I would like to express my dissatisfaction with this card’s design and in general Blizzard’s decisions regarding card creation lately.
To me; Reno, Lone Ranger is bad design caused by continuous power creep over a long period of time.
New cards need be strong to sell Packs; I get it, but this shows that Blizzard has no creative thinking space and just wants to sell Packs before nerf-dumbing a new Card to oblivion.
My main examples are ‘Yogg-Saron, Unleashed’ & ‘Reno, Lone Ranger’
Two cards that have lost almost all touch with what made their predecessors fun and widely know among the players, two cards made to just be strong and played for just that.
Yogg-Saron has a known effect amongst all, I think I wasn’t the only one surprised when I saw that the new Yogg version has lost almost all touch and was made to just sell Packs → getting nerfed.
Where is the ‘for each spell you’ve cast this game …’ effect.
This effect is what made it iconic and new Yogg’s effect is too easily forgettable and unremarkable, when it rotates it will simply vanish amongst it all.
Reno on the other hand is obviously the new iteration of the old Reno Hero Card for Mage considering them both having the poof effect.
Problem here is that Lone Ranger has been made to be overbearing, the same as un-nerfed Yogg and it wouldn’t surprise me if it had the same end.
Both cards have lost their touch and have tarnished the name that they have created among the years of their pre-existence.
Cards need to be strong … but they need to be fun first.
Reno and Yogg were made to just be strong and sell Packs and that’s what ruined them.
Get ready to be trolled by the Reno fan boys. They don’t like when people call out their favorite card.
I’d agree though the power creep is too much and the design strategy is more about selling packs than anything these days. Expect more auto include neutrals in future expansions too. Astalor, Ignis, Reno. I’m noticing a trend.
I’m also disappointed by Reno, he should be 6 mana at most so that I can deal with Treant Druid with double Soul of the Forest on their full Cultivated board. Or similar boards from Aggro Paladin.
Agree completely. Team 5 has focused exclusively on pack sales for a very long time, and I doubt that will change.
The real shame is that this will get dumped into wild with no alterations I imagine, and further ruin the only evergreen format there was in this shameless money grab.
In my opinion, Reno’s board wipe should hit both sides (keeping the 1 space limit only for the opponent). This is not only for power reasons but also for flavor. Reno wants a 1v1 but it’s hardly a 1v1 when you get to keep your board full.
I simply cannot understand how anyone sees Reno as a power outlier unless they do not comprehend how it works and play their whole hand or power cards into the clear.
It is an admittedly strong card, but it is unique and interesting design, too.
Also we still dont know what the next broken stuff of warlocks will be, could be more of those untargetable portals, having reno in our reserves makes me feel more safe…
poofing a board is nothing interesting, maybe it was when it was first printed with ‘The Amazing Reno’ but reprinting it with basically the same effect and making it nonduplicate is not interesting, it’s lazy.
It’s arguably the most boring Hero Card, literally just a board clear.
That card only affected minions, cleared your board as well, had no deck building restriction, and had a terrible hero power. I can concur it was the most boring hero card.
But the current Reno is a dramatic improvement. The board restriction the following turn is a unique wrinkle, and I one I very much like.
If you prefer to just flood the board, then I can see why having to plan causes your discomfort.
While several of the Reno variants are doing well, they are by no means power outliers purely because of Reno.
Because that’s the only thing I can make out from what you are saying.
Anyone would say that ‘The Amazing Reno’ even if not as strong as ‘Reno, Lone Ranger’ is definitely themore fun between the two.
Just comparing the cards HP’s shows which is made to be fun and which is made to be just strong.
Seems to me that you like it because you are not on the receiving end of it.
How can you like a mechanic that literally “stops” you from utilizing the core mechanic of the game, that is playing minions.
It’s fair for you to like it personally, but you can’t convince me this make the card fun, if anything it makes it unfun, especially when a restricting mechanic like this one is on a Neutral.
Your definition of fun seems to be more about blowing the seeds off dandelions than winning games, and that is your choice. I think the first Reno is the more boring of the two and it is not even close.
I have said this before and I will say it here again, but I have never used the card. Not even once. I do not like nor do I play any highlander lists.
I enjoy the challenge of anticipating it and playing around it, which is what the game used to be all about.
So many people are complaining about having to play differently to win against this card, and I propose that is a good thing rather than a problem.
Objectively, fun is randomness, it doesn’t matter what I or you think because that’s the objective Hearthstone definition.
When something is strong we say it’s strong, we don’t say it’s fun because nobody uses the word fun in that way.
‘The Amazing Reno’ is objectively more fun compared to ‘Reno, Lone Ranger’ close to everyone would attest to it because the card is clearly even made to be fun, Lone Ranger isn’t, what he is is an overbearing Neutral board clear that restricts minion play.
Board based decks are not affected by Reno, further, there is no actual way of playing around Reno.
You can’t go with the usual thinking of ‘my opponent has Blizzard on 6 and it’s Turn 5, let’s keep Wisp in hand and play it next turn’ because Reno will restrict me to 1 minion.
‘Playing around’ Reno is force-dumbing everything and praying that the opponent doesn’t have it because the board restriction ruins any actual ways of playing around it.
‘Playing around it’ is playing a continuously pressuring deck and applying enough pressure to force the Reno, waiting a turn, and then continuing the pressure and that isn’t intellectual enough to be considered ‘play differently to win against this card’ to me.
Reno comes down on Control vs Control and restricts the other player from playing anything other than a Renathal before floating 7 mana to continue the game.
Reno doesn’t pose a thinking challenge.
It’s just overbearing.
Exactly. Fun can, and will, never be anything other than a subjective emotion. What you find fun, I might not. By definition fun cant be objective as everyone finds fun in different things.
I am not talking fun in general.
I said the Hearthstone objective definition of fun is randomness since its creation as a digital card game.
Everyone says that what makes Hearthstone fun is being able to do what physical card game can’t and most of the time, these tend to be RNG type of effects.
So when it comes to Hearthstone, fun is random, it’s in the rule book. <3
Again, there is no objective definition of fun in any context. I find it fun to play prisoner decks that lock the opponent out of doing anything. At all. For the entire game, once online. I guarantee you dont find that fun if youre complaining about being restricted to 1 board slot for a SINGLE turn.
No, this is false. I completely reject this premise and any argument you make that flows from it.
For you to be correct, every card would have some element of random, which they clearly do not.
As the other poster noted, fun is always subjective.
There are players who like random effects and players who hate them, but the game has cards for both types of players to enjoy.
This is the sort of false argument made by lying politicians. Not even close to everyone agrees with you, but even if they did that would not make it any more fun for the people that disagree.
The fact that you are struggling to comprehend something does not make it incomprehensible.
Holding back a spell, a weapon, a large minion or all three to play the turn after Reno is part of the fun.
There’s no objective criterion for fun, and DoD Reno was probably about as silly as Lone Ranger. I kinda forgot how ridiculous it was way back when but I was thinking about it the other day, that full board poof was pretty outrageous too, at least in mage. DoD Reno gave the mage turn initiative, and Mage could run wild with turn initiative in that meta. And this Reno is cheaper, and neutral.
Reno feels like Hidden Meaning to me, where it’s just this really basic, fairly easy to play card that forces the opponent to do backflips upside down to play around. Especially if they’re playing a board based deck of pretty much any kind.
There’s a lot of reasons they can’t make it a parallel removal card, but I think it’s a bit under-costed for all the stuff it does. The highlander requirement isn’t nothing, but even just having access to the only hero card in the game – which besides Sargeras, Rheastrasza, Mograine and Odyn is the only way to gain accumulating value in the game right now, and it’s probably the best of those – is pretty significant to begin with.
Nothing like this Forums Page dodging actual pointers and just trying to disprove a small quote, while also taking it out of context.
If what you got got is that I am saying that universal fun is objective, you are nowhere near close, you and the others.
But what is there to be expected from this Page, all the people that decided to disprove what I said, dodged the actual points and just got caught up in me saying fun in Hearthstone is objective, you guys are tiring, sorry not sorry.
But I guess your ego can’t take it to just say ‘I am wrong’, hopefully you all are just children, because in your old age you should be able to accept when you are wrong, and also reply to all the pointers, not nitpicking.
Wasn’t meant to you Aldrius as much in the others.
