Odinn

Is Hearthstone's Ladder Too Hardcore?

14 posts in this topic

11987-is-hearthstones-ladder-too-hardcor

As a purported 'casual' game - which is to say, an accessible, easy-to-understand, free-to-play game with few mechanical requirements - Hearthstone has a broad audience. The tablet and mobile platforms have only served to open the game up to even more players. With the incredible frequency of its ladder resets and the constant compression of the player base into the bottom range of that ladder, however, is the game too punishing for infrequent enjoyment?



At it's core, Hearthstone is a competitive, player versus player game. It pits two human players against each other in a format designed to determine a winner and a loser. There is no co-op, and the game's single player content is still quite thin. By its nature, that sets up a competitive environment - but competitive does not have to mean hardcore.

What does come across as punitive, however, are things like the duration of seasons, and the rank reset structure on a season-to-season basis. Blizzard's seasons in their other games last multiple months at a time - WoW PvP seasons, StarCraft seasons, Diablo Seasons - and your matchmaking rating and the presentation thereof do not get substantially reduced from one season to the next (e.g. a Platinum StarCraft player may start a subsequent season in high Gold, a few games away from where they left off, but not in Bronze).

ANT6SOZ1AZCQ1411061634681.png

Player rank distribution.


The ability to climb the Hearthstone ladder quickly is offset by the limited stars in the game's ecosystem until players generate additional stars through win streaks or by winning games against opponents at level 20 or below. Every season, even players who finished at the top of the Legend ladder are pushed back down into the bottom of the rank system, and forced to re-earn their placement every month.

In essence, there are two competing problems, and solving either one would improve the Hearthstone experience for many: Either seasons need to last longer, or the rank reset mechanic at the end of each month needs to be less punishing.

Season_new_2.jpg

The current end of season 'Bonus Stars' system.


Longer seasons will appeal to players trying to make the grind to a high rank over a period of time, particularly for players whose time is limited and cannot play the game in large bursts. StarCraft has had an average of around five seasons per year since it was released; WarCraft seasons last six months on average; Diablo seasons look to last about two months as it stands. Hearthstone's brief seasons stand in stark contrast, and make the ability to feel like you make progress limited to anyone who cannot play large quantities of games in short periods of time during a given calendar month.

The second choice would be to reduce the season-to-season rank reduction, so that players could feel like they can make gains over time by succeeding in consecutive seasons as the short monthly seasons roll by. Right now, a player who pushes hard to achieve e.g. a rank 10 finish in a season - putting them in the top 10% of all players! - will start the next season back at rank 19. A pro player could just win 17 straight games and rocket back to rank 10, but for a player whose best finish is rank 10, it's more likely to take dozens of games, if not more.

If the rank structure were to simply reduce your rank by a fixed number of ranks/stars at the end of each season, rather than counting up from the bottom of the ladder every time, players could make slow progress over time if they can't manage a massive burst of play in a single month.

Ranked_win_streak.jpg

Win streaks make some difference, but not enough for many players.


For the sake of argument, if players lost half of their stars at the end of a season, the rank 10 player would start the next season at rank 15, and while that may only be a difference of 5 games on a win streak to a strong player, it's a huge quality of life improvement for someone trying to make slower gains over time (or who simply can't play that many games!). It would feel like less of a hard reset, and more like a ladder that is indicative of your current skill at all times, not just the end of a month when you could play a sufficient number of games.

Using this system, every player would be a little further ahead at the start of the next month's season, which would also help with the early season feeling extraordinarily punishing to players as the ladder's compression forces top players back into the same rank range for matchmaking as every other player starting back near the bottom. A Legend player would start at a comfortable rank 10, distant from the players who are still newer to the game or don't have the cards or time to compete at that level.

What drawbacks are there to moving to a more casual-friendly ladder system? There are, within reason, two major issues:

uhJfBZB.jpg

The really, really pro scene.


1. The Hearthstone World Championship. As the point structure and acquisition system for the HSWC is already based around monthly seasons, adjusting that prior to BlizzCon is effectively impossible; and

2. Seasons running longer, or players starting that much higher on the ladder on a month-to-month basis, has the potential to swell the size of the Legend pool over time (as more players could conceivably reach it in a month with the larger number of stars at the start of each month).

The former rules out longer seasons in the short term, but not forever; the latter feels like a fairly hollow complaint about exclusivity (oh no, Legend is now 0.75% of players instead of 0.5%!). Season length isn't a major concern for Blizzard, as how long a season runs or how many stars a player starts with has limited impact on things like volume of microtransactions or number of games played. At a worst case scenario, a player who quit playing while at Legend today would receive only one card back (the following month) before their account would slip below the Rank 20 threshold; under the new system, a discontinuing player would be able to get three card backs, despite not playing the consecutive seasons (in theory).

Having said that, a simple stop gap - such as requiring a player to gain at least one rank per season to receive a card back - would eliminate that concern, if that bothered Blizzard or the community. A Legend player who isn't playing earning a couple of extra card backs doesn't seem much cause for concern, though.

Would longer seasons or a softer monthly reset improve your Hearthstone experience? Does it appeal to you more than the current system? Are you happy with the status quo? Let us know what you think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm unsure on this at the moment.

 

When I play for a decent amount of time each month (few evenings for a few hours) I can reach around rank 10 / 9.  Last month was rank 7 month before that rank 11.

 

Now while I would prefer a slightly longer season so I dont have to go from rank 19/18 to 10 again I'm not sure if that extra time would actually allow me to improve my overall rank.

 

As I'm more of a casual player I probably wouldn't play any more or less than I do now - which is play a LOT in the last week of the season to see if I can get up that extra rank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a great post!

 

I am a that kind of guy you refer to. I have limited time to play and even if I am a casual player I still wanna try to climb the rank and beat my own record. But it seems hopeless with the reset time that is today. 

 

To adress the problem I would say that give more stars back so you don't have to start so far back again would be the best thing. 

Because even if you make the season it is still a to big drawback for a casual player like me starting at the top again. Even if the season is one month longer my game time can look really different that time and I might have smaller amount of time to play week to week so the punishment is just as hard when the reset comes.

 

Snake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like a season to be longer in order to be able to get a golden hero.

Right now in a month 500 wins are insane, that means 17 wins per day.

I'd like that to not get reset, to just achieve 500 wins in ranked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's strange, with only a few days left in the Season, I still run into prior legendary players (recognized on cardback) around Rank 12-14. Before that, a week ago maybe, LE players around Rank 15-18. Now knowing how much this game counts an RNG, I still ask myself following question: If I were a new player to hearthstone and I meet these before mentioned players again and again while trying to climb the ladder, would I continue to play hearthstone or is it too frustating?

Because like written in this detailed analysis, one does meet legendary players, or players with complete deck sets in lower parts of the ladder, because they also have to work themselves back up the ladder.

So, maybe the current system is not just frustrating for the players who make legend, but also for those poor souls who start the game and try to compete and the only thing on their side is maybe some good RNG because you can't get pro decks for free from the start.

Will the current system scare off "new blood" and frustrate "old blood" to give up the climb?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that longer seasons would be helpful, but I also think that there needs to be another "milestone" point added to the ladder climb (grind). 

 

Right now, if you are a casual player like myself, once you get to Rank 20 and reach that point where if you lose, you don't lose any stars and go down in rank, you have earned the card back for that season and the prospect of having to win enough to get all the way to Legend is daunting.  There needs to be some other incentive between Rank 20 to get the card back and earning the Legend rank.

 

The highest rank I have ever reached is Rank 13.  It doesn't seem to matter if I'm playing recommended decks from the Icy Veins decklists or trying my own creative ideas -- I lose way more often than I win and since I'm going to be knocked back so much when the season resets, if I have a good run of luck and get to somewhere past Rank 15, knowing there is no way with my limited time to play I'm going to make it all the way to Legend, I just stop playing ranked and switch to Casual or Arena until the season resets.  This is because the few times I tried to "press my luck" I ended up sliding back down to where I spend most of my time in the Rank 20 - Rank 16 range.

 

Now, if there was another incentive, say for example, once I reached Rank 10 then I didn't lose stars below that rank point for the rest of the season, I would be motivated to push to Rank 10 to reach that milestone, even if I didn't expect to be able to make it to Legend rank in that season.  The idea of having a good streak of luck (or maybe even investing more time and actually gettting more skilled enough to compete at higher ranks) and reaching up into the single digit ranks only to slide back down into my familiar teen ranks when my luck turns (or my skill fails me) is demoralizing.

 

So bottom line, in addition to longer seasons and maybe changing how the ranks are adjusted between seasons, I would really like to see another milestone point around Rank 10 that I could shoot for and, if I achieved it, not have to worry about sliding all the way back down to the bottom of Rank 20 for that particular season, at least.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Because like written in this detailed analysis, one does meet legendary players, or players with complete deck sets in lower parts of the ladder, because they also have to work themselves back up the ladder.

This is a similar concept to the Do LFR early in the week when the better raiders are in getting legendary stone/runes rather than the altfest of later in the week.

 

I think the 1 month length is good and should stay. If you were to take a 2 week break from the internet you could come back and only have 2 weeks to wait for a new season rather than have to wait potentially longer.

 

I do like the idea of more bonus stars so that you can build week on week. This would allow an avenue much like extending a heroic Garrosh lockout in SoO. The extra bonus stars could scale with rank so that the earlier levels give more bonus stars and the later levels provide less. IE a rank 1 will drop perhaps to rank 10, but a rank 10 may drop to rank 12, or something to the effect. This will force players to still earn the legendary status but not punish the time poor/newer players in to the 20 to 15 grind each week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting post.
I can see you're looking at the ladder from the view of a more "casual" gamer, those guys who generally finish the season rank 10-15. 

Let me give some perspective from a player who spends the majority of the season in the "death bracket" i.e. rank 1-5. 

I feel the season is too short. Unless you're exceptionally skilled,or very lucky, grinding to legend is extremely time consuming. Even a player who is able to win 55% of his games vs the top 2% of the player pool (a top 1% player?) would require ~250 games to get from rank 5 to legend. That's a ton of games in a single month, only to hit legend in the final week (if you're lucky) and then start the process over again. Additionally, while grinding to legend, you're forced into using your top decks, using a novelty deck for a bit of fun, or an unproven deck in ranked mode, can cost you a few days of grinding very quickly.

 

In that respect, I'd prefer a longer season, 2 months seems fair.

 

As for the reduction in stars, I somewhat actually like being dropped down the ranks. For me, getting from rank 16 to 10 is a matter of a quick session, yet the start of the season gives me an opportunity to spend the first week or so trying out all the decks I wanted to to play but without the risk. Any reduction in stars doesn't really help, as the hard work isn't getting from level X to 5...it's getting from 5 to legend.

I understand this isn't necessarily pitched at my demographic, but just thought I'd throw my 2c in anyways. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Let me give some perspective from a player who spends the majority of the season in the "death bracket" i.e. rank 1-5.

Some nice thoughts here.

 

Maybe we need a ranked practice option or something to the effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of having any incentive / cut off point at like level 10 as Malys mentioned.

 

Would something like this even be doable? It would have a major impact on the levels ofc.  For someone who spends a fair percentage of my hearthstone time getting from rank 18-10 it would be great to know once I've reached this milestone I wouldn't risk going back up to 13/14 (its happened too many times :P).

 

As rank 10 is so far away from legend it shouldnt impact too much on the top players, and and arguably its a mile away from new players as well.

 

What do you think Odinn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This ia bit stupid that such system promotes only those who spend much time on the game. Let's be honest, reaching higher ranks isn't a matter of skill or deck - it's a matter of time. Those who can play every day and aren't extremely bad (and have reasonable decks) will be climbing higher and easier than those who are better, but play less. System should promote better players over players with no life outside the game. Even the best player sometimes meets very bad match-up (Warrior or Rouge for Freeze Mage for example - ugh), therefore even the best deck doesn't guarantee faster climbing. You want to climb - you have to play much, that's all. And this stupid, because HS is commonly described as skillful game, but in the end time is much more important factor.

 

Another thing is that earlier ladder used to be like that: higher rank means better opponents. Nowadays you can meet golden Paladin with all golden cards at rank 19! It happened to my friend yesterday, I watched that game. What does potentially legendary player do at rank 19 at the end of the format? And obviously it isn't just a random example, ranks 15-18 are full of Mech Mages, Mech Shamans, Warriors, Oil Rouges, Face Hunters and other potentially tier 1 decks. Add to this people who simply farm gold, because it's obviously still easier to win at rank 18 than at rank 5, so on every stage of the ladder you basically meet the same decks, while the idea behind the ladder is obviously that each step forward means bigger challenge. Right now challenge starts above rank 20  and you can meet both noobs and pros at rank 19 at rank 10 with identical frequency.

 

Obviously "casual" mode in HS is basically nonexistent, because people hav no problems with playing complete tiers 1 there as well. HS is currently very unfriendly for starting players and it's 50%-50% due to both terrible community, where pro players have nothing against crashing unexprienced players and system unable to make ladder effective and consistent with its idea, also promoting time over skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a "more casual player" of Heartstone, i actually love the current system,

 

strenghts i see in it:

 

1. it gives me an incentive to play each month and see how far i can get.

 

(I usualy stop when i realise i am hitting a "wall" and cant make any more progress,

with the monthly reset it is nice, that i can see my progress from month to month, as i finish each season

a bit better then the one before)

 

If the seasons would last longer, i had less reason to play, if i for example hit rank 13 and start bouncing back and forth between 13 and 14, i usualy leave it be for the current season, and try my luck next season again, to reach 12, usualy works out quite well, with a two month season (or even 6) i had no reason to play again untill season change after reaching my

mark for the current season.

 

2. It gives a regular feeling of beeing rewarded for playing, with a cardback at the end of each month, another reason to

keep playing every so often, with longer seasons, again, there would be something missing which keeps me to come back now.

 

The mentioned drawbacks of the current system, are something i really do not feel at all,

it is suggested, that it might feel unfair for new/casual players to be matched up against top of the notch players every Month, as the ladder resets, but, are you REALLY aware of who you are matched against?

 

Personaly i hardly am, yeah sometimes i see a "golden hero" but to be honest, names? I Hardly even look at names

most of the time, so i could not tell if i ever had been matched against someone who was "way above my league"

all i can tell is, i played against better players and lost, and i played against worse players and won.

 

But i find, hardstone makes it hard, to tell if your opponent ist "super leet" or just "Slightly better" then you are.

 

So, i dont find any frustration there.

 

 

Something else i would think, could end up beeing a problem is, there are "infinite Stars" you can earn.

 

What i mean is, an ELO based system, has a finite number of "Points" to go arround, each player starts with x points

and what he gains, someone else loses in the progress.

 

But Stars in the Heartstone system, are not "traded" on a 1:1 base, if i have a streak, i gain 2+ Stars each win,

but my opponents only lose 1 so, given a long enough season, you would push people up and up the ladder,

without their skill really improving, ending up with the same Situation, where players are faced against much better opponents,

no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard about this discussion on the "Well Met" podcast, and I have some thoughts.  I should note that I've had two fairly successful (from my perspective, anyway) ranked runs to rank 5 and 7 in the last few months with a few weeks break in between each to play other things, work, etc.  I consider myself a very casual player, as I play most often during downtime at work or laying in bed at night on a tablet.

 

1) I like the monthly turnaround.  I like the "tabula rasa" feeling of having a fresh start every month.  I feel like anything longer than that would cause more burnout from players stuck at certain ranks.  For example, this season for whatever reason, I just can't bust through rank 5.  I've been bouncing between 5 and 8.  But come May 1, I'll be just as excited to try again.  It's like the first Saturday of college football season happens every month with all the teams trying to crack the Top 25.

 

2) I would *really* like to see some kind of reward (gold or dust would be sufficient) for achieving certain ranks.  They do this in arena already.  There should be some kind of similar reward for reaching a certain tier of the ladder.  Card backs are nice but not very fulfilling for me.  Maybe a swanky card back for reaching rank 10 would at least give me some sort of status relative to my peers.

 

Anyway, I really enjoy the podcast relative to its peers.  A lot more strategy discussion.  Doesn't sound as much like a load of friendly nerds talking about whatever happens to enter into their head.  Keep it up.

 

-aph0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Zadina

      The Druid legendary weapon has been revealed!
      After yesterday's stream, the card reveal season is now in full swing. And what a better way to start with a legendary weapon. Twig of the World Tree was unveiled today by NGA.CN.

      Image provided by Hearthpwn.
      This is a very curious case of a card, at first sight. It can either be terrible or it can be overpowered. Before presenting arguments for both sides, it should be clarified that this card doesn't exactly work like Kun the Forgotten King (since a lot of people are comparing them). Whereas Kun refills your Mana Crystals, effectively becoming a 0 mana 7/7 at turn 10, Twig of the World Tree gives you full Mana Crystals.
      This means, on the one hand, that you can use it to either ramp up or to have a ferocious amount of 20 Mana crystals on Turn 10 (double Ultimate Infestation anyone?)! Moreover, this weapon can't be countered by the Oozes or Harrison Jones, since you will be giving your opponent free Mana crystals. It's only worth using these cards when this weapon has 1 Durability. Lastly, a good combo would be destroying Twig of the World Tree by using Medivh, the Guardian. Therefore, you can create a very nasty OTK deck with the new legendary weapon, Medivh, Malygos, various spells and maybe even a Kun to piss your opponent off a bit more!
      On the other hand, while OTK Malygos Druid is powerful in the correct hands, it has always been a gimmicky, mid-tier deck at best. The combos that can be pulled off with Twig of the World Tree sound amazing and we will probably see them a couple of times in funny videos, but they are not combos that can happen in most games. The Deathrattle is also very slow to activate, if you get really unlucky with card draw and you want to use the weapon to ramp up. Getting a single Mana Crystal on turn 9 isn't exactly worth it.
      What is your take on the card? There are four more card reveals planned for today (check the schedule), while you can see all the Kobolds & Catacombs cards that have been revealed in our expansion hub.
    • By Aleco

      Standing on the shoulders of the Star Wars: Battlefront II controversy, the Hearthstone community has been voicing their concerns over the game's rising costs louder than ever. What can be done to fix Hearthstone's payment model?
      The Hearthstone community isn't happy - what can Blizzard do to fix the rising costs of the game?
      Since the release of Star Wars: Battlefront II, EA Games has found itself in the midst of one of the most heated, unified, and prolonged attacks against a game studio in the history of the gaming industry. Infuratied by the game’s costly “pay to win” microtransactions, the online gaming community made a recent reddit comment by the EA Community Team the most downvoted comment in the history of reddit, an impressive accomplishment which EA can rest on their mantle next to their back to back "Worst Company in America" in awards.
      Hot on the heels of this controversy, Blizzard released an advertisement for Starcraft II to spread the word about its recent shift to free-to-play which appears to take some serious shots at EA. It's a funny and well-crafted advertisement which is certainly worth a watch:
      As we discussed on the Icy Veins podcast, it's a bit odd to see Blizzard to take an aggressive stance against other gaming studios. Not only does Blizzard have a tendency to play it safe with their marketing and advertising, but one could make the case that Blizzard is currently in the midst of a very similar (albeit far smaller) controversy over their payment model for Hearthstone.
      There has nearly always been a vocal part of the Hearthstone community speaking out against the game’s cost, but the complaints against Hearthstone’s payment model are currently as loud as they have ever been. Just as Blizzard decided to capitalize on the EA controversy to advertise StarCraft II, the Hearthstone community is using the Battlefront debacle as a pedestal to shout their grievances from.
      With such a significant portion of the Hearthstone community demanding changes to the current in-game reward systems and payment models, now seems as good a time as ever to have an honest dialogue about what kinds of changes will strike the fairest balance between our bank accounts and our Hearthstone collections.
      A Fair Price for Hearthstone
      Is there something fundamentally broken about Hearthstone’s reward systems and payment model, and what can be done to fix it? To answer that question, the Hearthstone community needs to be honest about what kind of game Hearthstone really is.
      It’s far too easy to draw unfair comparisons between the cost of Hearthstone and the cost of other games. Take Overwatch for example. It’s undeniable that you’ll get a vastly superior return of fun on your investment of 40 bucks for Overwatch when compared against the $49.99 it will cost you to pre-order 50 packs of the latest Hearthstone set, but it doesn’t make a lot of sense to compare the cost of these two games against each other. First and third person shooting games (Star Wars: Battlefront II notwithstanding) rarely cost more than $59.99 for an entire game’s worth of content, while card games are expected to charge their customers for packs of cards instead of charging for the game itself. So how does Hearthstone stack up against other card games? 
      If you compare Hearthstone against the grandaddy of them all, Magic: the Gathering, Hearthstone is incomparably cheaper. Speaking for myself, the primary reason I switched from MTG to Hearthstone was to save money. Take a look at the average cost of a Standard deck, then take a look at the average cost of a Legacy deck (the rough equivalent of Wild). Want to play a round of draft (the MTG equivalent of the Arena)? That’ll cost you between 10 and 15 USD to play three matches of Magic.
      Is Hearthstone starting to sound cheap yet? Well, it shouldn’t, because MTG and Hearthstone are also totally unfair comparisons. Magic is a trading card game, not a collectible card game, which means that its individual cards hold value and can be traded to other players. Though Magic is undeniably more expensive than Hearthstone no matter how you slice it, the fact that it’s cards can be sold at any time for real money means that the two games should be held to very different pricing standards.
      It’s about as useful to compare the price of MTG to Hearthstone as it is to compare the price of a BMW to a John Deere tractor, yet I see comparisons like this being made all the time. I’m personally guilty of drawing comparisons between the cost of MTG and Hearthstone in a guide I wrote on this very site.
      If we want to have a realistic conversation about what a fair payment model should look like in Hearthstone, then we need to be realistic about what kinds of games it’s fair to compare Hearthstone with. Not FPS games, not trading card games (TCGs), but only other collectible card games (CCGs). These are Hearthstone’s true competitors. Games which are free to download, charge money to unlock cards at an accelerated pace, and have no system in place to trade cards between players.
      Here’s a quick list of the most popular non-Hearthstone CCG’s on the market:
      Shadowverse Gwent Eternal Elder Scrolls: Legends Ready for a controversial opinion? Hearthstone should be more expensive than the other CCGs. It’s the oldest and most polished game of the lot, it has the largest player base by a mile, and it has vastly more cards, expansions, and free single player content than its competition. Before we can begin to discuss ways that we can improve the reward systems and payment models for Hearthstone we need to accept that Hearthstone has earned to right to call itself the premier CCG in the world. As such, a fair price point for Hearthstone is something higher than that of the other CCGs and something lower than Magic: the Gathering, which is where Hearthstone currently lies.
      The Hearthstone community would probably complain far less about the game's cost if its players felt as though they were being appropriately rewarded for their investments of time and money; superior products are allowed to cost more than inferior ones. However, there is a tangible gap between the time and money players are investing into Hearthstone and the feeling of “reward and accomplishment” they are getting in return. This is a problem which, quite frankly, the other CCGs just don’t have.
      Win or lose, playing the Draft mode in Eternal makes me feel as though I’m steadily marching closer and closer to building the decks I want to play on the ladder. Creating a Shadowverse account bestows players with so many packs that it made me feel as though I owed the developers a debt of gratitude in return. Having played each of the other CCGs I mentioned earlier in this article (some much more than others), there is a strong sense of generosity and progress present in these games which is largely absent in Hearthstone. 
      The unfortunate truth is that Hearthstone is so much bigger and more profitable than the competition that these games need to be generous with their players in order for them to stand a fighting chance. It's an extremely common business practice for smaller companies to undercut their bigger and better-funded competition. If the Draft mode in Eternal didn’t tangibly feel as though I was progressing towards a complete collection of cards then I probably wouldn’t play it at all. If Shadowverse didn’t immediately shower me with packs for creating a new account then it may not have held my attention past the tutorials. These vastly smaller CCGs are fighting an uphill battle by attempting to compete in the same design space as Hearthstone, making it a virtual necessity for their developers to be overtly generous to their player base.
      Blizzard has earned the right to charge more and reward less to Hearthstone players than other CCGs do. What Blizzard has failed to do thus far is make its players feel as though the rewards offered by playing and paying for Hearthstone are worth every penny.
      In-Game Rewards and Player Psychology
      Blizzard has made some serious strides in the past few expansions by providing its players with more free content than ever. They’ve started giving out one free Legendary card per set, have started producing rich single-player content for every new expansion, briefly experimented with daily login rewards leading up to the release of Journey to Un’Goro, and have periodically run festivals that handed out free packs and Arena runs. These are certainly significant strides in a positive direction, yet players still feel guilty when purchasing packs from the shop. Why is that?
       
      Let’s start by taking a look at the random Legendary reward which was introduced at the start of Knights of the Frozen Throne. It’s certainly a welcome prize, but how does it make players feel? I’d argue that in practice, the average Hearthstone player will end up receiving a shiny new Legendary card that they didn’t actually want. The majority of players will be crossing their fingers for a specific Legendary (such as the one belonging to their favorite class) and will feel disappointed when they receive one of the eight other Legendaries they weren’t hoping for. Newer players might only have enough cards in their collection to build a deck for one or two of the classes (I only crafted Druid cards for my first few months in Hearthstone) and will probably have no use at all for a random Legendary outside of those classes. What we have is a reward that is purely beneficial to players, yet somehow it often results in a negative player experience.
      Player psychology is an incredibly important issue in game design, and it’s an issue that Blizzard has demonstrated the ability to masterfully navigate in the past. A famous example comes from World of Warcraft, where Blizzard was able to successfully morph one of the most complained about systems in the game into a system which has since been copied by nearly every MMO after it:
      This notion of player psychology is undoubtedly playing an important role in the perceived gap between player investment and player reward in Hearthstone. The way that rewards and punishments are framed has a tremendous effect on player psychology, and it certainly seems as though Blizzard is losing the psychological battle with its player base. Without having to make any sweeping changes to the in-game reward systems, I’d argue that Blizzard could gain a lot of good will with its players by reframing the way that some of its current in-game rewards are presented. Let’s start by revisiting the random Legendary reward to see if it can reframed in a way which feels better its players.
      At worst, a random Legendary card can be turned into 400 dust; enough to construct four Rares or one Epic. Instead of setting up a large portion of the player base to be disappointed by receiving a random Legendary they may or may not have really wanted, how would players feel if they were simply given 400 dust instead? This reward would be strictly worse than receiving a random Legendary, but I would guess that it would have been received much better by the average Hearthstone player than the random Legendary reward currently is. It’s not so bad to receive a free reward you didn’t really want, but it feels downright awful to dust a Legendary into one quarter of its previous value. Taking this one step further, imagine how excited players would be if they received 1600 dust (or a Legendary of their choice) for trying out a new set. This would give players a feeling of agency and control which is wholly absent from the current in-game reward model. The single biggest problem with Hearthstone’s current in-game reward systems and payment models is a perceived lack of player control. 
      A Lack of Choice in Hearthstone’s Payment Model
      The slow trickle of gold players receive for playing games leads to a slow trickle of packs, and this slow trickle of packs leads to even slower trickle of dust, the only resource players get for constructing the cards they truly want. Outside of grinding away on the ladder, the only other tool at player’s disposal for getting the cards they need to build competitive decks is to pay for packs.
      The best rate that players can get on packs is $49.99 for a one time pre-order of 50 packs of the new set. The estimated average dust per pack is 102.71, assuming you dust every single card you open. 102.71 dust per pack times 50 packs equals 5135.5 dust, which is just enough to construct three Legendaries of your choosing but not nearly enough to build the vast majority of competitive decks in the current metagame.
      If you assume that most of the players who pre-order every new set have the majority of the most popular Legendaries and Epics from previous sets, then it’s fair to assume that 5k dust will be enough for these players to build one or two decks using cards from the newest set. For a newer player with a thinner collection, it’s much more likely that they will be at the mercy of the cards they open in those 50 packs and won’t be able to afford the luxury of dusting most of the cards they purchased. One could make the case that $49.99 is a fair price for a player with a deep collection to pay to be able to immediately build a couple of new decks, especially when you take into account the amount of free content that Blizzard has been rewarding players with of late. One could also make the case that it isn’t. Regardless, I have a very hard time believing that $49.99 is a fair price for a new player to pay to maybe be able to construct a single deck that they may or may not have wanted to build in the first place.
      Its debateable as to whether or not the issue with Hearthstone’s payment model is the actual value players are receiving from their purchased packs. One thing we can for certain is that there are no choices associated with opening packs that feel good for players to make. There’s really no two ways about it, dusting cards that you may or may not need in the future feels awful. A 25% rate of return for dusting cards feels like selling your grandmother’s jewelry to a pawn shop, yet choosing to dust or not dust cards is the only choice players are presented with after purchasing packs.
      Why is it that the only choice players are offered after paying money feels bad to make? There’s nothing intrinsic to the design of Hearthstone which has to prevent players from having more authority over the kinds of cards that are being added to their collection, and I seriously doubt that it is Blizzard’s goal to associate paying money with bad choices. Returning to the idea of player psychology, if we could reframe the current pack purchasing system to offer players more choices, to offer them better choices, perhaps Hearthstone fans wouldn’t feel as disenfranchised as they are feeling right now.
      An example of a way that Blizzard could offer players more choice in their pack purchases would be to give players the option to choose from one of nine “prerelease bundles”, one for each class. Each bundle could be guaranteed to contain one Legendary, two Epics, and four Rares belonging to the class of their choosing. Blizzard could easily adjust these bundles of 50 packs so that they have the same expected value as 50 normal packs. This would offer players with smaller collections a choice that maximizes the likelihood that they will actually be able to use the cards they open, while simultaneously offering the more hardcore players a better opportunity at opening the specific Legendaries and Epics they want most. All this upside can be offered to players without having to actually increase the total amount of cards and dust that players receive from their prerelease packs, and has virtually no downside for players when compared against the current prerelease bundle. I hope this example illustrates that Blizzard is highly capable of improving their existing payment model by providing players with more choices, and that sweeping changes to crafting and pack opening systems are likely unnecessary.
      Conclusion
      To recap, here’s everything we’ve discussed so far:
      Hearthstone fans are currently as upset as they have ever been with the cost of the game. As the premier CCG on the market, Blizzard has earned the right to charge more for Hearthstone than other CCGs. The onus is on other companies to undercut Hearthstone to attract players to their less popular products. The way that players feel about the rewards they receive is just as important, if not more important, than the quality of the rewards themselves. Hearthstone has room to improve from a player psychology perspective and should seriously consider reframing some of their current rewards if they are unwilling to increase them. The only choice players receive when purchasing packs is which cards they would like to dust after opening them. The very low rate of return on dusting cards means that the only choice associated with spending money on the game is one that makes players feel bad, yet there’s no discernable reason that pack purchases can’t offer players meaningful choices that actually make them feel good. Its undeniable that Hearthstone has some room to improve on the systems which are currently under fire from its player base, but at the same, the player base needs to be a little more realistic about what they truly deserve from Blizzard. Hearthstone is an incredible game which provides its players with loads of free content, but at the same time, that doesn’t mean that its devoted fans don’t deserve more than they are currently receiving for their money. It seems as though Blizzard and Hearthstone fans need to meet each other halfway.
      Blizzard doesn’t need to make sweeping changes to its in-game reward systems and payment models to silence their unsatisfied customers. By offering players a greater degree of choice than they are being offered today, players will feel as though they are getting a much better return on their investments of time and money. There will always be a vocal minority of the Hearthstone community who feel as though they deserve more for their money, but when that minority turns into a majority as it has in today’s Hearthstone community, it’s time to make some changes.
      - Aleco
    • By Aleco

      Nine new Kobolds and Catacombs cards were revealed today on the spoiler kick-off stream, including two Rogue Secrets!
      Spoiler season for Kobolds and Catacombs officially began today with the spoiler kick-off stream, featuring game designer Peter Whalen and commentator Brian Kibler. Nine new cards were revealed during the stream, highlighted by the first two Rogue Secrets to join the game:


      The latest class to gain the Secret card type, it will be very interesting to see if the full crop of Rogue Secrets in Kobolds and Catacombs will be strong enough to support a new archetype. The first two secrets, Cheat Death and Sudden Betrayal, certainly lend themselves to some exciting play patterns.
      Peter Whalen's favorite card of today's lot, the team wanted to create a card which hearkened to the feeling of being swarmed by tiny monsters in a dungeon. Regardless of whether or not this card is actually good, it's certainly awesome.
      The card I'm most excited to get my hands on appears powerful enough to make Dragon Priest an instant contender in the K&T metagame. Expect this card to receive strong ratings in upcoming set reviews.

      Expanding on the skill-testing "Choose One" mechanic, Branching Paths doubles down by allowing players to choose from three options twice. The same option can be chosen both times.
      Kathrena Winterwisp's text box reads as a one-way ticket to Valuetown. The only Hunter card with the powerful new Recruit mechanic, will Kathrena be enough to bring diversity to the one-dimensional Hunter class?
      The design team knew that a set about dungeon crawling had to have a card with the name "Level Up!". Getting this to stick on three on more Silver Hand Recruits could be devastating, but how easy will that be to set up in an actual game?
      The Legendary Shaman weapon comes in at a whopping 8 mana, implying that it packs a serious punch. It reads a little underwhelming for its high mana cost, but Shaman has quite a few spells that are untargeted and therefore purely beneficial. If The Runespear can consistently find Volcano or Lightning Storm it may be strong enough to see play in slower Shaman decks.

      Warrior's Spellstone can deliver a whopping 15/15 worth of stats for 7 mana, but only if you can play two weapons while holding it in your hand. Mithril Spellstone plays excellently with the new Recruit mechanic, implying that the true strength of this card may be its ability to play to the board without being a minion. With spoiler season now in full swing, be sure to check back to Icy Veins for all your Kobolds and Catacombs spoilers, card reviews, news, and more!
      Card images courtesy of Hearthpwn.com
    • By Damien
      This thread is for comments about our Toxin Cards guide.
    • By Zadina

      For the first time, we know exactly where and when the card reveals for the upcoming expansion will happen.
      The reveal season will start off with the livestream on November 20. Then, it's time for the fan sites and streamers to take over.
      The schedule for the reveals during November 21 to November 26 has been unveiled and you can check it out below. We will have a fast pace of 3 to 4 reveals per day!
      Blizzard Entertainment
      We’ve teamed up with the Hearthstone community to bring you a treasure trove of card reveals!
      Tricky traps and dangerous dungeon dwellers lurk behind every twist and turn of Hearthstone’s upcoming expansion. We’ve gathered a party of Hearthstone community members to bring to light all the lavish loot and malicious minions they’ve discovered while venturing deep into the catacombs.
      Check out the days and times below, and click the images to portal directly over to their channels. 
      Week of November 20 The schedule for Week 2 will be posted on Friday November 24 PST!
      (source)
      We will be following closely these card reveals. You should look out for them on our news forum and on our Kobolds & Catacombs hub.