Outside of days that aren’t numbered 1, yeah.
I don’t like making patch assumptions. I’m often misinformed and should be disqualified in making any suggestions. While lacking the ability and information to evaluate the nuance involved. More people need to be rather careful on doing this and should wait for a lot of personal experience before saying anything needs to be estimated on the potential consequences of these suggested nerfs.
In short, people need to think elaborately before drawing any suggestions for nerfing.
That’s my two cents.
Edit: A lot of typos, God damn cell phones.
1 Like
Quest hunter advocates will tell you: Why did you let him finish the quest?
did he really deal all the damage thx tot he quest ?ive seen close to it without the quest
He did that long ago.
1 Like
Not a good reason NOT to nerf. Why is his opponent’s fun more important than his fun?
So everyone play hunter, then everyone can have fun.
That’s how weak your “reasoning” is.
Sure, “kill them faster” is always a great plan…but it doesn’t always work in practice.
From a fun perspective, banning a deck is analogous to arresting a person and imprisoning them. The argument for imprisonment is the argument that the well-being or “fun” of the imprisoned is less important than the well-being of everyone else improved by the lack of the imprisoned person’s behavior.
But the core of what is going on IS imprisonment, by which I mean nerfing. Nerfing is inherently unfun. Its direct effects are the opposite of fun. So you need a pretty good argument to convince people that the end result of oppression — and that is what nerfing is, no less than imprisonment is naked oppression — that oppression increases fun.
The point I’m slowly getting to is: burden of proof. It’s not symmetrical. The burden of proof is on the “nerf” side, not the “not nerf” side. Saying something isn’t a reason to nerf is a valid point. Saying something isn’t a reason to not nerf is meaningless; not nerfing is the default. We don’t need any reasons to not nerf to not nerf; but we need valid reasons to nerf to nerf in good conscience.
And unfortunately the predominant outlook around here is something like
Blizzard police,
arrest this man!
He deck has maths
that’re fuzzier than this.
He’s tanking my win ratio.
Blizzard police,
arrest this girl!
Her cartoon cleavage
is making making me feel ill
and we will crash her servers.
This is what you get
This is what you get
This is what you get
when you mess with us.
What is your fav deck ?
What if they nerf it just because I don’t like playing against it despite it not being very good.
Does that make sense to you ?
Man that sentence made me really sad. You’ve spent so much time in these forums that the trolls with their numbers and their big words convinced you that only good players are entitled to an opinion. There’s no right or wrong, just perspectives! Make your own assessment (based on thoughts and feelings) and please share them with us. Self appreciation man!
I’m only speaking for myself. Personally, I realize that my incompetence in suggesting actual changes to the game aren’t necessarily justified. This is not to say (as some users here believe) that only the best of the best can make such suggestions. I believe all players here are entirely entitled to make nerf/buff suggestions. For me, I like to be very cautious in making such predictions because I don’t trust myself to make good ones.
As an aside, I definitely do not subscribe to the idea that, for example, D5+ and only such players can make valid suggestions. I’m only skeptical of my own capability to make similar calls for nerfs/buffs that would in turn be reasonable.
I might make a suggestion here or there. But, I trust much more in more skilled players than myself in doing this. A fool is best to remain silent, than to speak and reveal their foolishness.
Lastly, I truly appreciate your take. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe my ideas aren’t as bad as I think they are. You’ve inspired me to look at this more closely and to more freely make such suggestions at this point.
And so, thank you very kindly @KapsLocke. Thank you.
Edit: My thing is less on the side of suggestions, but to instead try my best, with my knowledge of the game, to provide the best advice I possibly can when players are running into difficulties. I enjoy helping people far more than making any predictions. I hope you can appreciate that.
@KapsLocke – I do admit this has played a significant role in my suggestions, or lack there. You’re entirely collect. It can be daunting.
1 Like
Of course, I always see you handling tips for other players. I don’t usually pry into other people issues, I just had to give my 2 cents here because that sentence felt very self-deprecating from a person I believe is kind but highly suggestible.
As for me I always comment on nerf suggestions because for some reason I’m highly addicted to changes. I read each dota’s changelog 3-4 times. So I might go overboard sometimes and propose unnecessary and excessive changes, but that doesn’t mean it’s unfounded or insincere.
1 Like
No it isn’t. A valid counter argument must be made beyond “nuh uh.,” “IT’S LIKE BEING IN PRISON!” “my fun,” and “you just don’t like it” because if that’s it…then your deck should be torched to the ground because you have no valid arguments. I say this as someone who plays quest hunter right now.
No, it’s not. Not by a long shot. I once in a while ran decks with sorcerer’s apprentice, and I can tell you that because I used to work with people who ACTUALLY spent time in prison that nerfing a digital card game is NOTHING like spending time in a real prison. To compare the two is farcical at best.
I’ll just cut off your blog post by saying good card design is supposed to be the default. Every single quest from this set (with a couple exceptions) has been nerfed. It shows they didn’t look at the impacts of these cards on the game, properly test them, listen to feedback, or some combination of all (knowing team 5 and actiblizz it was all of the above).
Not relevant to this discussion.
Not a valid argument, see above.
No, see previous comment, and comments above.
I’ve said before, it’s enough of an issue that it needs to be looked at. And that’s enough to send the pro hunter crowd into an emotional tail spin.
Dude, it’s an analogy. You know the phrase “that person can’t take a joke?” Well you can’t take a prison analogy, apparently. Doesn’t make the analogy invalid, it just means you don’t have a sense of humor.
It sucks that your friends have had rough lives. A lot of the boys I knew as a young man have too. I think the main reason I haven’t spent time in prison myself is that those men are no longer my friends. I don’t know you and I don’t know your coworkers, and I say give everyone a fair chance, but generally speaking, prison time isn’t correlated with strength of character.
apples to oranges?
ftfy
It means bad analogy is bad. Your temper tantrum at this being pointed out, and trying to also claim it was “just a joke” shows this.
What you’ve just posted is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read both those posts. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I’m chill my dude. You’re the one without a sense of humor.
If you don’t like the analogy, I don’t need the analogy. Nerfing is still oppressive by direct effect and is only liberating if the effect of oppressing one thing leads to the indirect benefit of others. As such, the burden of proof is squarely on the nerf side and not at all on the no nerf side.
That’s a fun meme. But it doesn’t really work if you have other things to say before it. Also, even on low trust privileges you can, and in this case probably should, embed YouTube vids. You have much yet to learn, grasshopper.
Someone who can’t tell the difference between the two clearly has
If you think balancing cards is “oppressive” maybe you should spend time in the real world and learn what real “oppression” means. Because you clearly are dealing with some real first world problems if you think nerfing a card is oppressive.
And since you have no counterargument other than “OpPrReSsIoN!” you clearly don’t care that much about it in the first place, and the nerf bat can be swung with reckless abandon.
“NUH UH” intensifies.
Uh DH is doing it faster and more efficiently so i am really confused. I mean i’m only a turn behind Quest Hunter and DH decks with my shaman deck currently and sometimes i can race them or stay even with them.
You don’t know me, son.
My dude, this is a video game forum. Ain’t nothin’ but first world problems here. Quest Hunter being unfun
is a first world problem.
This is why we can’t have nice things. People like you wreck IPs.
I know you toss around words like “oppression” on subjects like a video game and compare a card/deck you like being nerfed to being in prison. That reeks of someone who needs to touch grass so bad, it’s clear you live in a desert wasteland.
The difference, which you fail to grasp: is that most people have a handle on reality and don’t compare the game to much worse situations in life. People like you get the “first world problems” label.
can’t form a coherent argument, only “nuh uh,” bad analogies, and irrational emotional based nonsense.
ftfy yet again.
An analogy doesn’t compare all elements. In the same way that a joke doesn’t compare all elements. You don’t have a sense of humor so you fail to grasp this.