Legends of Runeterra Experience. Compared

I haven’t paid a dime to Hearthstone yet I still have the decks I want. My goal isn’t 100% collection as yours. Refer to my post above your response to Marcoscongas.

Actually ,whatever ,go to LoR forums to tell your superiors what a big thread you made here, praising how superior LoR is with their measly 200 cards ,worse art and comparable f2p experience.

Cherry picking single sentences and throwing strawman arguments against others and blaming them for that is your idea of arguing?
You aren’t here to have a conversation ,you are here to just market LoR.

Still less expensive than hearsthone. Hahah ,I’d believe it if I wasn’t a complete f2p person.

There are videos explaining how to obtain every card in Hearthstone expansion ,you might want to check them out?
If that’s your goal ,because mine isn’t.
Begone ,brand puppet.

I always argued it was less expensive than Hearthstone. So why are you bringing it up when I am arguing about something completely different?

You told me I was, “doing it wrong”. So you did try to school me.

Saying that you have a problem with meme cards and saying that LOR doesn’t have any are 2 different things. How many times did you complain about the fact that meme Hearthstone Legendary cards exist? Only to then point at LOR saying all champs get played on the ladder and are good. It’s your statement that formed the basis for my reply.

I am arguing this point:
Everyone has different needs, LoR and Hearthstone is not comparable if everyone plays it, because different people want different things from different games. I agree it can be cheaper, better for you or whatever, but what is best for you does not mean Blizzard should imitate it, nor does it mean other players will feel the same. I might not like the mechanics in LoR and say it’s very boring while you, who is attracted to the “tons of rewards” (not really), might say its good. And your point is no matter how people feel about it or play it, you feel it is always better, and it clearly isn’t the case because many people hate LoR too. It can be surely a 500% better experience for you, but not for me. Therefore you cannot call it “always inarguably better” without looking into the details. “These games work the same more is better” is what I am hearing from you, really look at the details.

2 Likes

But in all 1v1 games with ranks you will always reach a plateau where your wins and losses are 50-50. The rank where the plateau is might be higher with a better deck and a better player but it will be there. You might get your face plastered to the floor for a time but then you find your plateau and are at 50-50 again.

That’s how it is in LoR, that’s how it is in HS, that’s how it is in any 1v1 video game.

So just play and have fun - that’s the objective of the game. The only thing you get from a higher rank is some kind of renown that really doesn’t mean anything to anyone.

1 Like

About the same is my point. The Legend of Rune experience compared to Hs experience with regards to aggro is not a plus for LoR. Thats all Im saying. No need to start throwing stupids around.

1 Like

well, that’s my issue: I play LoR and I play HS and I get no fun from either, so I play neither anymore

1 Like

And i m gonna disagree on this one…

Even the strongest aggro deck that existed till now (Burn) had its counters. Yes many players played it cause a)it was cheap b)it was fast BUT in general had a lot of counters. All you had to do was run a heal package.

Aggro decks in Hearthstone work in 2 ways: 1) They re the absolute masters of the meta (Ex the old pirate warrior, the prenerfed DH) or 2)They create a complete paper scissors meta in which Deck A beats aggro but loses by far to something else resulting in a game where you concede just by finding out what deck your opponent plays.

Now in LoR, yes there are counters, yes some decks have certain advantages over others but such polarised gameplay doesnt exist

I like to think that in a few years, LoR will eventually reach the point where it does get that polarized. Where they print Champs and cards that auto-win/lose matchups. It depends on how powercreep goes in that game, and it’s a bit early to accurately predict what path LoR will go down.

1 Like

True indeed. And to be fair LoR has still very few cards in its standard meta and therefore its easier to balance it.

Still i cant judge a game for a possibly darker future but for its bright present

Talking about the aggro problem in HS and LoR. I think LoR’s aggro decks are much more deadlier than their counterparts in HS. For example, in HS we have no such thing as elusive or “punching through” effect. If you manage to get a good taunt on board early in HS, 99% you will survive.

And LoR has the ability of flooding the board out of nothing (I’m talking about you, Vi/Heimer), unlike HS. It’s absolutely no fun to face a full board of elusive in turn 5. LoR’s cheating mana effect is way stronger than in HS.

Yeah, trample is a really toxic mechanic in many games. Glad it’s not in HS

that mechanic sounds like what a hunter legendary had

is this theone that damages minions + hero at the same time ?

Yeah, but it’s not common and it is more like explosive runes in KaC. Still should not exist, very toxic and that’s how I quit MTG.

1 Like

As collectible as LoR might be, as friendly as it is to craft “Tier 1” decks, if the gameplay isn’t fun, then I’m not going to keep playing it.

Which is a shame because LoR does a lot of things right, and Riot even improved on my initial gameplay gripes with the game (showing the top 40% of cards in hand as opposed to top 15%, spells displaying their text for longer, if only marginally).

Something LoR is said to do “better than Hearthstone”, is being able to counter spells played by your opponent during their turn - like in MTG. Unlike MTG however, in LoR, they feel deceptively meaningful. As in, it might affect the outcome of that turn, but it doesn’t affect the outcome of the game very much. LoR is still very much minion/board-control based and every card is a resource. Sure, you might have an OHHHHHHHH!! moment Denying some spell, but you’re still facing down 4 minions that you can’t kill (and blocking only stalls that), so you lose. In MTG, creatures are spells too, so you can potentially block an opponent’s entire tempo on that turn.

But after playing many digital CCGs, a main factor for me personally to stick with a CCG, is in how you play on tempo. There is some decision-making in choosing to attack right away or play a card first, but again, it feels deceptively meaningful. I’ll just cash in that damage right away before my opponent can spend their mana on something to block. Oh, they’re below 10? They’re just dead. Well that was fun.?

Now, I could go through and argue why MTGA and Eternal, which both have blocking and counterspells, feel more fun and meaningful to play. But this is more about LoR. LoR’s spells are simply overcosted for the effect they have on the game. They are a huge tempo loss, and spells are already supposed to be a tempo loss. Now this is a generalisation, as I’m aware of cheap buff spells that can be quite effective, and LoR can save up to 3 spell mana. But let’s look at their single target removal. For 3 mana you can kill 1 unit with 3 or less power. For 7 mana you can kill a unit. In Eternal you have spells that do the same thing for 1 and 4 mana, respectively. With how easy it can be to swarm the board with 1/1s and 2/2s in LoR, Culling Strike is just meaningless beyond the current turn, and you’re down a card afterwards. I have more satisfaction playing something like an Avarosan Marksman or even a Mystic Shot.

I just don’t get much satisfaction winning abruptly, as lots of games with developed boards go, or losing abruptly too, with no meaningful gameplay to swing the outcome. The other CCGs have more back and forth and change in decisions depending on the situation. I play against a friend who has played more and got Level 13 vaults. I win 2 games because I tempo out and “cash in the damage” at the start of the round. They didn’t have anything they could do. In HS I can hold against a Pirate Warrior and feel satisfaction as I hold from 3HP and claw my way back. In LoR I just hope my opponent only gets to have 2 minions on board max every turn and then I drop Hecarim and whatever and win. Hmm… that was abrupt. Fun?

I just watched Swim play, they had 4 minions out, attacks right away to “cash in the damage”. Opponent had 2, chooses to only block with 1, BOOM, Swim buffs up with Transfusion and something else, 13 damage for the win. Fun?

Anyway, I might just be singling LoR out here, but the back and forth is important to me. LoR has it, but I don’t feel it. So, yes it can be a good CCG for people, but it is not just a “objectively better you should switch from HS now” sort of CCG.

6 Likes

You haven’t played against Druids lately?

They can pull wide boards out of nowhere, Exotic Mountseller feels very similar to Heimer.

Now we proved this to the OP, let’s he how he respond.

Your evidences starts to break apart and got arrogant over time as soon as you had this in your mind: I need to teach those people LoR is the 500% best it is the best because I think it is the best it just gives more more is always good. (I still remember the humble sentence: It is not perfect but “very good”.)
Your argument totally fell apart, first from breaking a golden rule of CCG: players are not meant to have full or even most of the collection, just the best deck requires hard work. Yet you are still on the point of defending how cheap and easy it is to have cards in LoR, ignoring how expensive wildcards are, you cannot claim it is outright easier, without mathematical comparisons and details. And maybe LoR isn’t meant to be a CCG like HS in the first place, and you say “they work the same”. And how can you compare two totally different things? Your argument of LoR is always the better has not succeeded due to your increasingly arrogant claim, more and more opinions, just don’t overpraise LoR, saving me from making another mass flagged thread :expressionless:

1 Like

The definition of insanity is repeating the same action (repeatedly) and expecting a different result.

Maybe, you know, learn from the experience?!?

2 Likes

Hearthstone isn’t even expensive.
I have never paid a dime and if I wanted to I prolly could own all the standard cards.

But I like to keep golden and wild cards even though I don’t play wild. When HS first came it also had a small card collection which then grew over time. You don’t need 100% of the cards either to make it. You can choose what classes you want to play each expansion and tbh there is usually just a couple that are competetive which means you need only 4-5 of the classes cards to have all the best decks

1 Like

Good point. Let’s prove to the OP about the actual game and personal judgment is different and different people can have different beliefs.