almost any type of broken interactions that happen in this game come from 0 costing cards,
Simply make the lowest a card can cost (1) and call it a day
3 Likes
Drawing well is the reason 0 cost things are OP.
they used to not be.
old innervate was op on a powerlevel by integers like 1 would be too weak, 2 is too strong.
they balanced it pretty good by not having druid have good draw, that’s why you don’t see ramp druid all over classic, the class can’t draw.
so its a balancing act between draw ability and 0 cost cards, and/or discovering them.
so, that’s why mage is off the charts bc at least in wild they can draw very well, draw for 0 mana now, discover 0 cost, like very strong draw too, so its like no penalty for doing that.
Back in the day if a druid innervated out a yeti they were all in on that yeti.
3 Likes
Fair enough, the combination of high powered drawing/discovering and 0 cost cards are just simply to frustrating to play against. just watch a rogue basically play with himself while using pen flinger and a bunch of 0 costing spells,
Another example is the new warlock legendary that creates a 0 mana copy of a shadow spell you play, just simply make it cost 1 instead of 0.
1 Like
The zero mana decks I do find ridiculous.
I do agree that a lot of problematic combos are only possible because of 0-cost cards. I’m not sure if removing them entirely is the solution, though.
You probably are correct, im sure theres a better solution and hopefully we find it soon because its just not good design that you can play such powerful cards for 0 mana
My changes would be:
Cards cannot get reduced below 1 mana example: Strongman 7 mana 6/6 taunt would get reduced to 1 mana instead of 0.
0 mana cards are fine Example: backstab, prep, and tinyfin ofc
but of course open to new ideas anything that gets away from the pen flinger stuff
My suggestion is always: cards original to the deck should be able to be reduced to 0, but cards generated shouldn’t be able to be reduced to 0 (same idea as the Echo nerf). Except of course for cards whose original mana cost is 0 like Desk Imp or whose effect specifically reduces it to 0 like Strongman (but even then it only happens with its effect of course).
I’ve been saying for a long time now that ZERO COST CARDS are one of Hearthstone’s greatest mistakes. They are almost always nerfed and cause other interactions to become broken and yet they keep printing them.
1 Like
No card should remove full board, no card should fill board, no card should play all cards before it.
1 Like
I think it’s more complicated than that, but generally being able to discount cards to cost 0 is a problem, and probably shouldn’t be allowed. But a lot of cards are DESIGNED that way too.
I think it’s more a case by case thing.
1 Like
Yeah cards cannot be discounted below 1
far sight was never nerfed and it can make 3 mana cards cost 0 !!! there are several 0 cost cards they never nerfed
or cards that reduced costs
Almost always. Many zero cost cards and zero cost effects have been nerfed. Probably more than any other type of card in the history of Hearthstone. They are constantly a problem.
Fair enough, I don’t disagree (this commented is directed at the OP). But did you see what Blizzard just did to Priest? It takes a better player than me to get it to work, but it’s really dependent on fishing often 0-cost inconsequential spells to harass the opponent to death.
The game is designed for 0 cost cards at times. You might not like it, and it might not make a ton of sense, but it’s not exactly a surprise sprung upon you.
Correction: There shouldn’t be swing turns.
The main problem with priest right now, even though I have a really strong working deck, is that the entire priest class can be destroyed by the simple existence of Tickatus. There is no way to counter play it and no way you can win vs a control warlock. It very much feels like a 100% lose rate.
No other class is at this disadvantage. You can’t name a single class that is basically never allowed to be a top tier class because of 1 card and because it has no tech card to answer against said card. There’s nothing you can do except to accept your fate.
but most of the cards of this type werent
ill always be agaisnt blanket nerfs there is a long list of cards with those type of effects without any reason to be nerfed
You being against blanket nerfs doesnt change Schylas point. Since ET in BRM, reductions to (0) have been the biggest (ongoing) problem in the game.
/*I don’t mean to derail this conversation from the OP’s topic (0 cost spells), and I often agree with you Schyla, but
Warrior.
Maybe not the whole class, just a lot of what many Warrior players want to play.
It makes your case stronger rather than weaker, but Warrior’s not having a fair chance against Warlock in general, either. And one could argue Warrior distinctly doesn’t need to fall into this trap and control Warrior could easily try to pressure Warlock, but then we have to look at how people actually play. Calling the whole population bad is not productive, so it’s fair to say it is a design characteristic. Anyway, back to the topic…*/
he says all of them are but they arent