Is the game p2w?


Some posters may indeed have some misconceptions/ misunderstanding about the game, and I feel those that tries to clear up and explained are under appreciated.

However, I notice a “trend” of posters whom may have gotten abit emotional or a near state of provoking.

While there are posters that obviously seeking attention and not serious on discussing the topic on hand, then further engagement will lead to further feed, a waste of energy(which could be better spent on other value topics) and worse case of getting drawn into what we don’t want to be.

(added: reply to the context of the post, not the person/personality)

HS is marketed as a F2P game and have modelled it as so. For people who wants to understand how the F2P system works, there are many explanation above. If there is further doubt, you may seek clarification where most veteran here would gladly explain. For those that have a self definition for F2P and how it should work, you opinions are appreciated.


Paying to win is not the same as paying to have a full collection.

There are cheap decks that can reliably win even at high ranks.


Question for those who think newer players with mediocre collections are “just fine”:

(Assuming equal skill and equal luck)

How many games played would you expect it to take someone with a complete collection to get from rank 25 to Legend?

How many games played would you expect it to take someone (just as experienced but who just started a new account recently) who has not bought any cards to go from rank 25 to Legend?

I bet most people would pick a higher number for the second person. To me, that indicates a potential issue, even if you don’t label it “p2w”.


never said on average, learn to read


when did i inflate anything?

i can reach legend means i’m doing well? do you want to see my games when i play hunter (without rexxar) vs another one with rexxar, or odd warrior (without the quest) vs another one with the quest? i get rekt, literally

he was right, it’s easier to be rank 1 on the first (hour of the first) day of the season than on the last day because there’re less ppl in legend

they could do it like apex/fortnite, give everyone all the content and only sell skins, wouldn’t it be better? imagine the choice of having 10-20 skins for each class

and yet the maths say otherwise, with the same amount of play time, a p2w player will have more cards (more deck choices, more tech cards) than a f2p player, it’s called advantage (which doesn’t exist on games like apex)


To begin any fruitful discussion, we should have a common ground on a topic. Below are 3 examples I have googled.

  1. relating to or denoting an arrangement in which basic access to a game is granted without charge while more advanced features must be paid for.

  2. refers to a business model for online games in which the game designers do not charge the user or player in order to join the game. Instead, they hope to bring in revenue from advertisements or in-game sales, such as payment for upgrades, special abilities, special items, and expansion packs.

  3. are games that give players access to a significant portion of their content without paying.

as we can see HS fall in well within the definition. If there is any one with a good definition to add (with valid sources) feel free to contribute into the discussion.

sidenote: under wiki, F2P games are further segregated into different category such as freemium, shareware, etc

It is easy to sidetrack a topic by adding elements without a full context.
The argument where if player1(more cards collection) have a advantage over player2(less card collection) holds true. However if both players are F2P, then the whole portrayed P2W concept fails.

As regard to paid cosmetics, it works for some games and not for another. To fully understand why so, one need to how the economics works in each.

There is another posts that pip my interest.
“in order to not be p2w, the free player needs to be able to reach legend in some reasonable number of games that doesn’t drastically exceed the number a reasonable player might actually choose to play.” extract from a post where poster made a self define interpretation of P2W

Before we proceed, I request a valid source for definition. However, just for thoughts, i always like to put all thing into context.

Reaching Legend can be a challenge to both F2P and payers alike. As explained by many, not having a full collection does not spell doom for players who wish to compete. There are some realistic ways that one can manage to compete as again mentioned by many.

From observation, most players fails to see an internal lack of mastery or imposes a self limitation that handicapped their true potential.

The introduction of no. of games into this discussion could be misleading, due to the many factors that are involved in gameplay.


Very succinct. Well spoken, sir.


You got to be to kidding me. You tend to throw any context that is disadvantage to you out the window and only focus on certain wordings, ultimately twisting other people’s word.

No, you’re not doing well because you hit legend. You’re doing well because, according to you, you’re hitting legend with 70% winrate in your bad month and 100% winrate in your good month.

So~ if what you said is true about your winrate, your statement saying this game is p2w becomes false, as you a f2p player is performing quite well. In order for your statement of game being p2w to be true, you must be lying/exaggerating about your winrate wheh climbing to legend (i.e. you inflated your numbers/winrate, not to mention you consistently hitting legend as a f2p player already shakes your standing).

I said the exact same thing in my previous posts. You simply seems to be in ‘does not compute’ mode. I also gave you an alternative logical explanation on all of this, if you think 70-100% is not good. If you do think so, your narrative checks out: you’re a f2p player who performs underwhelmingly, and that the game is p2w. So the question is, is that what you think?

It’s a simple logical step. If you can come up with a different one, by all means go for it, but don’t try to play dumb with ‘me no understand what you’re talking about’.

As for your DK Rexxar and warr quest example, both of which are not locked behind paywall, making your argument invalid. Also, odd quest warr and simple odd warr focus on different game plan, with different tools as well. At this point, you’re repeating the same crap about ‘but me don’t have that card, so it must be p2w’ you’ve been saying all over again.


reading issues?


Yea and most of the cards are not great or overpowered and thus they don’t see play (moorabi, dustfallen aviana, the voraxx, gruul etc etc. Also a f2p player can craft or work towards getting the necessary meta cards to compete on ladder.


Indeed with you, and I guess simple logic and math issue as well.

Anyway, I’m done here. If you’re wondering how that simple math works, ask. I’ll only reply if you do. If not, you misunderstanding is not a problem of mine (everything I already said, read again if you don’t comprehend something). Heard English is not your first language (neither is mine, so this is not some looking down at you attitude), so if that is a reason for your misunderstanding, say so, I might elaborate more if that’s the case.


and what’s wrong with what I’ve said? a good player can do it with 21 games, a player like me can do it with 40 to 45 games, you think everyone is stuck at rank 20 like you?


Jesus…can you at least try to understand what other people are saying?

Hitting legened with 40 games means you had 75% winrate (from rank 4). 50 games was 70%, so 45 games should be in between. 21 games means 100% winrate in hitting legend.

Math is hard, right? I’ll give you a hint on how this things work.

  1. You need 20-21 stars to get from rank 4 to legend.
  2. Post rank 5, each win is a +1 star. Each loss is a -1 star.


and? what’s wrong? where’s the inflation?



Again, if you’re not inflating your numbers, you’re argument that the game is p2w falls short. Read again of what I said from the start. Oh, and before you say anything, read again of what I said, as I will likely to quote what I said again. Check my previous posts, I’ve been repeating what I said over and over again.


Show me a single player who has hit legend for the last 3 months with 100% win rate.

Same for you. Show me evidence you have maintained a 70% win rate on the 4-L grind for the last 3 months.

Can it be done? Sure. Can it be done consistently? I highly doubt it in such an RPS meta.


I’m doing what you call “well” means the game isn’t p2w, despite p2w players having an advantage?

do I know every player?

why would I keep my stats months later?


Ok, so I take your claim for granted when far better players than you are closer to 65% win rate on the 4-L grind. You claimed consistency, yet it doesnt match the reality in an RPS meta.

And even if you maintain a 70% win rate 4-L, again, it only further disproves your P2W claim. Yes, ladder is all that relevant for the F2P/P2W debate.


You still didn’t go over the winrate debacle, which I don’t think it’s because you understand any of it.

Either way, you’re back from the start. Is any card locked behind paywall, or some ridiculous grind? That’s the question/statement many people have been saying, the one you keep trying to ignore. They also mentioned ‘pay for variety/collection’, which isn’t the same as being p2w.

CCG isn’t really a game for you if you really think this ccg structure is p2w. You’ll always feel unhappy and feel cheated out with that entitled mind.


yes and no, there’s not one particular card which can’t be obtained but there’s a huge % of cards you can’t get without paying

maybe, I love hs not because it’s a ccg but because it’s in the warcraft universe (just like I like hots and used to like wow)
it’s p2w till they give all the content and only sell skins which means, nobody would have an advantage over anyone


Again, pay for variety, nothing more. Anyone can craft a t1 netdeck in their first month. Is it recommended to do so by dusting most of their collection? Not really. Doesn’t change facts though.

I would say I’m on a similar boat. I don’t not enjoy HS, but I feel I’m clearly not a ‘card game’ player like players such as Lykotic or someone. But no, you’re definition of p2w or ideal f2p model (for ccg) is simply off. This is not some old school package game era nor did any T/CCG had that kind of model.