Could the BG shop have "anything" I could spend my gold on?

Community Discussion
1

Like literally anything, cosmetics, pass, 4 hero choice, anything.

Give the players ways to spend gold they accumulate over time with reward track.

Battlepass is P2W, you get 4 choices instead of 2 Heroes, in a gamemode where more than 2 Heroes can be considerably weaker on average than others.

As much as people can have loyalty and can be keen on on Hearthstone Battlegrounds, things can get bit boring.

For even if F2P players don’t contribute to the game, they still contribute by being part of playerbase… by… playing the game…

And F2P players have to suffer:

  • having less variety due to only 2 Hero choices at start
  • having less variety in terms of some Heroes they own simply don’t have skins, while other Heroes can have 5 skins, but you only use one of them for whatever reason
  • having less variety in emotes until new Season pass arrives, which can sometimes bring some decent free emotes
  • Having Bob as one of their only bartenders… [Insert Bob Quote you’ve heared for the 16784th time] “wow Bob so cool”
  • F2P strikes - personally 99% of F2P strikes aren’t that impressive, I have 6 strikes, I use only one of them, and it’s Rare not Epic
  • And don’t get me started on boards, though if you can as F2P player get anniversary type board, then that’s alright

But of course, despite the last point, everything else is not alright.

What’s the idea of this thread?

The idea of this thread, despite the bullet-point of things that can frustrate F2P players.

Is backed up by the underlying fact that:

"If no currency, cosmetics, nothing is barely achieved through gameplay - then the only main driver for F2P player to play this game, is Balance", (and gameplay) - and as you know balance is something that can on occasion be very objective, so the amount and intensity of interest of F2P players, can always vary, because the balance can always be different in a certain way.

2 Likes
2

spend gold for anything

That’s not P2W enough.

1 Like
3

No because BGs is the part of hearthstone for the purely Free to Play casuals that have no interest in the constructed modes at all. so there is no incentive for them to make anything available with gold to the BGs people. Its why the pass is IRL money or runestones, and all the cosmetics are runestones. The incentive for even granting gold from BGs is to get you into the constructed format of the game so you’ll be more likely to spend IRL money or runestones there, and if you do it there, high probability of you also doing so back in BGs. Doing anything at all to deviate from that thru-line would result in negative results in terms of incoming revenue for them. They have no incentive at all to do that.

Personally Ive told them in the past as a suggestion in a previous survey that they ought to have one of the possible cosmetics in the BGs store be available to both gold and runestones. the price of the runestone wouldnt change compared to the others available, but the gold price could be stupid high like 1000-1500 gold just as a method of BG only players being able to slowly acquire some things using gold, but also be a gold sink so players may not have the gold saved up for constructed when mini-sets are released and then they;d have to buy them outright because they spent all their gold on BG cosmetics.

If i were them thats what I would do and test to see if it affects the needle on miniset purchases with gold/with cash or not.

1 Like
4

Wut. It’s the most Pay2Win part of the game. You get 2X the choices of Heroes at the start if you pay when Constructed in contrast can be 100% Free2Play if you put the hours to farm XP and are careful with disenchanting.

1 Like
5

There is no pay to win because of the perks… all that does is reduce the likelihood of autobailing on a lobby… on average out of 5 times I queue into a lobby, I bail on 3 of them as soon as I see my choices of tribes and then the heroes. when I have the perks, that goes down to like 2 out of 5 lobbies for being autobailed. has nothing to do with the results of any match that is actually played.

6

Right, cuz the pro players playing at 13k rating , RDU , Jeff etc have all achieved that rank with 2 hero choices, because your statistic is correct.

Having two more hero choices is an immense advantage, also considering that it dilutes the pool of choosable heroes for others. To have only your sample of games it’s technically not a statistic. After a particular rating is impossible to win over the advantage of having 4 heroes to chose from. The ones having the 4 hero pool will have an advantage that might overcome your lucky refreshes in particular game setups. And also after a particular rating let’s say 8k and onwards almost everyone has the tavern pass…

7

ClashRoyale once went harder on P2W aspect…

they lost millions of players after that went live…

it is correct, if these pro players were able to choose out of 4 instead of 2, they’d win more, they’d climb more steadily, and perhaps even have much more fun.

My statistic is called “common sense”

it still is, because you can still land on 2 trash non-meta heroes, and everyone else can get really good/meta hero

So you deny 2 more choices doesn’t give advantage, and then you follow up with “they have 2 more choices after XYZ MMR anyway”…

1 Like
8

No it does not. all 8 players are given 4 separate heroes with 0 chance of anyone being offered the same hero as another. the 2 choices that arent shown if you dont have the perks is just a cosmetic thing that is the same as if they just greyed out the choices and you could still see what they would have been… there is no dilution of the choices for others. If all 8 players have the perks, they would still have been assigned the 4 different heroes with no overlap of anyone getting offered the same hero between any of them, and its the exact same if all 8 players dont have the perks and only get to see 2 of 4 choices. There are 50+ or even more heroes to be offered with some exceptions being locked out if certain tribes arent in the tavern that game. Upon loading the game with all 8 players the 32 heroes are already assigned to the 8 players, 4 each, and if any dont have the perks, 2 are hidden from view. There is no dilution of the heroes for other players if a player has the perks and another doesnt. The same 4 would be assigned to a player upon the game being loaded whether or not they have the perks. Being able to choose from them is all that changes, and has 0 effect on another player’s 4 heroes they were assigned.

9

If you don’t have an official source, that’s just conjecture.

2 Likes
10

He doesn’t, he just assumes. The simple fact that when you get to chose the heroes you will be offered a choice from heroes that are not already offered to other players in this case 4 to the ones who have tavern pass is pool dilution, he simply doesn’t want to be wrong. Which he still is and tries to defend that the mode is not pay2win just because he has 4 heroes instead of 2, even though it has been discussed for ages by profesional streamers not nobody “Cramer” from the HS forums who knows the code behind HS and knows that when he paid for 4 heroes it’s not pay2win so he can sleep at night.

2 Likes
11

I wasn’t talking to you and I wasn’t denying 2 more choices doesn’t give an advantage…Read what I said again, and again I wasn’t talking to you…

Also you wrong and probably never reached more than 5-6k, from 8k to 10k with 2 hero choices you drop from a 50-60% win rate ( that after removing the rigged hidden mmr matchmaking system), to a bullsh@t of probably 3%. And that’s if being stupid lucky. Let me correct myself , I wanted to say it’s virtually impossible to climb, not impossible to win any kind of matches, because you will win 1 out of 14 matches.

1 Like
12

Call it conjecture, I call it is simple logic: to just assign the 4 potential choices to each player and merely mask the ones away if they havent got the perks. It’s fair because there is no manipulation of the “pool”, there is no ordering of the players being offered their choices in sequential order, its just obviously the most simple and fairest way to assign heroes to each player. Think of it like a dealer issuing out 4 cards to each player out of the Hero’s List deck of cards, if you got the perks you can turn all 4 face up, if not you can only turn the middle 2 face up. But the fairness of what potential choices each player can have isnt changed at all by another player’s perks or no perks. My deduction and use of logic results in no ability for someone owning the the perks to affect someone else that doesnt. All it does is just let you flip you hidden 2 choices face up to be able to choose from.

How is this done in sequence as it would have to be started with one player and then another and another, whats the order? It cant be whoever is labelled as player 1 in the tavern as that is only determined AFTER heroes have been selected because player 1 is whoever has the most health+armor.
There is no evidence at all for what you suggest that there is a pool of heroes being subtracted from if some players have the perks and others dont. Where is your source for such an extraordinary claim? My claim is simple deduction of what the most simple, most logical, and most efficient way to give players their choices. The idea that if I have the perks package and so when Im offered my 4 heroes, that if one were Reno for example, had I not had the perks, then you could have been given Reno instead. The hero selection does not function like the cards in the tavern once the game begins. That is such a huge leap of logic I dont think Superman can clear that.

Also, I dont currently have the perks, havent for the last 3 or 4 seasons. As it makes no difference in my BGs ratings each season. So I do not see the P2W aspect you claim. At best for me it only reduces the number of games I bail on before they begin by 1 out 5. Not a huge difference to warrant the expense.

Also, sleep is for casuals.

13

Quite simple to explain actually … Let’s take a list of [1,2,3,4,5,6] and 2 players, if one player has the perks, it doesn’t matter which 4 heroes the game took out of the pool to offer the player with 4 heroes, because player 2 will have the remaining 2. It doesn’t matter if the come into an order to pick from the list, the one getting 4 will still have 4 while the other will have 2…The random order they get picked doesn’t matter, hence diluting the pool because the gam has fewer choices to give layer 2 than 4.

You don’t have to take my point of view, you can check every streamer on the planet that plays bg and they will have at least 1 video about 4 hero choice vs 2 hero choice calling it p2w.

1 Like
14

Blizzard forums are bad at determining whether people respond to comment/post…

I’m 6k right now in duos…

15

That isnt how that works at all. if so, show some proof because the logic is bonkers.

16

Each player gets 2 or 4 random Heroes taken from the same pool, how hard is that to understand?

There’s no reason for 2 option player to be grabbing 4 Heroes out of pool, that would be the opposite of good, (and redundant)

imagine X hero in one lobby gets put under the “locked” 2 remaining options of F2P player,

imagine this X hero then proceeds to get “locked” again next game,

then locked again next game,

then locked again next game,

then locked again next game,

because each time same/different F2P player would randomly got the hero “locked” under their inaccessible choice,

that would be more than unfair, because instead of choice, it would just be locked out of reach from other players. (not just for players, but for Hero diversity too)

Which is similarly the same reason why 4 picks is P2W too, because with 4 picks, you can do exactly that, you can happen to run into same Hero over and over again, meaning in these lobbies this option isn’t available for anyone else…

17

Your premise is entirely based on a flawed assumption of how it works. The assigned heroes to each player are just as random as if we are each dealt 4 cards out of a deck. after the 4 each are dealt out, then we flip them over, if without perks, you flip the middle 2. if with perks, flip all 4. it has no affect on any other players because all the heroes choices have already been provided and none can affect the other. And the next game is not affected by the previous game at all. It is only by a very few and far between circumstance where 1 player is offered 1 of their 4 choices from the previous match again in their next match, and that is just by luck of the draw, and not because it was locked behind someone’s perks or lack thereof.

You have to be trolling us at this point because your idea of how it offers heroes is so flawed and makes no sense.

18

Like I said, it would be redundant and potentially unfair.

it has effect, if this were true it would mean that certain hero could be inaccessible by anyone for several games

yes it would be, because you could have hero stuck under “unflipped” card for several games,

what about a different player drafting “unflipped” hero, that is same to the previous?

you do understand there can be more F2P players, and each can alternate between holding “unflipped” heroes hostage by being unable to play them,

you created a flawed system by assuming it’s 1:1 to the original Hearthstone.

Have you ever read and used common sense on what you write or do you just write with your brain turned off?

19

In what game lobbies do you see the same heroes in EVERY match over and over over again? you do not. For example, let us assume Reno is offered to 1 of the 8 players in my version of the way the heroes are assigned. With all 8 players being given 4 heroes at random and 1 of them has Reno, the only one of two determining factors if Reno is seen or not by that player that was offered Reno is if that 1 player has the perks or not, and the other is if Reno is within the middle 2 choices. if none of the other players have the perks, it has no affect on the one player that was offered Reno, the only variable at play after the randomly assigned 4 choices are dealt out is if the 1 player that got the luck of the draw, has the perks or not, and it may not matter at all if Reno is one of the middle 2 choices for them, and again, that is just luck of the draw.

If Reno wasnt within the middle 2, that’s again, luck of the draw. This happens every match where you are hoping for a certain hero to play, out of the many many many choices there could be based on the tribes available, there are still more options than can even be assigned to the 8 players. There are going to be lobbies where even if all 8 players had the perks, some heroes are just not made available because they just werent in the ones that were dealt out at random from the what Im gonna refer to as the “Heroes Deck”. Again, this is the most fair method of dealing out the choices, keeping the variety of the gameplay fresh, and overall keeping the complexity of the game at the lowest possible method to code.

Your method not only makes zero sense, it in no way has not been explained at all other than “but what if I dont get this hero for several games?!” which is something that already happens in reality. Only 1 of the 8 players are gonna be offered any 1 specific hero out of the lobby as we know that no 2 players are allowed to be given the same possible choice to be any 1 hero. That is already a known. SO in order to do that, the heroes must be dealt out to the players at random and a total of 4 choices of heroes to each player. The method you propose would be such a backwards method of dealing out the choices, and doesnt even make sense.

Explain in detail, how it functionally works. And dont tell me to go watch streamers. Use your own words and spell it out here in a way that actually makes any sense. Because it is obvious you are not using any common sense to approach this functionality,

20

Can you please show me your proof that it works the way you do before me ? It’s simple, you stated first it’s how you said so show us proof, then I will show you mine…

Today I worked too hard , so I am cutting the edge here, show me your proof and then I will show you mine