Thats to be expected now that people are noticing and those that dont have the time for these new quests are arguing
They did the same thing for Corridor Sleeper and nothing happened.
The days when Blizzard prioritized user experience seem to be behind us. I wouldnât be surprised if they continue along the same lines with both. Next expansion will tell.
False, if by âadvantageâ you mean that it benefits bots more than humans. Letâs compare a bot to a human before quests. One makes XP 24/7; the other plays for a limited number of hours per day. Now letâs have both of them complete all of the quests. They both gain the same amount of XP in absolute terms, but the human gains more as a percentage of what they would have gained otherwise.
I donât think that Blizzard cares about us beyond the money we spend and drive to them. However, even for paying players, this is a big deal if based mostly on the sh*ttiness of the change.
1 Like
The argument being presented revolves around the advantageous implications of this alteration primarily for bots. Bots, capable of perpetual play without constraints, stand to gain the most from it.
Conversely, humans face finite time and various constraints, rendering larger quest requirements less appealing. These factors might result in reduced engagement or even cessation of play.
In essence, the underlying humor lies in the notion that bots will derive greater enjoyment from this change than genuine players. The bot argument serves merely as a tool for pushing back against the change. Thereâs no genuine intention to derive any substantial meaning from it.
If you believe this then your logic is bad, or your math is.
Quests typically donât extend beyond a few hours for someone playing continuously. Unless the entire bot situation is addressed before that short timeframe to deliver the account to the buyer, then my calculations remain accurate.
This fact advantages humans over bots. It is not evidence for your point, it is against.
My point does not relate to a comparison for who gets the most crumbs.
Humans will experience both advantages and disadvantages with this change, whereas bots will only benefit. Therefore, determining who has the surplus becomes irrelevant as one side gains exclusively.
1 Like
Then when you said thisâŚ
âŚyou didnât mean it. Advantage implies comparison. Thatâs what the word means.
If a change provides advantage to bots then (bot XP after á bot XP before) > (human XP after á human XP before). Thatâs the only calculation to make.
the backlash already has the devs discussing itâŚ
keep making a stink and theyâll revert the quests
2 Likes
If youâre unfamiliar with how bots function, thatâs the calculation to consider. However, the reality that bots operate in larger, continuous timeframes than humans grants them an advantage.
Omitting such factors in an argument demonstrates a lack of understanding regarding Hearthstone bots.
The pivotal point is the time investment between humans and bots. If you equalize the quantity of members in the 2 parties, bots will maintain an advantage over the same period of time, related to before the change.
P.S. An advantage over their experience gain compared to before the change. Perhaps that aspect wasnât made clear earlier and caused confusion. I didnât mean to compare to humans but to their previous trials.
This is a TRUE statement. Note that it doesnât say anything about quests. Almost all bot XP is questless.
The conclusion of this paragraph is FALSE. Because it tries to act like quests are bigger for bots than they are for humans.
Do you see the difference between TRUE and FALSE here? Or are you going to keep blaming me for âomittingâ the blatantly obvious?
Thatâs not an advantage at all. Advantages imply an advantage over something; like the word âdominateâ it implies an opponent. The word youâre looking for is improvement.
And it is a tiny improvement. Bots gather the 5000ish gold needed to make a sellable Arena run in well under a week. There is not a bot ever that will complete more than 6 weekly quests and a handful of dailies during its entire lifespan. All the rest is questless. If only 4% of bot XP is gained from quests and quest XP goes up by 25%, thatâs a net improvement of +1%. Itâs laughable.
Yeah this is an incredibly stupid change.
1 Like
Youâre absolutely correct, though.
Bots get more xp for doing what they already do because doing 200 or 1000 damage or 500 mana spent is meaningless to their play style. The net is they get boosted xp without altering anything.
There will be a portion of the player base that will consistently fail to meet the enhanced requirements for any number of reasons, and thatâs a net loss of xp and gold despite the increased rewards from the quests.
I currently donât play enough to hit 15 wins in constructed or in battlegrounds. You can only reroll one quest a day⌠this is bad.
3 Likes
I guess there are many gambling addicts like me that complete the quests in tuesday, playing 2 hours per day, really werent a challenge⌠im glad i didnt buy the battlepass, hate the toy skins, but idid like the expansion and even bought the diamond dr boomâŚ
1 Like
A very tiny portion. Refusing to go along with the new quests would be the heroic option, and most people are no heroes. 90 plus percent are going to go with the simp option and play a lot more. Overall Most free-to-play players will get more XP, both from quests and from just playing more games.
There absolutely will not be a net loss of XP due to this change. For some players sure, but overall absolutely not.
Not only are there many of them, thatâs the vast majority.
Just to be clear, I am adamantly against these quest changes. I want the Hearthstone player base to not be a bunch of gambling addicts. Me being realistic about the fact that they already almost entirely are, doesnât mean that I like that fact or that I want it to be encouraged more. However, this is absolutely something that if Iâm just being realistic blizzard will get away with, no major problem. Sad but true. Maybe if the social media reaction is bad enough, theyâll increase XP that it grants. But Iâm pretty darn sure they are not going to reduce the requirements.
Just the size of the reaction to these quest changes shows in and of itself how addicted the community is. If you as a collective did not feel like you have to complete your quests, then you wouldnât be responding so powerfully.
You have absolutely zero basis for this statement.
The correct answer is you donât know how wide spread the issue will be.
So far my reaction is to play less than before because the whole thing pissed me off.
I have a high degree of confidence the change was not intended to drive off players.
4 Likes
You are a member of a forum community. It is already your clear and proven bias to play less so that you can complain more. 7000 posts of evidence. It is my bias as well. You donât seem to acknowledge how unusual we are.
And it wonât. Not many anyways.
This is also false. It is your bias that makes you say this.
Again, the only correct answer is âwe donât know yet what impact it will haveâ instead of asserting facts when you have zero evidentiary support for your ridiculous claims.
1 Like