Due to the power creep, the bad card design and irrelevance of the game board, some classes are inssuferable to play against. So unless we get such a feature, I see me quitting the game for good. And I have been playing since 2014
5 Likes
This is similar to asking someone “what’s your sign?”
Because no matter WHAT you say, they’re gonna be like “oh, I KNEW you were a candy corn!” Or whatever the hell it was. Capricious-fish? I think I’m a bull. Or maybe a dragon. It’s funny how they never expect the Chinese Zodiac…
Point is, mind telling me what class(es) YOU play the most? Cuz I KNEW you were a dirty ____ main (fill in the blank with whatever tilted me 5 minutes ago) and I can’t WAIT to put the entire class on my personal block list…
3 Likes
then concede
we have abutton for that
4 Likes
Since the OP has no actual argument, other than “it’s insufferable”, I can only assume they only want to win no matter what.
1 Like
Yes, delete Mage, Priest, freeze, and secrets
Ban priest please and thank you
1 Like
It’s been time for years (I’ve posted about this years ago). Unfortunately you will get people playing whatever 2-3 FOTM classes who come and say NO! Waah! Then I’ll only face other FOTM players! To which I say…okay? Get what you deserve? Another thing people say is Waah! The matchmaking will take longer than 10 seconds! To which I say…okay? I would gladly wait 30 seconds to a minute if I know I’m going to get a match that I won’t have to just auto concede. Unfortunately it works best for Blizz to not have class bans because it allows the matchmaking algorithm to work at full effect. Obviously class bans would be in the best interest of the players. But hearthstone hasn’t been concerned about the best interest of the players for a long long time. So don’t hold your breath
1 Like
I never had a chance to play twist classic, but I find it kind of odd that they don’t keep extra formats around. It makes me think that they are trying to keep most of the players in standard for match making purposes (for what end I don’t know).
Class bans are a game-destroying idea. You can’t have a system where if other players play the deck they want to play, then they don’t get to play against the other players. If it is ever implemented the game will be completely dead in a month because of all of the side effects that y’all are too shortsighted to even see.
1 Like
rude Post must be at least 20 characters
Strictly speaking, and I know the OP didn’t intend for this idea to be considered in this manner, but: you COULD have class-banning in a casual, unranked format that doesn’t have any formal reward or MMR structure tied to it at all. Like, literally just “I want to play these cards, and I don’t care about meta, I just care about never playing against Mage ever again.”
It’d still be a terrible idea, but theoretically if the active player base for that format grew large enough, we’d get a sort of “reverse herd immunity” phenomenon wherein there’d be so many people queueing at any given time, that it’d be functionally impossible to have all 300,000 concurrent players all banning priest opponent AND also all running priest themselves. You know what I mean?
Again, still awful, even in that limited sense. And that’s probably not what the OP envisioned. But that’s a way to make it work, and Blizz could even monetize it: charge $14.99 per “season” to get access to the “check up to 2 other classes you’ll encounter far less often” boxes.
I know what you mean, but it’s completely wrong. If you’ve got 3 players, 2 of which are banning Mage and 1 of which is playing Mage, you do NOT fix that problem in any way by upscaling the quantity.
Class bans fundamentally break matchmaking. Not like “oh you just wait longer,” no, I mean that a large enough group banning a class means that you can’t play as that class at all.
1 Like
Let`s be real here. would people miss priest?
2 Likes
i already auto concede to them in casual
That’s a good thing.
Okay, bye.
Class ban feature won’t happen and shouldn’t happen.
Have you considered playing better?
First…the game is already destroyed. Second…banning one class among 10+ classes, is as game destroying an idea as having 9 toes instead of 10 is a human life destroying idea. Third…class bans could/would/should be entirely optional/opt-in, some, maybe even most, wouldn’t even use it, so how game destroying could it be? The answer; not game destroying at all (though see First point, as if the game being destroyed further when it is already destroyed, would matter)
It’s an aimless idea anyway. The game doesn’t have classes that make you lose: it has DECKS that make you lose,
also try to win anyway.
You don’t like the game. That doesn’t make it “destroyed.”
Ironically this is absolutely true; stubbing your toe is annoying, and this would be like arbitrarily cutting it right off because “I never want to have that annoyance again.” Much easier to slip down that slope when you’re already minus some pedal digits.
The game as presented would fail entirely. You literally cannot maintain systemic integrity if I can say “nobody ever gets to face me if they’re using the one class that has the highest win rate probability against what I’m personally playing today.”
But, since you hate the game we currently have, it’s not exactly surprising you would see nothing wrong with, or perhaps even be in support of, something that destroys the current game. Because you want the game that either was, or could be, instead of what is.
To be more specific: paper would always ban scissors, scissors bans rock, rock bans paper. So if you are playing as paper, you want to play against rock, but you can’t, because rock banned you. I understand that a lot of people who want a class ban are incapable of thinking two moves ahead, but if you think that a class ban won’t be used against you, whichever class you like, then you’re not thinking far enough ahead. They’re all imagining somehow that they’d get the benefits of banning others without the costs of being banned in return. As if everyone would agree with them and ban the same class that they would, lol.
I know things aren’t quite paper rock scissors simple, but the point is, your worst matchup disappears, but your best matchup disappears with it. The occurrence rate of mirror matches increases dramatically; really, the occurrence rate of every matchup, except your best and worst, increases dramatically. What you end with is a meta that’s every bit as inhospitable to your deck as it was before, except with two or more decks less variety in what you play against.
So in conclusion, it’s just reducing opponent deck variety, but with extra steps. Saying it would destroy the game is obviously figurative language, not literal, but there is no CCG that benefits from having a less diverse metagame. Player satisfaction would inevitably go down, not up, because everyone hates their second least favorite class just about as much as they hate their least favorite, and they will really miss what used to be their best matchup.
1 Like