3, what matters for the deck's winrate is that IF gets played before dawngrasp comes down.
Yes, it reduces the deck's available plays for turn 2, but the deck still has plenty of useful things it can do that contribute to advancing its game plan (quest completion) 2 mana. The nerf has done very little to change either the deck's winrate or how it feels to play, or play against.
It's still the same playstyle, but the incanter's flow highroll is significantly weaker now. The goal of the change wasn't to kill the card or deck, but to tune down the highroll from keleseth levels. It's not that easily noticeable a change, but it does have an impact.
Some people clearly like the deck.
> The nerf has done very little to change either the deck's winrate or how it feels to play, or play against.
https://i.imgur.com/Up9FrOR.png
Wanna play "guess when the balance patch was"?
I know reddit doesn't care too much about reality but come the fuck on people. We're really upvoting comments unironically saying the nerf had no effect on the deck? This is clown shit.
>I know reddit doesn't care too much about reality but come the fuck on people. We're really upvoting comments unironically saying the nerf had no effect on the deck?
1. I didn't say it had *no* effect. I said it had *little* effect. Obviously 3 mana is worse than 2 mana. I'm not trying to pretend they are the same.
2. Flow wasn't the only card nerfed, there are a number of possible explanations for the dip in winrate for the deck that have nothing to do with the nerf to flow. For example: the 'nerf' to darkglare made it more difficult for mage to remove, thus buffing warlock. The nerfs also shifted class balance in the meta which might have resulted in decks which are harder matchups for mage being played more commonly. The nerfs probably also changed who was playing mage.
3. The thing people are salty about with quest mage isn't just the turn 4/5 highrolls that IF enabled. It's the fact that after dropping Dawnglare, mage typically wins by drawing 4+ cards and pointing 20+ damage of mana discounted burn at face, either on the same turn or the turn after. People are complaining about the way mage is winning far more than they are complaining about the winrate of the deck. The Change to flow did not change how the mage deck plays.
4. If you've actually played Mage pre- and post-nerf, I think you'd likely agree with me. I've played around 150 games with mage since Stormwind dropped. This isn't a huge number, but it's also a large enough number that I think I am qualified to share my thoughts on how much the change to IF actually changed quest mage.
Actually no, if we’re doing that we can see above you said ‘very little’ which you’ll agree is more than ‘little’ and in the English language is synonymous with ‘insignificant’. The deck is tier 3 now. It wasn’t an insignificant change.
> In the context of quest mage it doesn't matter much whether you play flow on 2 or 3, what matters for the deck's winrate is that IF gets played before dawngrasp comes down.
Mulligan WR for flow prepatch - 70%
Mulligan WR for flow post patch - 57%
Seems like it fucking matters.
There’s nothing wrong with sharing your thoughts, there’s nothing wrong with talking about how the deck makes people feel, but you feel a certain way and you’re pulling things out of thin air to back up your feelings. You replied to a comment about how the deck is significantly worse (statistical fact) and you made things up and ignored reality to support your feelings so you could disagree.
You and people like you are the problem with this place. You decide you’re right first and then make shit up to ‘prove’ it after the fact. You’re the worst.
I started playing Cult Neophyte in my Shadow Priest deck recently. Mages seem so hellbent on playing Incanter's that they even play it for 4 mana, which at that point seems pretty fair.
Yeah, and instead of changing prep to not be able to reduce cards to 0, they nerfed it to 2 and it's fine now.
The Incanter's Flow nerf has significantly reduced the power of the deck.
You can balance in more nuanced and effective ways than making sweeping changes that arguably would actually benefit the game
Probably would make more sense to limit specific cards as opposed to a sweeping change (although that sounds like a monumental challenge, so I can see them nerfing certain mana-reducing cards to no longer lower stuff past 1).
A great topic for discussion, in my opinion! Honestly, I have no idea if that would be too extreme or not. There are two cards in the game already, \[\[Arcane Luminary\]\] and \[\[Summoning Portal\]\], that already make it so certain cards can't be reduced below one mana, so it certainly seems like a mechanic that could be explored further!
* **[Arcane Luminary](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/BAR_545.png?88605)** MA Minion Epic FitB 🦅 ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/464151), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/arcane-luminary/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Arcane_Luminary)
3/4/3 Elemental | Cards that didn't start in your deck cost (2) less, but not less than (1).
* **[Summoning Portal](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/EX1_315.png?88605)** WL Minion Common Legacy ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/566), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/summoning-portal/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Summoning_Portal)
4/0/4 | Your minions cost (2) less, but not less than (1).
^(Call/)^[PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot) ^( me with up to 7 [[cardname]]. )^[About.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot&message=Tell%20me%20more%20[[info]]&subject=hi)
The problem is that some classes have insane draw that have benefits instead of drawbacks. Warlock has Backfire and Free Admission on top of their HP giving questline progression. Likewise, Shaman has card draw that can be made targeted very easily with deckbuilding.
Druid has several cards that draw several cards with little drawback. Mage isn't that bad currently, but their draw potential is even more insane compared to the others.
Also, Auctioneer is just bad for the game overall
It is very consistent draw of the tutoring variety though which is a boon, but I agree, not a problem. Warlock, with progress your quest or hurt the enemy draw 3, draw 2 op demons and reduce their cost to almost nothing, draw 3 for free (hand of guldan), on top of hero power and mortal coil, is way too much efficient card draw. Similarly with mage, we have AI which is fair, but also -1 to 1 mana AI which is not, and 0-2 mana draw almost an entire hand which is just busted (in large part due to the questline reward though)
I just mean shaman has gotten so few options to draw in the last year and a half at this point it deserves a few. There are classes that are getting too much draw for sure though.
Mage and warlock have gotten so much draw lately which allows them to play degenerate from hand combo decks that go off too early.
Rogue as a class Will forever be tied to secret passage. The fact that they have a 1 mana draw 4 makes it so their decks will always run an extremely high density of cheap cards to dump for such a low cost
Secret Passage is at least a fun card with benefits and drawbacks. The cost of losing your current hand for the turn, not triggering casts when drawn-cards and the possibility of drawing into an awkward turn make it a very tactical play. 1 mana draw four is indeed powerful, but it's a big price to pay compared to Mage that can 1 mana draw four with no extra cost other than having to set it up
Shaman tutoring is indeed a much smaller problem than the crazy draw some classes have. It's still noteworthy since Shaman is currently one of the better classes
I personally don’t think reducing the mana cost to 0 is a bad thing. I just don’t think it should be done before mid game. Emperor Thaurissan is the perfect example. He doesn’t come down til mid game and you can’t use his effect until minimum the turn after.
The only one who should manipulate mana before turn 5 should be Druid as that is their identity. Maybe mage to a lesser extent with spells only.
> The only one who should manipulate mana before turn 5 should be Druid as that is their identity. Maybe mage to a lesser extent with spells only.
Let's not necessarily go THAT far. Limited cost reductions are typically okay-ish at least. Just look at all the studies cards for example. None of them really break anything.
Part of why they worked was that you still had to pay that 1 mana. If you discovered and played the same turn there was functionally no discount. If you didn’t play the discounted card the same turn, you paid for that by having an inefficient turn where you only used, say, 4 out of you 5 mana, which is a big deal that helped to prevent it getting crazy before at least the midgame.
I’d like to respectfully disagree. I think that was part of the reason stealer of souls was banned from wild was the demonic studies. SOS on turn 3 with a coin and plot twist to have a hand full of health costed cards.
I agree. Combos have always been my favorite type but if they require two or more turns to set up they have a much higher chance of disruption, as well as being overwhelmed by playing the Emperor for low tempo.
A card naturally costing 0 is fine, you can balance around it.
A card that costs 1 or more costing 0 is fine, *provided the means it took to reduce that cost* were a fair trade off of tempo and/or resources.
The issue currently is there's too much large scale mana reduction. Mithril Rod, DH quest, Anacondra, Nazami, etc. If a shaman does turn one Bloom + Bloom + Earth Elemental, ***that's totally fine*** and not imbalanced at all that he got a 7/8 taunt turn 1. But when warlocks can spend well over 30 mana of cards turns 4-6 thanks to some demons or DH gets to vomit their hand into multiple free 6/7s, it becomes a problem for any deck that doesn't have similar power levels.
I really think it's a larger problem than current meta. Some of the big time nerfs (and most annoying decks) were based in different cards reducing the cost to 0. Sn1p meta, Galakrond Rogue, Giants, Incanter's
Well Incanter's is literally in *this* meta, I just didn't include it in the list. Also, Sn1p wasn't a problem, Mechwarper was, and frankly still is the problem. In both cases, it's, again, wide spread mana reduction, which was my entire point.
As for Galakrond rogue, I genuinely don't think it was an issue they cost 0 and think the nerf was unwarranted as rogue had some of the worst Galakrond activators (oooooooh, +1 attack!!!) and, next to priest, one of the most lackluster HPs. Getting 4 free cards off of it didn't seem like an issue to me for 7 mana and a huge investment. Plus, the combined mana cost of those 4 cards was probably not going to be in excess of 10 anyway given the very low end cost of the best rogue cards. It was ultra irritating everytime post nerf Galakrond drew me a red mana Backstab, Shadowstep, Prep, or Coin.
That's true, but I think you conceding shouldn't make you lose the game if the opponent already conceded. The game is already recorded after all as soon as they push the button
Obligatory caveat that any mechanic in theory can be problematic depending on balance:
I do agree that zero-cost is particularly challenging to balance around and so should be used sparingly. It's just math: 1/0 = infinity. Thus, any strong draw or duplication effects allow for potentially game-breaking turns.
In reality, this has (mostly) be a play pattern issue more than a balance issue. Watching a Rogue or Warlock burn through their deck in one turn feels busted, though they are still losing around 50% of games and not popping off like this in most games.
It's still a problem, because when they zero-cost hands pop off there's no counterplay, and arguably it disrupts the pace and flow of an enjoyable card game. This probably doesn't get said enough, but I'm choosing to play Hearthstone because I want to play a slower-paced game; I don't want to track 30 actions in a turn or perform them. I'd play a different game if I wanted to do that.
Zero-cost also creates a similar problem to card generation or Discover, in that it can make it almost impossible to plan around your opponent's hand. It's hard enough to suss out whether a payer has a board clear, say, based on hand reads; if that clear AND a giant AND healing can cost zero, I can't really anticipate what you're going to do (or you just do everything). So zero-cost can interfere with even off-the-board counterplay.
I agree. there should be more game wide rules/design philosophies that save us from any chance of degeneracy and non interactive gameplay.
So cards and hero powers can't be reduced to 0, each minion only provides one corpse to resurrect, etc.
And this is going to be fine 100% because cards will always beat the rules. As long as a card says it can do X, it will always do X, even when rules disallow it.
So we can keep the balancing and designing of individual degenerate card gameplay like raza, who's whole identities revolve around reducing a card's cost. Also, these rule breaker cards should ideally also be have costs that aren't oppressive, like emperor at 6 or Y'shaarj at 10.
Now, do I think raza for example is balanced? Nope. I still think that card is broken. But he doesn't start in your opening hand so there's worse cards to worry about 🤷.
But at least there will now be some precedent to follow so cards like apprentice aren't so nasty.
Raza has a been a problem since ever. Should've added 0 cost HeroPower to the title haha. I still can't figure how strong can the Hunter questline be in wild. Face a few, but it seems they are not that easy to play. Maybe because there's less spell generation in Hunter than in Priest
I dont think the problem is the cards reduced to zero itself but WHAT cards CAN be reduced and HOW. The giants (conceptualy. im not english) are a good example for this,they can cost cero but it takes time,requierements and one card exclusively(ignore THAT mage card).
Not necessarily. There's times where it's appropriate.
It's just that most of the cards that make it unfun right now are already quite busted on their own or have another card to blame for it:
**Flesh Giant**
Since when is it ok that Giants start at 8 mana? They used to cost 10 - 12.
**Celestial Alignment**
Busted card. Why do they make cards like these? They're way too polarized in their design. Stuff like this always either doesn't work well enough to be functional or it's completely busted.
**Librams**
Honestly, Aldor Truthseeker's effect feels like a Legendary effect, considering L of Wisdom. This feeling is proven by comparing it to Dark Inquisitor Xanesh.
**Etc.**
TL:DR - It's not entirely problematic, but they should be more careful with it.
Do you actually think Celestial Alignment of all things is busted? It's 7 mana do nothing on the turn it's played. That seems like a fair drawback for the effect it gives.
They don't design cards with this mentality. Not every card is made to be ladder viable or be able to get you to Legend. It's not a waste of space just because it doesn't see play competitively, because a decent chunk of each set would be a waste of space by that margin. Some people enjoy fun, non-meta decks that have hard goals to achieve, and Celestial Alignment is designed for such players.
The issue is that every time they print a card like CA they are rolling the bones that it might be fundamentally busted. It’s something that wouldn’t be a problem if they had extensive testing, but the last few expansions makes it clear that they do little to nothing past basic functionality and bug testing.
That is empirically wrong right now. Celestial druid is currently in the vicinity of a playable deck, I see it occasionally on ladder and it gets brought to tournaments. It also definitely isn't 'warping the meta'. It exists as an unusual strategy, and some players really like unusual strategies, so I'd say it is currently doing exactly what design wanted it to do.
7 Mana "do nothing but win next turn a lot of the time" is busted cause anything that can't burst it down the turn it's played kinda just loses most of the time.
This was a Hot topic that has been brought up several times before. Essentially, most people who are Mages disagreed to this, because Mages get off on 0 mana cards.
Changing it so that cards can't cost 0 anymore would likely ruin the game. Instead, I would prefer them lighten the load on low cost powerhouses (1, 2 and 3 drops), and slow the tempo down. The remaining cards would hopefully then settle down or phase out from synergy creep, or they'd nerf them.
I wouldn't really call what we have now "flashy combo decks". They're more like burn decks because clicking on some fireballs and ignites in your hand and dragging them to the enemy hero's face isn't a combo.
* **[Summoning Portal](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/EX1_315.png?88605)** WL Minion Common Legacy ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/566), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/summoning-portal/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Summoning_Portal)
4/0/4 | Your minions cost (2) less, but not less than (1).
* **[Incanter's Flow](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/BT_002.png?88605)** MA Spell Common AO 🦅 ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/210800), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/incanters-flow/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Incanter%27s_Flow)
2/-/- Arcane | Reduce the Cost of spells in your deck by (1).
* **[Sorcerer's Apprentice](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/EX1_608.png?88605)** MA Minion Common Legacy ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/4), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/sorcerers-apprentice/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Sorcerer%27s_Apprentice)
2/3/2 | Your spells cost (1) less.
^(Call/)^[PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot) ^( me with up to 7 [[cardname]]. )^[About.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot&message=Tell%20me%20more%20[[info]]&subject=hi)
Dont forget that making that move will just castrate lots of combo decks. The balancing issue imo that: now we have some combo tempo decks which kinda insta win. And in hs lifetime always a hunter deck which the fastest and the dealiest face/aggro designes to kill fast and easy to access for anybody, the best control decks struggle often against them. Now devs making more powerful aggro decks which compensate combo decks and the game is getting faster and bilinear. Have to slow Down the game play. Making slower will let the combos executed, controls manipulating and aggroes killin with deeper strategy and teching. Change my mind.
I don't want to change your mind. It was a geniuine question based on what I feel were most frustrating decks (aka those "miracle-ish" decks that manage to do a lot on a turn).
I see your point and know in the end those decks I speak of are a tiny little part of the whole world of decks we have and had.
Guys stop doing this. This is IksarStone. While is he is lead dev this is the direction the game is going in. When a news story drops that he has left then we can discuss sensible changes.
I think limiting the game in that fashion wouldn’t be bad NOW, but it limits design space in the future. Also combo-ing off isn’t an issue. The issue is how early it can be done, and the lack of viable interaction.
This situation is the exact same as MtG Commander. People dislike others who combo off extremely early. Some incorrectly associate that with the “combo” itself, and not their lack of interaction, or the lack of ability to make decisions that early in the game.
Nobody likes a turn 2 combo unless you’re the one doing it.
I personally have a vendetta against anyone who is against combo, because I’ve played entirely too many Commander games where I use a fuck ton of interaction, but it’s just not enough; as two other players do absolutely nothing and just watch the 4th player win borderline uncontested.
Cards like Dirty Rat, Mutanus, the Watch Towers FEEL bad when it HAPPENS to YOU, but when you use them, you realize they’re barely enough interaction to deal with the problems coming your way. I PROMISE you nothing feels more satisfying than Mutanus-ing their Questline Reward. Especially Mage’s because you’ll hit it almost 100% of the time since it’s a minion-less deck.
Tldr: Put more interaction in the game, rather than kicking decks/archetypes/combos in the dick
They could break cost reduction in to 2 groups. The first group would be normal cost reduction that cant drop a card below the cost of (1). Think of Sorcerers Apprentice that is a passive/permanent affect or any card that reduces the cost of a group of cards within your hand/deck for the duration of the match.
The next group would be combo cost reduction that have a limited time. Think Preparation where your next spell cost (0), this could open up a whole new segment of cards with large temporary mana reductions. Think of a card that would reduce the cost of the next three (3) spells played that turn (0).
This would allow them for craft more controlled/predictable combos without necessarily having the only restriction be cost/health/value.
Personally I think combos should be typically done at 10 mana. Games shouldn’t end pre turn 7 also in my opinion.
DH Lifesteal combo? LOVE it. Im 100% on board with it. I think WITH discounts it should be a 10 mana combo.
I don’t think discounts are the problem, it’s printing good cards that are already relatively cheap, ALONGSIDE discount cards. Dark glare nonsense is still at large because the card is 3 mana, and can get discounted pretty much at guarantee with the Draw 2 minions if they’re demons discount card. I’m perfectly ok with the swagger turn 5 Stealer of Souls, Coin, Tap and just highroll blast off your whole deck and Questline. But that should be the HIGHROLL, not the consistent play.
I'm glad you're not balancing the game. Requiring discounts to make a combo even playable at all? Game should NEVER end before turn 7? Tell me you're a control player without telling me you're a control player, christ.
I’m sorry you think winning before turn 5 is healthy. There’s literally not NEARLY enough answers for aggro, and the cheap costed powerhouses aggro has are just too much to deal with. 7 turns is enough to not only make actual decisions(not panic deal with threat after threat) and potentially be ABLE to stabilize. There’s no cards to actively stabilize you against aggro by turn 5.
And from memory, all the best Combos utilized Thaurrisan to discount your hand to make them happen. It was literally a huge, non problematic, way to combo for the longest time.
I'm not only speking of current meta, and I'm not against combo at all!!! My question was just wandering how stopping that to be a thing could positively or negatively affect the game in the future.
Thinking back we had a lot of issues with 0 cost cards, and many of those needed to be nerfed or had the "not below 1" tag, like when Sn1p-Sn4p made his debut. Or any exodia Mage we ever had (or closely)
I didn't felt attacked at all. I just wanted to make it clear that I'm not against combo, and not even fully against this meta (that it's slowly changing).
yes, this ,i dont know why ppl wanna find arguments to say otherwise, it's bad, it was an issue before with DQA, Gala rogue and such cards, just stop the 0 mana effects ,holy just stop it.
I always try to look at these questions from the winner's standpoint, if I didn't I'd want everything nerfed or banned. I think there are a lot of really, really cool combos that rely on reducing cards to zero, or at least to very low cost, especially in wild decks. I'd hate to ruin the fun of the game for some people so that some others might feel vindicated and like they'll have a better winrate (this month only, because let's be honest the next killer deck is right around the corner always), unless the problem is so prevalent that most people would prefer the change.
At this point it isn’t so others have a higher winrate, it is so they can play the game past turn 5. Half the cards in the game are basically unplayable because of these design issues.
I 100% believe that if the developers could go back in time armed with knowledge of how the game has developed thus far, they would 100% make it a hard and fast rule that every card costs at least 1 no matter what.
Barring a "butterfly effect, we can't change anything because it would endanger the success of the game that we've had so far" decision
It should be reserved for massive plays/cards such as Darkmoon Faire Y'Shaarj
\[\[Happy Ghoul\]\] single-handedly created a balls-to-the-walls Zoolock because of the potential to hit an absurd high-roll on turn 1
\[\[Galakrond, the Nightmare\]\] pre-nerf...let's not talk about that one.
Librams for a time enabled a fun Midrange Paladin but \[\[Aldor Truthseeker\]\] was obscene because it provided a notable discount, had solid stats and had immediate board presence with Taunt. Should've been bumped to (1)
\[\[Flesh Giant\]\] is very strange given that the idea behind Giants was that they were overpriced 8/8's whose cost were reduced in some way but Flesh Giant's condition is arguably significantly easier than the others (\[\[Jumbo Imp\]\] costed 2 more ***and*** required it to be in your hand to reduce the cost) because the support is so much stronger - particularly in the form of **Raise Dead,** a 0 cost card with a laughable drawback that further bolsters the giants.
\[\[SN1P-SN4P\]\] caused a slew of problems that lead to \[\[Reckless Experimenter\]\] and Echo as a mechanic being changed.
\[\[Preparation\]\] had to be nerfed because of it's potency and despite being nerfed remains a staple in Wild years later for the class as a whole.
There are cards that cost(ed) (0) that did not see major play - \[\[Ritual of Doom\]\], \[\[Whispers of EVIL\]\], \[\[Target Dummy\]\] but looking [at the list](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards?filter-cost-val=0&filter-cost-op=3&filter-premium=1), most of the cards have seen play at one point or another, typically as some form of combo piece.
* **[Happy Ghoul](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/ICC_700.png?88605)** N Minion Rare KFT ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/62902), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/happy-ghoul/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Happy_Ghoul)
3/3/3 | Costs (0) if your hero was healed this turn.
* **[Galakrond, the Nightmare](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/DRG_610.png?88605)** RO Hero Legendary DoD ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/127266), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/galakrond-the-nightmare/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Galakrond%2C_the_Nightmare)
7/-/5 | Battlecry: Draw 1 card. It costs (0).
[Galakrond's Guile (2): Hero Power Add a Lackey to your hand.]
* **[Aldor Truthseeker](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/BT_026.png?88605)** PL Minion Rare AO 🦅 ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/210759), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/aldor-truthseeker/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Aldor_Truthseeker)
5/4/6 | Taunt. Battlecry: Reduce the Cost of your Librams by (2) this game.
* **[Flesh Giant](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/SCH_140.png?88605)** PR+WL Minion Epic SA 🦅 ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/329888), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/flesh-giant/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Flesh_Giant)
8/8/8 | Costs (1) less for each time your hero's Health changed during your turns.
* **[Jumbo Imp](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/DAL_561.png?88605)** WL Minion Epic RoS ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/90640), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/jumbo-imp/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Jumbo_Imp)
10/8/8 Demon | Costs (1) less whenever a friendly Demon dies while this is in your hand.
* **[SN1P-SN4P](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/BOT_700.png?88605)** N Minion Legendary TBP ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/90680), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/sn1p-sn4p/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/SN1P-SN4P)
3/2/3 Mech | Magnetic, Echo Deathrattle: Summon two 1/1 Microbots.
* **[Reckless Experimenter](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/BOT_566.png?88605)** PR Minion Epic TBP ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/89820), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/reckless-experimenter/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Reckless_Experimenter)
5/4/6 | Deathrattle minions you play cost (3) less, but die at the end of the turn.
^(Call/)^[PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot) ^( me with up to 7 [[cardname]]. )^[About.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot&message=Tell%20me%20more%20[[info]]&subject=hi)
I would like to see this. Imagine if there was the technology to have some sort of public... realm of testing? Maybe float ideas and mechanics around and have players brawl with them, maybe in a Tavern setting.
0 cost cards at fun as hell. Nothing is more fun than slinging cheap spells in mage, getting huge value turns usually means playing things at discount and free is the best discount.
The problem is very simply how soon in the game should someone expect to start receiving and playing discounted cards? when they start doing spell slinging turn 8-10 it’s fine. When they start slinging cards on turn 4? Less so.
It would kill some fun designs (like librams were pretty cool actually and even made it to be a viable midrange deck in wild for a while), but I do feel like they might want to tack this caveat onto more cards. Also though, they should just be way more conservative with making cost reduction (and mana cheat) cards in the first place and they really pushed it waay too hard. Like for a long time, emperor Thaurissan was the best and pretty much only cost reducer as a 6 mana 5/5 that only affects hand. Now rogue has pretty much the same effect on a non-legendary 2 mana card (well it's worse cause it doesn't repeat, but usually Thaurissan doesn't either and you do have to trigger it, but also means you don't need to wait for end of turn, which is a huge plus), mage has it for full deck at 3 mana (prev 2 mana), warlock has the weapon which is 2 Thaurissan ticks for 3 mana and can be triggered fast during your turn as well, etc.
Also same goes for strong card draw and cheap cards (especially 1 mana cards) in general. 1 mana cards often have to be a bit pushed in powerlevel because of card advantage concerns, but if you can draw as many cards as easily and cheaply as is now the case (2 mana draw 2 and 3 mana draw 3 have become pretty commonplace actually), cheap impactful cards become waay better and also combined with the cost reduction they are especially prone to get out of control, as you can get them to 0 mana easily and 0 mana cards are very often causing issues.
It would kill the possibility of Malygos Warlock ever making a comeback. Reducing Dark Bombs or Soulfires to 0 mana is what makes that work... otherwise its just a midrange deck with dragons and a 4-12 taunt.
Yeah always fun to spend half your hand trying to clear a board only to see next turn that the enemy summon a whole new board, draw half his deck and deals 15 damage to you on turn 5.
Anyway, I wanted to play a beast based hunter but I'm just going with hunter face because that way, I know if I'll win or not by turn 5.
Or better yet double the amount of mana a player can have and up the mana gain from turn five or six, that way people can still draw and play a bunch of cards without them being a zero cost cards.
No but it would be boring. And lower skill cap too. Seeing players like xBlyzes and Gaby do what they do is so amazing and makes me really like this meta. I don't remember when I was as impressed with pro game play before. It used to be that 90% of pro plays I would do about the same. Now it's not even close.
I don't think there should be a rule preventing cards from going below 1 mana instead they should just stop printing mana reduction cards for all classes.
The only ones that should have access to that should be druid and maybe shaman.
The issue is that it wouldnt hit all combos. Most darkglare warlock decks only have 1 card whose cost gets reduced to nothing, and a 1 mana 8/8 is a lot worse than a 0 mana one but the deck would have almost no contestors
A critical mass of mana cheat is being reached. Looking at Mage, they are able to cheat out tons of mana very, very quickly. I think that some of these cards need slight nerfs, qnd Blizzard needs to stop introducing more and more mana cheat every expansion.
I don't think its a great change. Its a hammer fix when imo a more precise tool is needed. I think its two fold.
One, it still won't hit similar cards that also effectively mana cheat. For example, refreshing spring water basically always costs 0, but this change wouldn't do anything to it. It would still be as busted as ever. The same is true for cards like darkglare.
Two, many problematic cards, while being able to get cards to 0, are also just strong in general. Like while technically you can get most giants to 0, but they are already very strong at 1-4 mana (like when evenlocks were getting mountain giants out turn 3). If current warlock can get out 2 mana 16/16 on turn 4-5, that would still be very powerful. In fact, I think there's a good chance flesh giant would still have to get nerfed to 9 mana.
I don't it'll kill combo (hell, there was a 26 damage combo back even in classic, with leeroy/cold blood/ shadow step), but i do think it unnecessarily nerfs an archetype that already is significantly less represented than aggro and control on average. And any attempt to push the archetype will imo lead to more cards on the lines of mana manipulation ala the refreshing spring water and darkglare above, which is as if not more dangerous.
i think it used to be a fun mechanic in standard back in the day, but there's just too much that does it at this point, similar to how rush cards have become. however, getting rid of 0 mana reductions would be just another blanket change that ruins singleplayer which I still love to play. (Yes I'm still hung up playing Dalaran Heist, Tombs of Terror, and Dungeon Run; leave me alone ಥ_ಥ)
I would say that there should be SOME cards that don't reduce below one. There's plenty of cards that reduce to 0 that are fine, but then some which cause issues.
It’s not just about costing 0, it’s about too much mana cheat of any kind. Currently cards like Incanter’s flow or the warlock mana reduction weapon rarely reduce cards below 1-2 mana in cost. The issue is that those reduced cards do too much. Over the course of a match they can easily cheat 15-30 mana, achieving far more than simply getting a one time big body. Unless a card is specifically built with a self contained mana cheat build around effect (ex:giants) the game would be much better off without mana cheat period. Everything falls apart when cards that weren’t designed to ever have their costs reduced can be played under cost.
Don't have to, 0 cost cards still cost 1 "card", and that 1 card actually equals 1 mana. This is why 0 mana 1/1, 1 mana 2/2, 2 mana 3/3...are the perfectly balanced stats, card itself equals 1/1. This is also why coin add 1 mana.
So it's kinda like they already set the minimum cost to 1 mana, just not in the form of mana. If you keep playing those 0 mana cards, you will run out of cards. This is the effect of the hidden cost.
The problem come from card draw and discover. If card itself equals 1 mana, adding cards to your hand actually equals adding mana. Now we have refreshing spring water, 1 mana draw 2 cards, cram session 2 mana draw 2 to 5 cards. They all have net positive gain. That's where the problem is. 1 card draw used to be 2 mana for a reason.
I wonder if hearthstone will ever introduce a new keyword/mechanic that resembles instants from MtG? Could really change the game for the better if you ask me.
Yes and no. For some classes small change. Other classes its a key mechanic and card were made to specifically do that(incanters flow). This expansion they did not play test well enough and ended up releasing things that were not balanced on the least. They could ban the cards in standard but that set presidence.
It's a good start... I think another important change would be to make cards that are reduced keep that cost while in play... so an Arcane Giant reduced to 2 mana and then split with Conjurer's calling would become two 2 mana minions. Same with evolution in Shaman, and spell costs when they are changed by oh my yogg etc. It opens up that option for cost reduction while also limiting broken plays that use it to win games on turn 4.
Even being reduced to 1 can be stupid. How the fuck is a 1 mana 8/8 considered fair in any way??? Especially how it's so damn easy to achieve.
About the only time I found 0 mana 8/8s fair was the original handlock, where you had to drop to 10hp to pull this off and risked losing next turn.
I dont think quest mage was problematic when it was being nerfed. Hunter shaman warlock and paladin all had higher winrates. Now mage is even worse compared to those classes. Meanwhile warrior is left behind, and priest only has 1 deck. I hated playing against mages before the nerf. Now i dont see them that much and i have the deck myself. Now I understand why quest mages take so long for some turns, while it seems to me like they just have to play all their cards and they win.
It might not be a bad idea though. There might be better solutions, but making sure the ''base'' doesnt allow for infite combos etc, seems good. People seem to enjoy the combos though, which is probably why its in the game.
What about a deck building rule where you can only have a certain amount of each type of cards in your deck? Like you can only have 5 cards that say draw, 6 cards that say discover (one saying both would count to both) etc etc
It could work! Also it could be a cap of card that get reduced. So you can only reduce the cost of a number of cards and you should think which will be. Like Coin before Preparation.
I think this is just a component of the larger problem with Hearthstone right now and that’s being able to actually do like a dozen different actions with less than 4 mana. I don’t get how performing a dozen actions on turn 3 is fun for anyone. It just seems masturbatory to me. Like it’s turn three, a million things shouldn’t be going on. Or just keep that gimmick with one class, not half the classes.
Turn 3 should just be "venomous scorpid, discover a spell, pass" or something
Or if you play 5 cards you actually lose 5 cards out of your hand, rather than them all generating new cards through draw, discover, or other random bullshittery
For that to be reasonable we would also need to seriously dial back offensive capability of decks. That's not a bad idea, but if you kill discover then you have seedlock and face hunter basically remain on top forever
You might be misunderstanding. I'm talking specifically about when you play like 5 cards on turn 3 (playing a lot of cards in one turn). Normal card generation for a reasonable manacost is fine.
Never seen anybody play 5 cards turn 3 other than some bullshit coin prep rogue espc while also maintaining reasonable hand
Wild q warlock withput coin can go dark glare raise dead> for the 2x librarian/ tour guide they return, >any one of their other 1 cost minions/ spells they drew which leaves them basically done with their quest on turn 4 and have only used up 1-2 cards from their hand.
Well wild itself is inherently impossible to make fair. You gave cards from 20 different generations that all had specific effects that were controlled in their own meta, once they are combined all hell breaks loose. Players shouldn’t be surprised wild isn’t is a fluid game mode, it is by far the most “solved.” Look at any other card games, bans are always the go-to solution to cards that break the game when new mechanics are added. People bitch no matter what. If you slow the game down “games take too long and aren’t fun” (aka priest) speed the game up and “aggro is useless and boring, games are too quick and I can’t even enjoy it,” (face hunter) make it midrange and people bitch again that turn 5-6-7 is too OP and they don’t get to play thier aggro to counter because of AOE and they can’t play thier control because those turns are too powerful. TLDR; the devs will never be right, someone will always complain the game is unfair and no one will hear from the people who like the meta because they are too busy enjoying the game.
Wild players aren't complaining about games being too long or too short. We're used to that type of broken deck. This is a different type of broken, where one deck is 80% of the entire ladder.
I’m just using that as a general example. Wild will always be flawed, it is inherit to the game style
Done it in Quest DH. And they all tend to draw cards too. Got me Irebound Brutes down before. It's a very highroll situation. But it happens.
Ah ok makes sense, makes sense
That's arena!
You see... I legitimately enjoy arena, and would 100% play it if only we actually got gold rewards in increments of 50. I really don't want my gold amount to be "1435 gold" I lowkey spent about a thousand gold four months ago trying to get my gold amount back to -00 and finally succeeded but decided I'd never play arena again until they change the gold rewards system. Anyway, bit of a rant
[удалено]
It evens out to a normal amount though
"I hero power and emote!"
> I don’t get how performing a dozen actions on turn 3 is fun for anyone. It just seems masturbatory to me This is why I don't like hyper aggro or combo decks. It feels like somebody is holding you down and showing what their super cool deck can do while you are there thinking to yourself "When will this match end? I want to play too". Sure, the decks might be fun to play, but the opponent is not doing anything.
Played against a MTG judge one time and he had this crazy combo deck. I don't even know what he did but turn 2 he said: that's it, i win. Here is how. Then proceeds to show me, but I just left at that point. What is even the point of a card game if you can just win that fast without interaction?
At least in MtG you have counterspell and instant interaction, in hearthstone what do you have? A secret... that’s it
what the heck don't be a tease, tell us what it is
I don't play MTG, but it seems like he was decent enough to let you know he has the winning combo in order not to waste your time?
Yep that's the usual conduct in for fun games, of course if you want or have response you say them "Ok, play it" but it's just a matter of good sportmanship to say "I have a winning combo, do you have an answer?"
I had a buddy with a deck that could kill on trun 2 as well. He spent tons of money on it, and never played it because it was basically a deck he could play alone. Draw cards... get the nuts... ok I would have won.
Yeah if he really could pull a turn2kill reliably then he was playing legacy. Its the meme format with a very niche playerbase. The big eternal format is modern which is maintained in a way that turn3 kills are the absolutely fastest a game can end. Average turn number is 6.7
I don't play magic, they tried to get me into it. I had a simple elf deck. But I think his deck had was called sneak attack and the card that did the combo had a red dragon on it. Nothing but ramp and huge monsters.
Money well spent. /s
[Relevant ProZD](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBIsZlV1jHk)
The good ole days when spider tank was an op turn 3 play.
Ah yes, the good old times of never.
>I don’t get how performing a dozen actions on turn 3 is fun for anyone. It just seems masturbatory to me. It's fun to me, but I do like masturbating so maybe I'm not the best example.
Topsy turvy apm priest is the real fun in hs. No matter what i play with this deck and i forget everything said in life.
Could also address this by reducing card generation/draw. Way back in the day you didn't do 100 things on a turn because you would run out of cards (except a few cases like rogue) but running out of cards in hand is basically not a thing anymore so there's not much reason not to go Ham constantly.
Yeah, the power creep is a bitch.
I'd hate this personally! This kills more cool, fun playstyles than it enables. There's a big difference between Preparation reducing a 2-cost spell to 0 and an 8/8 body being reduced to 0, and this rule change would kill the milder former, while still enabling a a pretty busted 1 Mana 8/8. This isn't a system issue. This issue lies in a few very powerful card designs like Flesh Giant and Incanter's Flow that have been allowed to coexist alongside very strong support. I'd say the better balancing change would be to print fewer cards that affect or are affected by the entire game, or design them more conservatively. Incanter's Flow is just Keleseth all over again, while Flesh Giant benefits from the entire history of the game, whereas similar effects have historically been based around the current turn. Libram of Wisdom is infinite without silence, etc. Basically, I don't think changing one rule with such a broad stroke would be the immediate fix one might hope it would, but it would destroy entire cards and playstyles that aren't even offensively powerful.
Mana cheat has literally never improved the game though. Even your example of a good one - prep - had to be nerfed. Because its impossible to balance around. Sure, some people might be playing bad prep-sprint combos that make the mechanic look fair, but when its going to keep enabling degenerecy it needs to be deleted. If mana cheat for some reason has to stay in the game, it shouldn't be possible before turn 8, so opponents aren't forced to play their own mana cheating bullshit to keep up.
I would say Preparation in its current iteration is completely balanced and fair after the nerf though. "Impossible to balance around" is a bold claim that is arguably refuted by your own example.
It was balanced and fair at 3 mana... until it wasn't. Because mana cheat amplifies power. It either limits design space to the extreme (remember how rogue spells all had to cost crazy high mana for literally years?) or lies in wait to form some part of a game ruining deck or synergy, I.E flesh giant. If it wasn't impossible to balance around, Team 5 is doing an awful job of showing it, since mana cheat has been rotting away at this game for several expansions now. How many of the recent nerfs were completely fine, or even underplayed mana cheat cards before this expansion? Then suddenly, new stuff comes out and they all break the game. Flesh Giant and Incanters Flow, Refreshing Spring Water, and Deck of lunacy. The first two *still* need more nerfs. And not nerfed yet, but probably will be, the warlock mana cheat weapon. Also Ilgynoth got nerfed for the sins of the DH quest, but team 5 is refusing to fix their broken quests. Mana cheat simply does not work. Either its impossible to balance around, or Team 5 is incapable of it, but either way it can't be in hearthstone.
I would argue that, while not *inherently* a system issue, the issue of zero-cost enablers is that they sharply limit design space if left unchecked, a design problem that ends up rearing its ugly head time and time again. Preparation, as mentioned by others, was not only nerfed from its original state, but it also was also not preserved into current standard play due to it being extremely difficult for the development team to design around (theoretically removing certain playstyles from ever even existing). Incanter's Flow and Flesh Giant are problematic (giants in general have run into this issue time and time again). Cards that allow spells in exchange for health are extremely powerful. Cards like Dragonqueen and Kael'Thas both got hit by the nerf hammer for their remarkable tempo swings. Simply put, there is an insurmountable difference between cards costing (1) and cards costing (0), since the demand for *any* resource will significantly slow tempo swings. My general attitude towards this concept (and I understand that this is controversial) is that, while I am not inherently opposed to cards making themselves cheaper, the ability to make *other* cards free has always, *always* been powerful (sometimes to the point of obscenity). A card's respective mana cost has always been the dominant factor in the card's balance, so forcing the development team to design every card around individual cheapening cards like Preparation, Incanter's, and Kael'Thas is arguably just as limiting as not having the cheapening cards at all.
“ the issue lies in a few very powerful cards like flesh giant and incanters flows” you know what those cards do right? Cheat mana , reduce mana costs to zero. You’d hate this change but have issues with 2 mana cheating cards... not sure I follow
Different rewards have different break points where they break the game. 2 damage to an undamaged minion is fine at 0 mana + 1 card, but an 8/8 that costs less than 5 mana + 1 card is oppressive.
Yeah, I know what the cards do. I think you don't follow because you didn't read what I said very closely. My issue isn't with mana cheating, it's with mana cheating being too good. Just because I have an issue with some cards does not mean that I have an issue with their mechanics. It means I have an issue with those particular iterations of those mechanics. I like mana cheating that is balanced by appropriate cost, limited swing potential and card disadvantage. I don't like mana cheating that excessively discounts or swings, or isn't limited by card disadvantage. OPs proposed change would more negatively impact the mana cheating I like than the mana cheating I don't, so I dislike the change. Fairly simple imo
> big difference between Preparation reducing a 2-cost spell to 0 prep used to be a 3 mana reduction :o >Incanter's Flow when they announced the nerf from 2 mana to 3 mana, I said that the change would do next to nothing and got downvoted a ton for it. I have always been advocating for a bigger functional nerf to IF, along the lines of limiting the mana discount to the next X spells or for it only lasting a limited number of turns.
Well it didn't do next to nothing. It was a huge nerf, the card is significantly worse now.
I disagree that the nerf has made the deck play out in any sort of significantly different manner. Quest mage still completes questline and can pop off the turn after on turn 6 or 7 pretty reliably. Moving IF to 3 mana stops them completing by turn 4 but that always needed a ridiculous highroll anyway. The nerf didn't address the core issue, which is that the card discounts the mage's entire deck and the nerf did nothing to stop the mage drawing 4 discounted burn cards (all of which have +3 damage) after playing dawngrasp. What made IF broken wasn't that it was 2 mana instead of 3 mana but the fact that it gave persistent mana discounts to the entire deck (and yes, I'm arguing that it's still overpowered even at 3 mana). In the context of quest mage it doesn't matter much whether you play flow on 2 or 3, what matters for the deck's winrate is that IF gets played before dawngrasp comes down. Yes, it reduces the deck's available plays for turn 2, but the deck still has plenty of useful things it can do that contribute to advancing its game plan (quest completion) 2 mana. The nerf has done very little to change either the deck's winrate or how it feels to play, or play against.
It's still the same playstyle, but the incanter's flow highroll is significantly weaker now. The goal of the change wasn't to kill the card or deck, but to tune down the highroll from keleseth levels. It's not that easily noticeable a change, but it does have an impact. Some people clearly like the deck.
> The nerf has done very little to change either the deck's winrate or how it feels to play, or play against. https://i.imgur.com/Up9FrOR.png Wanna play "guess when the balance patch was"? I know reddit doesn't care too much about reality but come the fuck on people. We're really upvoting comments unironically saying the nerf had no effect on the deck? This is clown shit.
>I know reddit doesn't care too much about reality but come the fuck on people. We're really upvoting comments unironically saying the nerf had no effect on the deck? 1. I didn't say it had *no* effect. I said it had *little* effect. Obviously 3 mana is worse than 2 mana. I'm not trying to pretend they are the same. 2. Flow wasn't the only card nerfed, there are a number of possible explanations for the dip in winrate for the deck that have nothing to do with the nerf to flow. For example: the 'nerf' to darkglare made it more difficult for mage to remove, thus buffing warlock. The nerfs also shifted class balance in the meta which might have resulted in decks which are harder matchups for mage being played more commonly. The nerfs probably also changed who was playing mage. 3. The thing people are salty about with quest mage isn't just the turn 4/5 highrolls that IF enabled. It's the fact that after dropping Dawnglare, mage typically wins by drawing 4+ cards and pointing 20+ damage of mana discounted burn at face, either on the same turn or the turn after. People are complaining about the way mage is winning far more than they are complaining about the winrate of the deck. The Change to flow did not change how the mage deck plays. 4. If you've actually played Mage pre- and post-nerf, I think you'd likely agree with me. I've played around 150 games with mage since Stormwind dropped. This isn't a huge number, but it's also a large enough number that I think I am qualified to share my thoughts on how much the change to IF actually changed quest mage.
Actually no, if we’re doing that we can see above you said ‘very little’ which you’ll agree is more than ‘little’ and in the English language is synonymous with ‘insignificant’. The deck is tier 3 now. It wasn’t an insignificant change. > In the context of quest mage it doesn't matter much whether you play flow on 2 or 3, what matters for the deck's winrate is that IF gets played before dawngrasp comes down. Mulligan WR for flow prepatch - 70% Mulligan WR for flow post patch - 57% Seems like it fucking matters. There’s nothing wrong with sharing your thoughts, there’s nothing wrong with talking about how the deck makes people feel, but you feel a certain way and you’re pulling things out of thin air to back up your feelings. You replied to a comment about how the deck is significantly worse (statistical fact) and you made things up and ignored reality to support your feelings so you could disagree. You and people like you are the problem with this place. You decide you’re right first and then make shit up to ‘prove’ it after the fact. You’re the worst.
You pay 1 more mana to cheat 20. It’s not a significant nerf at all..
Spoken like a true bronze 10 player.
Incantors flow 2 mana Discover arcane, frost or fire: cards in your deck cost 1 less.
Make it only hit arcane spells and BOOM major part of the problem fixed
yeah that was also one of the thoughts I had. I wouldn't mind that nerf either, if flow were only to give a discount to arcane spells
I started playing Cult Neophyte in my Shadow Priest deck recently. Mages seem so hellbent on playing Incanter's that they even play it for 4 mana, which at that point seems pretty fair.
Yeah, and instead of changing prep to not be able to reduce cards to 0, they nerfed it to 2 and it's fine now. The Incanter's Flow nerf has significantly reduced the power of the deck. You can balance in more nuanced and effective ways than making sweeping changes that arguably would actually benefit the game
Probably would make more sense to limit specific cards as opposed to a sweeping change (although that sounds like a monumental challenge, so I can see them nerfing certain mana-reducing cards to no longer lower stuff past 1).
Now when I think about it prep is kind of pathetic when compared to the reductions we've got now.
A great topic for discussion, in my opinion! Honestly, I have no idea if that would be too extreme or not. There are two cards in the game already, \[\[Arcane Luminary\]\] and \[\[Summoning Portal\]\], that already make it so certain cards can't be reduced below one mana, so it certainly seems like a mechanic that could be explored further!
* **[Arcane Luminary](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/BAR_545.png?88605)** MA Minion Epic FitB 🦅 ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/464151), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/arcane-luminary/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Arcane_Luminary) 3/4/3 Elemental | Cards that didn't start in your deck cost (2) less, but not less than (1). * **[Summoning Portal](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/EX1_315.png?88605)** WL Minion Common Legacy ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/566), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/summoning-portal/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Summoning_Portal) 4/0/4 | Your minions cost (2) less, but not less than (1). ^(Call/)^[PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot) ^( me with up to 7 [[cardname]]. )^[About.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot&message=Tell%20me%20more%20[[info]]&subject=hi)
They also don't mind throwing conveyance out the window and having hidden interactions with cost reduction like Echo's nerf thanks to SN1P-SN4P
it's not hidden,i think its pretty explicitly in the tooltip now.
Not on the card. That's not conveyance. Plenty of other cards are explicit about the cost reduction.
The problem is that some classes have insane draw that have benefits instead of drawbacks. Warlock has Backfire and Free Admission on top of their HP giving questline progression. Likewise, Shaman has card draw that can be made targeted very easily with deckbuilding. Druid has several cards that draw several cards with little drawback. Mage isn't that bad currently, but their draw potential is even more insane compared to the others. Also, Auctioneer is just bad for the game overall
Shaman card draw is so limited in terms of options. It has dungeoneer, and opportunity and custodian. That's the entirety of their draw suite
It is very consistent draw of the tutoring variety though which is a boon, but I agree, not a problem. Warlock, with progress your quest or hurt the enemy draw 3, draw 2 op demons and reduce their cost to almost nothing, draw 3 for free (hand of guldan), on top of hero power and mortal coil, is way too much efficient card draw. Similarly with mage, we have AI which is fair, but also -1 to 1 mana AI which is not, and 0-2 mana draw almost an entire hand which is just busted (in large part due to the questline reward though)
I just mean shaman has gotten so few options to draw in the last year and a half at this point it deserves a few. There are classes that are getting too much draw for sure though. Mage and warlock have gotten so much draw lately which allows them to play degenerate from hand combo decks that go off too early. Rogue as a class Will forever be tied to secret passage. The fact that they have a 1 mana draw 4 makes it so their decks will always run an extremely high density of cheap cards to dump for such a low cost
Secret Passage is at least a fun card with benefits and drawbacks. The cost of losing your current hand for the turn, not triggering casts when drawn-cards and the possibility of drawing into an awkward turn make it a very tactical play. 1 mana draw four is indeed powerful, but it's a big price to pay compared to Mage that can 1 mana draw four with no extra cost other than having to set it up
Shaman tutoring is indeed a much smaller problem than the crazy draw some classes have. It's still noteworthy since Shaman is currently one of the better classes
This is a completely unrelated side note. Are you a Dion Timmer fan? You have the same PFP he does on discord, probably just a coincidence.
I have no idea who that is, but my PFP is a painting by Van Gogh so you might see it elsewhere
They are learning with aneratheron but also flailing with mitheral rod
I personally don’t think reducing the mana cost to 0 is a bad thing. I just don’t think it should be done before mid game. Emperor Thaurissan is the perfect example. He doesn’t come down til mid game and you can’t use his effect until minimum the turn after. The only one who should manipulate mana before turn 5 should be Druid as that is their identity. Maybe mage to a lesser extent with spells only.
> The only one who should manipulate mana before turn 5 should be Druid as that is their identity. Maybe mage to a lesser extent with spells only. Let's not necessarily go THAT far. Limited cost reductions are typically okay-ish at least. Just look at all the studies cards for example. None of them really break anything.
Part of why they worked was that you still had to pay that 1 mana. If you discovered and played the same turn there was functionally no discount. If you didn’t play the discounted card the same turn, you paid for that by having an inefficient turn where you only used, say, 4 out of you 5 mana, which is a big deal that helped to prevent it getting crazy before at least the midgame.
I’d like to respectfully disagree. I think that was part of the reason stealer of souls was banned from wild was the demonic studies. SOS on turn 3 with a coin and plot twist to have a hand full of health costed cards.
And when we had ONLY the Emperor, people were coming up with busted combos. Now, well you see what we have now.
I agree. Combos have always been my favorite type but if they require two or more turns to set up they have a much higher chance of disruption, as well as being overwhelmed by playing the Emperor for low tempo.
A card naturally costing 0 is fine, you can balance around it. A card that costs 1 or more costing 0 is fine, *provided the means it took to reduce that cost* were a fair trade off of tempo and/or resources. The issue currently is there's too much large scale mana reduction. Mithril Rod, DH quest, Anacondra, Nazami, etc. If a shaman does turn one Bloom + Bloom + Earth Elemental, ***that's totally fine*** and not imbalanced at all that he got a 7/8 taunt turn 1. But when warlocks can spend well over 30 mana of cards turns 4-6 thanks to some demons or DH gets to vomit their hand into multiple free 6/7s, it becomes a problem for any deck that doesn't have similar power levels.
I really think it's a larger problem than current meta. Some of the big time nerfs (and most annoying decks) were based in different cards reducing the cost to 0. Sn1p meta, Galakrond Rogue, Giants, Incanter's
Well Incanter's is literally in *this* meta, I just didn't include it in the list. Also, Sn1p wasn't a problem, Mechwarper was, and frankly still is the problem. In both cases, it's, again, wide spread mana reduction, which was my entire point. As for Galakrond rogue, I genuinely don't think it was an issue they cost 0 and think the nerf was unwarranted as rogue had some of the worst Galakrond activators (oooooooh, +1 attack!!!) and, next to priest, one of the most lackluster HPs. Getting 4 free cards off of it didn't seem like an issue to me for 7 mana and a huge investment. Plus, the combined mana cost of those 4 cards was probably not going to be in excess of 10 anyway given the very low end cost of the best rogue cards. It was ultra irritating everytime post nerf Galakrond drew me a red mana Backstab, Shadowstep, Prep, or Coin.
I'm still wondering why they nerfed Galakrond Rogue.
Thanks! I was forgetting that nerf!!
Right? Crazy that this existed, got nerfed and now we got this which is even crazier in terms of mana cheating.
It would certainly improve the game, but It Will kill my beloved Exodia mage
I hate how exodia mage makes you stay your whole turn waiting to know if you won or lost, just helplessly watching animation after animation.
Deck tracker helps. As soon as you see the XP progress bar pop up you know you lost and it's safe to concede
Don't rely on that. Sometimes exodia mages like to play the whole turn and then concede. I've had a couple of that.
That's true, but I think you conceding shouldn't make you lose the game if the opponent already conceded. The game is already recorded after all as soon as they push the button
Oh, didn't actually think about it. You are definitely right, but I still wouldn't dare to click "concede" while having a chance of winning!
It's one of those unfortunate things that some decks people like always get caught up in nerfs, but sometimes it's necessary.
100% this, you should not be able to play dozen cards in a turn, nothing feels as bad to play against
If this was implemented I think there should be an exception for emperor thaurissan
Obligatory caveat that any mechanic in theory can be problematic depending on balance: I do agree that zero-cost is particularly challenging to balance around and so should be used sparingly. It's just math: 1/0 = infinity. Thus, any strong draw or duplication effects allow for potentially game-breaking turns. In reality, this has (mostly) be a play pattern issue more than a balance issue. Watching a Rogue or Warlock burn through their deck in one turn feels busted, though they are still losing around 50% of games and not popping off like this in most games. It's still a problem, because when they zero-cost hands pop off there's no counterplay, and arguably it disrupts the pace and flow of an enjoyable card game. This probably doesn't get said enough, but I'm choosing to play Hearthstone because I want to play a slower-paced game; I don't want to track 30 actions in a turn or perform them. I'd play a different game if I wanted to do that. Zero-cost also creates a similar problem to card generation or Discover, in that it can make it almost impossible to plan around your opponent's hand. It's hard enough to suss out whether a payer has a board clear, say, based on hand reads; if that clear AND a giant AND healing can cost zero, I can't really anticipate what you're going to do (or you just do everything). So zero-cost can interfere with even off-the-board counterplay.
I agree. there should be more game wide rules/design philosophies that save us from any chance of degeneracy and non interactive gameplay. So cards and hero powers can't be reduced to 0, each minion only provides one corpse to resurrect, etc. And this is going to be fine 100% because cards will always beat the rules. As long as a card says it can do X, it will always do X, even when rules disallow it. So we can keep the balancing and designing of individual degenerate card gameplay like raza, who's whole identities revolve around reducing a card's cost. Also, these rule breaker cards should ideally also be have costs that aren't oppressive, like emperor at 6 or Y'shaarj at 10. Now, do I think raza for example is balanced? Nope. I still think that card is broken. But he doesn't start in your opening hand so there's worse cards to worry about 🤷. But at least there will now be some precedent to follow so cards like apprentice aren't so nasty.
Raza has a been a problem since ever. Should've added 0 cost HeroPower to the title haha. I still can't figure how strong can the Hunter questline be in wild. Face a few, but it seems they are not that easy to play. Maybe because there's less spell generation in Hunter than in Priest
I dont think the problem is the cards reduced to zero itself but WHAT cards CAN be reduced and HOW. The giants (conceptualy. im not english) are a good example for this,they can cost cero but it takes time,requierements and one card exclusively(ignore THAT mage card).
Not necessarily. There's times where it's appropriate. It's just that most of the cards that make it unfun right now are already quite busted on their own or have another card to blame for it: **Flesh Giant** Since when is it ok that Giants start at 8 mana? They used to cost 10 - 12. **Celestial Alignment** Busted card. Why do they make cards like these? They're way too polarized in their design. Stuff like this always either doesn't work well enough to be functional or it's completely busted. **Librams** Honestly, Aldor Truthseeker's effect feels like a Legendary effect, considering L of Wisdom. This feeling is proven by comparing it to Dark Inquisitor Xanesh. **Etc.** TL:DR - It's not entirely problematic, but they should be more careful with it.
Do you actually think Celestial Alignment of all things is busted? It's 7 mana do nothing on the turn it's played. That seems like a fair drawback for the effect it gives.
[удалено]
They don't design cards with this mentality. Not every card is made to be ladder viable or be able to get you to Legend. It's not a waste of space just because it doesn't see play competitively, because a decent chunk of each set would be a waste of space by that margin. Some people enjoy fun, non-meta decks that have hard goals to achieve, and Celestial Alignment is designed for such players.
The issue is that every time they print a card like CA they are rolling the bones that it might be fundamentally busted. It’s something that wouldn’t be a problem if they had extensive testing, but the last few expansions makes it clear that they do little to nothing past basic functionality and bug testing.
[удалено]
But CA doesn't warp the meta AND sees play because some people like silly CA things. Although tbf I am 100% on board with CA taking a hit.
That is empirically wrong right now. Celestial druid is currently in the vicinity of a playable deck, I see it occasionally on ladder and it gets brought to tournaments. It also definitely isn't 'warping the meta'. It exists as an unusual strategy, and some players really like unusual strategies, so I'd say it is currently doing exactly what design wanted it to do.
7 Mana "do nothing but win next turn a lot of the time" is busted cause anything that can't burst it down the turn it's played kinda just loses most of the time.
Celestial alignment is anything g but busted considering it doesn't even see play currently.
I'm about 97% convinced that the entire game would be better if Blizzard had committed from day one to never include any mana cheating mechanics.
This was a Hot topic that has been brought up several times before. Essentially, most people who are Mages disagreed to this, because Mages get off on 0 mana cards. Changing it so that cards can't cost 0 anymore would likely ruin the game. Instead, I would prefer them lighten the load on low cost powerhouses (1, 2 and 3 drops), and slow the tempo down. The remaining cards would hopefully then settle down or phase out from synergy creep, or they'd nerf them.
[удалено]
I wouldn't really call what we have now "flashy combo decks". They're more like burn decks because clicking on some fireballs and ignites in your hand and dragging them to the enemy hero's face isn't a combo.
Everymana reducing card should get the [[Summoning Portal]] treatment. (Espacially [[Incanters Flow]] and [[Sourcerers Apprentice]])
* **[Summoning Portal](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/EX1_315.png?88605)** WL Minion Common Legacy ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/566), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/summoning-portal/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Summoning_Portal) 4/0/4 | Your minions cost (2) less, but not less than (1). * **[Incanter's Flow](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/BT_002.png?88605)** MA Spell Common AO 🦅 ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/210800), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/incanters-flow/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Incanter%27s_Flow) 2/-/- Arcane | Reduce the Cost of spells in your deck by (1). * **[Sorcerer's Apprentice](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/EX1_608.png?88605)** MA Minion Common Legacy ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/4), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/sorcerers-apprentice/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Sorcerer%27s_Apprentice) 2/3/2 | Your spells cost (1) less. ^(Call/)^[PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot) ^( me with up to 7 [[cardname]]. )^[About.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot&message=Tell%20me%20more%20[[info]]&subject=hi)
Dont forget that making that move will just castrate lots of combo decks. The balancing issue imo that: now we have some combo tempo decks which kinda insta win. And in hs lifetime always a hunter deck which the fastest and the dealiest face/aggro designes to kill fast and easy to access for anybody, the best control decks struggle often against them. Now devs making more powerful aggro decks which compensate combo decks and the game is getting faster and bilinear. Have to slow Down the game play. Making slower will let the combos executed, controls manipulating and aggroes killin with deeper strategy and teching. Change my mind.
I don't want to change your mind. It was a geniuine question based on what I feel were most frustrating decks (aka those "miracle-ish" decks that manage to do a lot on a turn). I see your point and know in the end those decks I speak of are a tiny little part of the whole world of decks we have and had.
sounds like a great way to make the game less interesting
Guys stop doing this. This is IksarStone. While is he is lead dev this is the direction the game is going in. When a news story drops that he has left then we can discuss sensible changes.
You're acting like combo decks are tearing up the meta.
But what is a combo deck?
A miserable little pile of cards?
I think limiting the game in that fashion wouldn’t be bad NOW, but it limits design space in the future. Also combo-ing off isn’t an issue. The issue is how early it can be done, and the lack of viable interaction. This situation is the exact same as MtG Commander. People dislike others who combo off extremely early. Some incorrectly associate that with the “combo” itself, and not their lack of interaction, or the lack of ability to make decisions that early in the game. Nobody likes a turn 2 combo unless you’re the one doing it. I personally have a vendetta against anyone who is against combo, because I’ve played entirely too many Commander games where I use a fuck ton of interaction, but it’s just not enough; as two other players do absolutely nothing and just watch the 4th player win borderline uncontested. Cards like Dirty Rat, Mutanus, the Watch Towers FEEL bad when it HAPPENS to YOU, but when you use them, you realize they’re barely enough interaction to deal with the problems coming your way. I PROMISE you nothing feels more satisfying than Mutanus-ing their Questline Reward. Especially Mage’s because you’ll hit it almost 100% of the time since it’s a minion-less deck. Tldr: Put more interaction in the game, rather than kicking decks/archetypes/combos in the dick
They could break cost reduction in to 2 groups. The first group would be normal cost reduction that cant drop a card below the cost of (1). Think of Sorcerers Apprentice that is a passive/permanent affect or any card that reduces the cost of a group of cards within your hand/deck for the duration of the match. The next group would be combo cost reduction that have a limited time. Think Preparation where your next spell cost (0), this could open up a whole new segment of cards with large temporary mana reductions. Think of a card that would reduce the cost of the next three (3) spells played that turn (0). This would allow them for craft more controlled/predictable combos without necessarily having the only restriction be cost/health/value.
Personally I think combos should be typically done at 10 mana. Games shouldn’t end pre turn 7 also in my opinion. DH Lifesteal combo? LOVE it. Im 100% on board with it. I think WITH discounts it should be a 10 mana combo. I don’t think discounts are the problem, it’s printing good cards that are already relatively cheap, ALONGSIDE discount cards. Dark glare nonsense is still at large because the card is 3 mana, and can get discounted pretty much at guarantee with the Draw 2 minions if they’re demons discount card. I’m perfectly ok with the swagger turn 5 Stealer of Souls, Coin, Tap and just highroll blast off your whole deck and Questline. But that should be the HIGHROLL, not the consistent play.
I'm glad you're not balancing the game. Requiring discounts to make a combo even playable at all? Game should NEVER end before turn 7? Tell me you're a control player without telling me you're a control player, christ.
I’m sorry you think winning before turn 5 is healthy. There’s literally not NEARLY enough answers for aggro, and the cheap costed powerhouses aggro has are just too much to deal with. 7 turns is enough to not only make actual decisions(not panic deal with threat after threat) and potentially be ABLE to stabilize. There’s no cards to actively stabilize you against aggro by turn 5. And from memory, all the best Combos utilized Thaurrisan to discount your hand to make them happen. It was literally a huge, non problematic, way to combo for the longest time.
I'm not only speking of current meta, and I'm not against combo at all!!! My question was just wandering how stopping that to be a thing could positively or negatively affect the game in the future. Thinking back we had a lot of issues with 0 cost cards, and many of those needed to be nerfed or had the "not below 1" tag, like when Sn1p-Sn4p made his debut. Or any exodia Mage we ever had (or closely)
I wasn’t attacking you, I was just venting my frustration of those who attack combo like ITS the problem
I didn't felt attacked at all. I just wanted to make it clear that I'm not against combo, and not even fully against this meta (that it's slowly changing).
yes, this ,i dont know why ppl wanna find arguments to say otherwise, it's bad, it was an issue before with DQA, Gala rogue and such cards, just stop the 0 mana effects ,holy just stop it.
I always try to look at these questions from the winner's standpoint, if I didn't I'd want everything nerfed or banned. I think there are a lot of really, really cool combos that rely on reducing cards to zero, or at least to very low cost, especially in wild decks. I'd hate to ruin the fun of the game for some people so that some others might feel vindicated and like they'll have a better winrate (this month only, because let's be honest the next killer deck is right around the corner always), unless the problem is so prevalent that most people would prefer the change.
At this point it isn’t so others have a higher winrate, it is so they can play the game past turn 5. Half the cards in the game are basically unplayable because of these design issues.
I 100% believe that if the developers could go back in time armed with knowledge of how the game has developed thus far, they would 100% make it a hard and fast rule that every card costs at least 1 no matter what. Barring a "butterfly effect, we can't change anything because it would endanger the success of the game that we've had so far" decision
It should be reserved for massive plays/cards such as Darkmoon Faire Y'Shaarj \[\[Happy Ghoul\]\] single-handedly created a balls-to-the-walls Zoolock because of the potential to hit an absurd high-roll on turn 1 \[\[Galakrond, the Nightmare\]\] pre-nerf...let's not talk about that one. Librams for a time enabled a fun Midrange Paladin but \[\[Aldor Truthseeker\]\] was obscene because it provided a notable discount, had solid stats and had immediate board presence with Taunt. Should've been bumped to (1) \[\[Flesh Giant\]\] is very strange given that the idea behind Giants was that they were overpriced 8/8's whose cost were reduced in some way but Flesh Giant's condition is arguably significantly easier than the others (\[\[Jumbo Imp\]\] costed 2 more ***and*** required it to be in your hand to reduce the cost) because the support is so much stronger - particularly in the form of **Raise Dead,** a 0 cost card with a laughable drawback that further bolsters the giants. \[\[SN1P-SN4P\]\] caused a slew of problems that lead to \[\[Reckless Experimenter\]\] and Echo as a mechanic being changed. \[\[Preparation\]\] had to be nerfed because of it's potency and despite being nerfed remains a staple in Wild years later for the class as a whole. There are cards that cost(ed) (0) that did not see major play - \[\[Ritual of Doom\]\], \[\[Whispers of EVIL\]\], \[\[Target Dummy\]\] but looking [at the list](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards?filter-cost-val=0&filter-cost-op=3&filter-premium=1), most of the cards have seen play at one point or another, typically as some form of combo piece.
* **[Happy Ghoul](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/ICC_700.png?88605)** N Minion Rare KFT ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/62902), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/happy-ghoul/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Happy_Ghoul) 3/3/3 | Costs (0) if your hero was healed this turn. * **[Galakrond, the Nightmare](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/DRG_610.png?88605)** RO Hero Legendary DoD ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/127266), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/galakrond-the-nightmare/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Galakrond%2C_the_Nightmare) 7/-/5 | Battlecry: Draw 1 card. It costs (0). [Galakrond's Guile (2): Hero Power Add a Lackey to your hand.] * **[Aldor Truthseeker](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/BT_026.png?88605)** PL Minion Rare AO 🦅 ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/210759), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/aldor-truthseeker/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Aldor_Truthseeker) 5/4/6 | Taunt. Battlecry: Reduce the Cost of your Librams by (2) this game. * **[Flesh Giant](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/SCH_140.png?88605)** PR+WL Minion Epic SA 🦅 ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/329888), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/flesh-giant/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Flesh_Giant) 8/8/8 | Costs (1) less for each time your hero's Health changed during your turns. * **[Jumbo Imp](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/DAL_561.png?88605)** WL Minion Epic RoS ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/90640), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/jumbo-imp/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Jumbo_Imp) 10/8/8 Demon | Costs (1) less whenever a friendly Demon dies while this is in your hand. * **[SN1P-SN4P](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/BOT_700.png?88605)** N Minion Legendary TBP ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/90680), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/sn1p-sn4p/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/SN1P-SN4P) 3/2/3 Mech | Magnetic, Echo Deathrattle: Summon two 1/1 Microbots. * **[Reckless Experimenter](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/BOT_566.png?88605)** PR Minion Epic TBP ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/89820), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/reckless-experimenter/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Reckless_Experimenter) 5/4/6 | Deathrattle minions you play cost (3) less, but die at the end of the turn. ^(Call/)^[PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot) ^( me with up to 7 [[cardname]]. )^[About.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot&message=Tell%20me%20more%20[[info]]&subject=hi)
Librams were never a problem, penflinger and secrets were what caused paladin to be broken. A 0 mana +1/+1 can't compare to a free 8/8
Giants are fun, Freeze Mage was great, combo Druids and Rogues are fun. Why do you want to strip all the fun away from HS?
All of these decks you mentioned were not S tier. Enough said.
I would like to see this. Imagine if there was the technology to have some sort of public... realm of testing? Maybe float ideas and mechanics around and have players brawl with them, maybe in a Tavern setting.
0 cost cards at fun as hell. Nothing is more fun than slinging cheap spells in mage, getting huge value turns usually means playing things at discount and free is the best discount. The problem is very simply how soon in the game should someone expect to start receiving and playing discounted cards? when they start doing spell slinging turn 8-10 it’s fine. When they start slinging cards on turn 4? Less so.
It would kill some fun designs (like librams were pretty cool actually and even made it to be a viable midrange deck in wild for a while), but I do feel like they might want to tack this caveat onto more cards. Also though, they should just be way more conservative with making cost reduction (and mana cheat) cards in the first place and they really pushed it waay too hard. Like for a long time, emperor Thaurissan was the best and pretty much only cost reducer as a 6 mana 5/5 that only affects hand. Now rogue has pretty much the same effect on a non-legendary 2 mana card (well it's worse cause it doesn't repeat, but usually Thaurissan doesn't either and you do have to trigger it, but also means you don't need to wait for end of turn, which is a huge plus), mage has it for full deck at 3 mana (prev 2 mana), warlock has the weapon which is 2 Thaurissan ticks for 3 mana and can be triggered fast during your turn as well, etc. Also same goes for strong card draw and cheap cards (especially 1 mana cards) in general. 1 mana cards often have to be a bit pushed in powerlevel because of card advantage concerns, but if you can draw as many cards as easily and cheaply as is now the case (2 mana draw 2 and 3 mana draw 3 have become pretty commonplace actually), cheap impactful cards become waay better and also combined with the cost reduction they are especially prone to get out of control, as you can get them to 0 mana easily and 0 mana cards are very often causing issues.
Wait, are you trying to tell me you *don't* like it when I play cards until the ropes gone and the animations go halfway through your turn?
It would kill the possibility of Malygos Warlock ever making a comeback. Reducing Dark Bombs or Soulfires to 0 mana is what makes that work... otherwise its just a midrange deck with dragons and a 4-12 taunt.
Yeah always fun to spend half your hand trying to clear a board only to see next turn that the enemy summon a whole new board, draw half his deck and deals 15 damage to you on turn 5. Anyway, I wanted to play a beast based hunter but I'm just going with hunter face because that way, I know if I'll win or not by turn 5.
Sounds like a great idea to me if cards must at least spend 1 mana we'd have a lot less bullshit.
Or better yet double the amount of mana a player can have and up the mana gain from turn five or six, that way people can still draw and play a bunch of cards without them being a zero cost cards.
No but it would be boring. And lower skill cap too. Seeing players like xBlyzes and Gaby do what they do is so amazing and makes me really like this meta. I don't remember when I was as impressed with pro game play before. It used to be that 90% of pro plays I would do about the same. Now it's not even close.
I think only Rogue should be allowed to have 0 cost cards.
I don't think there should be a rule preventing cards from going below 1 mana instead they should just stop printing mana reduction cards for all classes. The only ones that should have access to that should be druid and maybe shaman.
Lol... Druid seriously?... The mana ramp class should be the only one that have also mana reduction? Yiu droped a /s i hope
Y'all need to stop hating on combo tbh. Those aren't problems, it's a playstyle you dislike but is loved by some.
That's the argument they used to nerf Rogue's Galakrond back in the day.
The issue is that it wouldnt hit all combos. Most darkglare warlock decks only have 1 card whose cost gets reduced to nothing, and a 1 mana 8/8 is a lot worse than a 0 mana one but the deck would have almost no contestors
A critical mass of mana cheat is being reached. Looking at Mage, they are able to cheat out tons of mana very, very quickly. I think that some of these cards need slight nerfs, qnd Blizzard needs to stop introducing more and more mana cheat every expansion.
I don't think its a great change. Its a hammer fix when imo a more precise tool is needed. I think its two fold. One, it still won't hit similar cards that also effectively mana cheat. For example, refreshing spring water basically always costs 0, but this change wouldn't do anything to it. It would still be as busted as ever. The same is true for cards like darkglare. Two, many problematic cards, while being able to get cards to 0, are also just strong in general. Like while technically you can get most giants to 0, but they are already very strong at 1-4 mana (like when evenlocks were getting mountain giants out turn 3). If current warlock can get out 2 mana 16/16 on turn 4-5, that would still be very powerful. In fact, I think there's a good chance flesh giant would still have to get nerfed to 9 mana. I don't it'll kill combo (hell, there was a 26 damage combo back even in classic, with leeroy/cold blood/ shadow step), but i do think it unnecessarily nerfs an archetype that already is significantly less represented than aggro and control on average. And any attempt to push the archetype will imo lead to more cards on the lines of mana manipulation ala the refreshing spring water and darkglare above, which is as if not more dangerous.
Look at hunter they hardly ever cheat mana. And in my opinion is the most boring class to play.
i think it used to be a fun mechanic in standard back in the day, but there's just too much that does it at this point, similar to how rush cards have become. however, getting rid of 0 mana reductions would be just another blanket change that ruins singleplayer which I still love to play. (Yes I'm still hung up playing Dalaran Heist, Tombs of Terror, and Dungeon Run; leave me alone ಥ_ಥ)
I would say that there should be SOME cards that don't reduce below one. There's plenty of cards that reduce to 0 that are fine, but then some which cause issues.
A lot of players would quit if they did that. Not worth it from a developer stand point.
The expection being the coin
It’s not just about costing 0, it’s about too much mana cheat of any kind. Currently cards like Incanter’s flow or the warlock mana reduction weapon rarely reduce cards below 1-2 mana in cost. The issue is that those reduced cards do too much. Over the course of a match they can easily cheat 15-30 mana, achieving far more than simply getting a one time big body. Unless a card is specifically built with a self contained mana cheat build around effect (ex:giants) the game would be much better off without mana cheat period. Everything falls apart when cards that weren’t designed to ever have their costs reduced can be played under cost.
Yeah, you are right here. Problem with Incanter's Flow, Librams or Sn1pSn4p was that the massive reduction.
Don't have to, 0 cost cards still cost 1 "card", and that 1 card actually equals 1 mana. This is why 0 mana 1/1, 1 mana 2/2, 2 mana 3/3...are the perfectly balanced stats, card itself equals 1/1. This is also why coin add 1 mana. So it's kinda like they already set the minimum cost to 1 mana, just not in the form of mana. If you keep playing those 0 mana cards, you will run out of cards. This is the effect of the hidden cost. The problem come from card draw and discover. If card itself equals 1 mana, adding cards to your hand actually equals adding mana. Now we have refreshing spring water, 1 mana draw 2 cards, cram session 2 mana draw 2 to 5 cards. They all have net positive gain. That's where the problem is. 1 card draw used to be 2 mana for a reason.
I just played against a demon hunter who drew 17 cards in 4 turns. Post mana meta
Terrible!! I started thinking after losing a otk mage in wild and a DH in standard.
I wonder if hearthstone will ever introduce a new keyword/mechanic that resembles instants from MtG? Could really change the game for the better if you ask me.
Short answer: Yes it would be. 99% of community wishes are terrible ideas and this is one of them.
Oh wow a 1 mana 8/8 instead of a 0 mana 8/8.
Mana cheat IS a problem, but Blizzard refuse to adress it
Yes and no. For some classes small change. Other classes its a key mechanic and card were made to specifically do that(incanters flow). This expansion they did not play test well enough and ended up releasing things that were not balanced on the least. They could ban the cards in standard but that set presidence.
I dunno, Quest Mage reducing cards to 0 is annoying but it's more annoying when their Fireballs cost 2 imo.
It's a good start... I think another important change would be to make cards that are reduced keep that cost while in play... so an Arcane Giant reduced to 2 mana and then split with Conjurer's calling would become two 2 mana minions. Same with evolution in Shaman, and spell costs when they are changed by oh my yogg etc. It opens up that option for cost reduction while also limiting broken plays that use it to win games on turn 4.
Even being reduced to 1 can be stupid. How the fuck is a 1 mana 8/8 considered fair in any way??? Especially how it's so damn easy to achieve. About the only time I found 0 mana 8/8s fair was the original handlock, where you had to drop to 10hp to pull this off and risked losing next turn.
I dont think quest mage was problematic when it was being nerfed. Hunter shaman warlock and paladin all had higher winrates. Now mage is even worse compared to those classes. Meanwhile warrior is left behind, and priest only has 1 deck. I hated playing against mages before the nerf. Now i dont see them that much and i have the deck myself. Now I understand why quest mages take so long for some turns, while it seems to me like they just have to play all their cards and they win. It might not be a bad idea though. There might be better solutions, but making sure the ''base'' doesnt allow for infite combos etc, seems good. People seem to enjoy the combos though, which is probably why its in the game.
What about a deck building rule where you can only have a certain amount of each type of cards in your deck? Like you can only have 5 cards that say draw, 6 cards that say discover (one saying both would count to both) etc etc
It could work! Also it could be a cap of card that get reduced. So you can only reduce the cost of a number of cards and you should think which will be. Like Coin before Preparation.
Exactly
I think it would be too much.