After the resent patch, which took too long to arrive, where most cards where just a number switch, i care for standard… i stand firm on my opinion on more frequent nerfs…
2 weeks or what it was? For such weak nerfs… nourish should’ve joined auctioneer…
And I stand still on my opinion that players are not babies you need to bottle feed, you have to let the meta be for a time for players to find options by themselves
Thats exactly what im argueing too, if your new update has major problems you should fix them as fast as possible. Nobody should have to wait a week for a cancer card to be fixed because they didnt take into consideration future events.
3 Likes
Ignore you? Is that what you call it when I focus on the faults of your claims rather than the claims themselves? Not only am I a dev, but im learned in philosophy, theology, and psychology. Im not ignoring you, but if you recognize I dont make it to your point, and rather get hung up on the details its because there is a major flaw in your argument and in order for me to continue I need that flaw to be fixed. Otherwise were both shouting our opinion without hearing the other. Im not ignoring you, but I cant follow your logic if it is not logical.
1 Like
Never said they were. I was only stating that you as a player deserve better in terms of update quality, being heard, and being informed. Its nobodies job but those at blizzards hearthstone dev team. Also, you claim we cant get relevant data in a day, but it legit takes less than 2 hours to get relevant data when you have 10k+ concurrent players at all times. I know only because the domino effect was catastrophic with every 10 minutes that passed, reviews, ratings, purchases, etc. You take a hard financial hit when you do wrong, and I guarantee they see that problem not just gamewise, but financially too.
1 Like
You’re whole message was about not waiting a week for fixing a bug.
I Just said prior to that That I agree to as much bug fixes as possible. Depending on tech organisation and deployment politics of the company, I understand that a daily bugfix may not be possible for every one, but I very stated that every 2~3 days is perfectly fine.
You didn’t highlight anything else in your message.
You will get data about the edecks that were existing prior to your balance change
You won’t have data about new decks that have not been experimented with yet.
Past expansions proved that new decks can emerge several days, weeks, event months in rare occasions, after a balance patch, and shift all the meta around them. When that happens, all the data you collected before that becomes obsolete as it does not reflect what the game was actually capable of.
If you focus your patch to fix daily the top roaster of the meta, you’re not monitoring the underdogs and take
A- The risk that those decks are never expiremented with to counter the top meta if the top meta is getting nerfed anyway
B- The risk to buff an underdog archetype that was not discovered yet but in reality was already a perfect candidate to counter to pmeta decks
You are literally building a strawman of what I am talking about. I am only talking about patches/bug fixes and you conflate all of this BS into your own argument to devalue mine, and thats just ignorant af. I havent said anything about meta, or deck builds. Thats only you who has talked about that, and youve used it for arguments that nobody is making. You are air headed. Regardless of if you agreed to more bug fixes it doesnt take away from your attacks at my knowledge. You try to hide behind ignorance.
1 Like
OP was only talking about having daily balance patch. Asking for more frequent nerfs.
I made my first comments by replying to OP’s topic of balance patches, stating that 2 weeks is frequent enough IMO
You came and used an argument from authority to say that you can do “full game updates” every week and so could they. Devaluating my comment by calling it a poor excuse while it was just my opinion of the frequency we should have, not an excuse of any sort for why we don’t have more often.
An argument from authority without context is irrelevant. That’s not devaluating, that’s a fact. This is why I was asking questions to have more context to understand your point of view and your statement.
You condescendingly refused to give any clear context to explain your point of view.
Then you assume, out of nowhere, that I’m against having frequent bugfixes.
you NEVER stated that in a thread that was NOT about bugfix. You completely went off-topic IN YOUR HEAD, assuming we would know that.
That’s the main topic of that thread. How can you claim that nobody has talked about that when the very first message is about requesting more nerfs ? And when the second message of the thread, mine, to which you replied, is centered about meta and deck building ?
Every single reply you made could have been about actual balance patch and I replied to them in that regard.
And for the FOURTH time : I AGREE with you about the frequency of bug fixes, we should have more
Agreeing or not has nothing to do with you coming at me negatively.
“As a game dev, me and my team dropped full game updates every week (three of us). So its a very poor excuse to claim every two weeks for patches is sufficient.” Do you not see what I was stating here? I was literally talking about patches, and you want to claim I made no such indication? Get off the gas dude. You claiming I need to give more information to be relevant was extremely rude, and you want to pretend you werent just being a jerk. OK, sure. Then you claimed your tech team working on a banking app was the equivelant of my knowledge in the field and thats an actual “Appeal to an unqualified authority”. You want to insinuate that my claim of dropping full updates every week meant thats what I expect of blizzard and you are legit playing ignorant on purpose. I never claimed I could do better than blizzard on their game. I just want them to care more, but you wanted to push that narrative. To top it off you keep claiming im making an argument from authority fallacy, but I am not citing someone elses knowledge on the matter. I am claiming that I have knowledge in this field because I do it for a living. Thats not an arguement from authority. You could claim Im trying to make an “appeal to unqualified authority”, but I have data that proves otherwise on that front. I just dont have to share that data with you. Thats like going to a mechanic with a car made by another manufacturer and when he gives his input and says he has 8 years of work behind it you claim hes making an appeal to authority. Thats wild, and completely false. Also OP wasnt just talking about meta, they clearly stated bug fixes/patches. Dont just lie. If you want to go the philosophy route I can do that too, but I really dont feel like argueing anymore. And you keep claiming Im trying to be some type of way, and I cant stand accusers. I also went to your profile. You are standoffish and arguementative across the forum. If you want to debate pick up the hobby, dont make us forum goers suffer because you want to clash with everybodies opinion.
1 Like
Uff, I don’t read walls of text, but I saw OP and bugs, and no, not only bugs, I want frequent mini-changes to cards. like, push mana up and down or dmg. to push up or down the win chances of decks. and major nerfs can be less often like today. like changes that change things more drastically like auctioneer, or cards that are important to a deck. As we saw the new patch was quite the miss.
if tomorrow they would make Crazed Wretch 3 mana, to slow down enrage warrior, and Embrace of Nature 2 mana, just to slow druid down just slightly. then you can look at the major offenders for a major patch, and if needed, revert the 2 nerfs.
that’s just what I think would help these long(2 weeks is long for me…) periods of frustration.
But I agree with some who say the game needs a refresh, perhaps HS2… but knowing how the did with OW2, might be the worst thing to do.