Since august we have nerfed:
-Mana wyrm
-Wild growth
-Nourish
-Cold blood
-Flametongue totem
-Equality
-Hunters mark
And today preparation
and im not even counting older nerfs and HoFs.
Just saying that: ‘‘All changes we make to the Basic and Classic sets are aimed at ensuring Hearthstone’s long-term health’’ doesnt change the fact that Hs classic set and history are being ruined + the fact that so many classic changes happened recently that maybe, just maybe its the new expansions fault and not the classic sets one.
Also ‘‘As always, we’ll be evaluating the results of these changes over the coming weeks and look forward to your feedback’’ is a lie since i havent seen a buff ever.
The most common argument ‘‘Classic set should stay cause it gives a baseline to new and returning players’’ fades away bit by a bit and the question remains ‘‘what to do?’’. If things stay the way it is, the classic nerfs will continue and by the end of the day Hs will lose its history.
So pls, pls blizz just put some brain in your heads and change your stance towards Core set. Its the only solution.
26 Likes
They either nerf:
- Classic Cards that are only problematic due to overtuned expac cards, which rotate out soon
- Both
At some point, while I do not subscribe to any conspiracies, this trend becomes very questionable.
Surely, even a small indie company can learn from previous mistakes.
Right?
7 Likes
For anyone whom is with the game for 3 years or more would probably observed the changes on-going for the nerf/balance changes.
In the earlier phase of the game, Classic cards forms an important part of the class identity where new cards generally get design with them in consideration.
In today’s game, we see that class identity shifting. Cards are designed more focusing on empowering those new identities, where Classic card would bear the cost of it. (Thus, usually the target of nerf/balance changes)
Dev has not came out to explain such design insight which players can be “confused” by the direction the game is and will be going. This is important to some of the players, where such information will contribute to the class/es they main and how they invest their money/time/gold/dust.
While this provide the Dev a lot of space to explore possibilities on how the game can further develop, on the other hand, such uncertainty creates a lot of insecurity among the player base.
However, this is my personal observation and deduction.
7 Likes
The Argument of “Design space” is completely bs. Blizzard just want people to us more newer cards than older ones to make more money. (Which there is nothing wrong with). Nerfing Classic cards is a necessary evil unfortunately.
Buy new cards, don’t be cheap.
2 Likes
Explore possibilities does not restrict only to card design, but more to the overall game design. The game economy is part of it. However, that discussion will go much deeper…
YAY! MORE NERFS! MORE NERFS! MORE NERFS!
Barnes says “do me!”
3 Likes
An eternal set was always gonna be a mistake guys time to accept that and their direction. Ideally they’d introduce a rotating classic set but at this point it is blindly clear they’re of a mind to nerf problem classic cards. You can be furious about it or just take the healthier option and accept it. Lol Also acting like people haven’t been calling for nerfs or at least rotations for prep is absurd. It’s been eyed for a long time now and it is dishonest to act like this came out of the blue and no one wanted it addressed.
5 Likes
I WAS against the changes to the classic set as it forms an important part for new players. However, I been observing the direction the Dev may be heading towards.
At this point, I think the removal or rotating classic set could be nearer to be a possibility.
3 Likes
Pretty much this. Team5 should have implemented a rotating Classic “Core” set over 3 years ago, but they’ve been stubbornly refusing to do it in favor of slowly butchering the Classic set. At some point they’re going to have to bow to the inevitable and either do an entire redesign of the Classic set, or do the rotation thing that every other CCG long ago learned was critical to the long-term viability of a product.
This isn’t new territory. Magic The Gathering solved this issue decades ago. You either rotate your core set, or you are plagued with problems. Team5 needs to give up on this misguided position of theirs that the Classic set is both “untouchable” and somehow at the same time subject to constant nerfs and HOF Thanos snaps.
8 Likes
I have supported a rotating core set for a long time now, its better than the continued destruction of B&C. But at the end of the day it comes down to the C-word (not that one you filthy frog, get your mind out of the gutter), compensation. They gave us an assurance when formats were announced that B&C would remain standard legal, so if they go back on that then compensation would (imo) be required, and somehow I dont think a token gesture of a handful of packs will go down too well with many players, yet it is likely all we would get (if anything at all).
They really are caught between a rock and a hard place on this one. Personally I’m of the “damned if you do, damned if you dont” thinking on it, so just do it and get it over with!
2 Likes
Well.
If classic set not exists the new player has no need to buy it.
At this point you can count on they maintaining the classic even if nerfs turn it unplayable at all.
With that said it will be important for us as players point it to new players when it start to be the scenario.
There are 237 cards in the classic set. OP listed 7 of them that have been nerfed. (2.9%)
Conclusion: HEARTHSTONE CLASSIC SET IS RUINED Q_Q!
1 Like
You can’t possibly be that daft. Not all cards are created equal. Hence not all cards have the same impact or power. You further gut the classic collection by nerfing only a handful of cards. Try again.
So you think that the entire classic set is RUINED because 1 to 2 class cards per class have been nerfed?
Here is the definition, but I’m sure you will cling to your melodrama and hyper-reactive whining.
ruined
/ˈro͞oind/
–(of a building or place) reduced to a state of decay, collapse, or disintegration.
–* having been irreparably damaged or harmed.
I view at as Classic set provides the platform where players starts to build their collection. New players that start off with a modest collection can “safely” rely on the Classic set as the backbone in their deck building until they can replace them with more powerful expansion sets. (Classic set last “forever”, expansion set last 2years/less in standard)
At the rate of “powering down” the classic set, new player will have a harder time, unless subsidised substantially & consistently through freebies and offers.
2 Likes
But no.
The new player will just go to exp cards and need someone to help they since blizzard will never admit it even if it happens.
If I take a single popular letter (~4%) out of the English Alphabet, I’ve reduced hugely the number of words you can make. I’ve ruined several works of Shakespeare.
More prosaically, the spark plugs of a car are less than 2% of the machine, but it isn’t going to work without them.
Degree of impact is not always proportional to percent composition. This is especially true when things are meant to be used in combination (as with cards in a deck).
The classic set is meant to provide reasonable decks for f2p and new players to craft. Things like ramp druid and temp rogue are part of the evergreen landscape that they are slowly pruning. People are right to be concerned.
2 Likes
I think what hes saying is that nuking B&C is fine, but its on us as the “community” to inform new players that classic packs are not worthwhile purchasing.
I disagree, its on blizzard to do that if this is the way the want to reduce the prevalence of cards in that set. The online HS community is a minuscule percentage of players, there is absolutely no way that WE can do that. Blizzard need to make it clear that the Classic set is not worthwhile if they continue down this road.
#rotateb&c and cut the crap already!
2 Likes