I really don’t play anything but mage, so I want to reserve judgement, but it seems like class identities have been done away with.
When I started this game, it was explained to me that each class had a clear strength and weakness.
Now days I see Warlocks healing as much or more than Priests and Druids drawing on par with every other class if not better. I was taught that this game is rock /paper /scissors with each class having a clear strength and weakness. Seems to me every class has rock and paper and scissors these days.
Is this just my perception, or have the game’s class boundaries become really blurred?
1 Like
I think they are only starting to releasing class identity cards and would take awhile to see significant impact. (Starting with DH and priest)
But then there is also a possibility that they again will change design philosophy in future again.
Change design philosophy every single time something goes wrong equals to have no design philosophy.
And blizzard actually did that during the years.
When they do something and actually commit to it we can say that such thing as design philosophy exists.
Design philosophy isn’t only about to know what is important but is also about accept the drawbacks of prioritize what is important.
You can obviously do tweaks here and there but blizzard did actually go from one extreme to another really fast during the years with the most notable scenario being baku/genn case.
1 Like
Class Identity can be a complex concept, you see class identity is not a set of unbreakable rules or limitations that are meant to be respected at all times. They are more of a collection of guidelines that define how each class will approach any given mechanic. On top of that identities can change with time, they can refine ideas, and get rid of outdated ones. Meaning than a class today may not be exactly the same as the class 5 years from now.
For example hunters are not supposed to be a good at drawing cards, but lately we have seen a few cards in hunter that allow you to draw cards, but they do it in a very specific way, master’s call can be a draw three given all your creatures are beasts, the new draw a beast and give it +3/+3 once again is very specific kind of draw, the griffin that allows you to draw a rush minion. So you do get to draw now, but you draw only minions and mostly beasts, so it is not universal draw and it still feels very hunter like in the end.
Take into consideration than a game like this needs to be constantly changing, so classes might try different things to feel fresh over time and those things end up adding to the class identity over time. Again lets take hunter, this is usually a very aggro class, and in an attempt to make them more than that we got spell hunter, and secret hunter, and deathrattle hunter in addition to the regular aggro and beast stuff. So when they release a 10 mana spell for hunter now, people don’t just say it is way to expensive for aggro, they try to find a place for it in those other things that hunters have been able to do, which would be impossible if identities were a fixed thing since the beginning of the game.
6 Likes
I agree with most with this exception.
In short, most player are acceptable to identities changes, but each identity should be allowed time to shine, and also allow warning to allow players to plan ahead.
Recent designs show more of identities bleeding where 2 class can feel similar to each other.
2 Likes
Again, an identity is not perfectly defined thing in game and it is definitely not the same as an archetype, to have an opportunity to shine or not, an identity is not something players can plan for or play against, it is something designers use to build around.
It is fine for several classes to to play similar themes or the same archetype, what class identity tries to do is make sure that they do not feel like same exact experience regardless of what class you play. So we have a bunch of classes with successful aggro decks, but odd paladin did not feel like odd rogue, and zoo doesn’t feel like face hunter, even when all of those are basically doing the same thing. And when they do start to feel very similar like token shaman and pirate warrior then you do have a problem with class identities and it is time to look into it, to make better and more defined rules so that it doesn’t happen when designing future cards.
Again only agree in parts. Look at each class and most can tell you what is unique about each class strength and weakness.
If I describe,
Strengths: Mana generation, giant minions, minion swarms, card draw, Beasts
Weaknesses: Destroying big minions, board clear
Strengths : Beasts, face damage, Secrets, Deathrattle
Limitations: Card draw and generation, board clear, Taunt
Weaknesses : Healing
Strengths : Spells (big and small), damage spells, Secrets, board clear
Limitations: Minion swarms
Weaknesses : Healing, Taunt, minion buffs
Strengths : Minion swarms, minion buffs and debuffs, healing, Divine Shield, Secrets
Limitations: Cost reduction
Weaknesses : Direct damage spells, destroying big minions
Strengths : Healing, narrow but powerful spells, copying, single-minion buffs, Deathrattle
Limitations: Card draw
Weaknesses : Face damage spells, multi-minion buffs
Strengths : Combo cards, destroying individual minions, card draw, weapons, Deathrattle
Weaknesses : Taunt, healing, board clear, multi-minion buffs
Strengths : Minion swarms, damage spells, Totems, Elementals, Murlocs
Weaknesses : Card draw, card generation
Strengths : Powerful sacrifice effects, card draw, minion swarms, disruption, Demons
Weaknesses : Face damage spells, big healing
Strengths: Armor, weapons, Taunt, destroying minions
Limitations: Card draw and generation
Weaknesses: Face damage spells, multi-minion buffs, minion swarms
We can quite accurately deduce which class it is.
However, when we look at the class at certain stage, the description deviates.
If that deviation brings a fresh life to the class, it can be widely received. (How Hunter DK propel it away from the usual aggro style)
But the failure to communicate design insights to prepare the player base adequately beforehand can bring distress to the players.
Some player have a very strong attachment to some class and chose them specifically due to their identity. Such changes + ‘no communication’ leave these players scratching their heads when their preference are not met, and had no allowance to make adjustment. (Hence, repeated complains by some class)
This made worse when another class adopt a better version of a deck where it better suits the ‘intended’ class by identity definition.
A good example is how recent presentation for DH and priest is. Do we have a good picture of how DH will play out, and do we have a good picture of how Priest will play out?
Class identities are the most unnecessary restriction on design. What is the point of them honestly?
2 Likes
10 years later…
1 Like
The whole class identity thing is pretty confusing.
I think the idea is that the class identities they gave are meant to apply to a “normal” card designed for that class, but they aren’t a hard restriction that a class can’t do those things , just that if they do it has to be contained in a particular archetype that will eventually rotate away.
Sp, as shown in the examples above, Hunter can draw cards, but it has to be restricted to certain cards to make the deck feel different , i.e. Masters call decks might look very different from those running the draw a beast give it +3/+3 (Masters call-all beasts,Scavengers Ingenuity-1 or 2 powerful beasts that benefit from a buff).
So although generally Mages are all about their spells, all minion mage/book of spectres can be a thing for a few seasons.
Let’s face it , it would be pretty boring if Hunters were always beast aggro and Warriors were always grindy control, but these identities are still represented (Hunter can nearly always make an at least semi-viable beast aggro deck and Warriors can nearly always have some sort of control deck, just because of the Basic/Classic set they have).
I feel the game is very power crept right now, so nearly every class can draw and generate cards out of the wazoo and has good ways to remove minions, but they still do those things in different ways.
2 Likes
There’s no point in releasing Murlocs for Paladin card set, then the next one making them dragons, the next being buffadin, it just makes no sense. They just give up on what they were previously focusing on and just go onto a different archetype.
I find the same problem happens in WoW, your CLASS had an identity and was UNIQUE, but in BFA they completely dropped that to give classes ‘hey lmao use this heart of azeroth ability slot that gives you +10 agility & intellect, but dont worry other classes get +10 strength &10 stamina or +7 versatility’, so let me ask you; what’s the fun in that?
Classes are supposed to be unique and feel different, not have the ability to do the same exact thing as every other class, each class is SUPPOSED to have their own unique ability. EX: Druid (was) the only class to have a combat res, interrupting ability was a thing only a few classes could do (cant remember which tho).
You wouldn’t be happy if every class used every single deck type, would you? Anyway, I hate making overly long posts, so I’m gonna end it here.
4 Likes
Class ID matters only if devs adhere to it, like priority 1 on their whiteboard.
Class ID doesn’t matter if lines get blurred for some classes, but not for all.
If every class has different weaknesses, that’s the goal, like that’s what balance is. balance means strengths AND weaknesses.
but if the balance is off, like in wilds case, it means not all classes are playable in more than one way. That means a smaller meta, less options for winning, less options for deckbuilding, less cards in the game essentially.
Wild has what, 9 classes, all can aggro, but only like 4-5-6 can ‘combo’, and ‘control’ isn’t a viable strat if it cant disrupt combo, WHEN combo can handle-aggro. Like what we have now. The balance is simply off blizz. Wild 1, Devs 0, politely.
9 decks 30 cards, some are the same, idk 250 cards give or take.
4 combo decks, roughly, some same cards as aggro, so like idk 90 cards well totally-guess with rn.
Umm, fringe archetype attackers like Mill Rogue? Ok, 30 brand new cards.
No need to play “anti aggro” fringies if decks like priest or mage can already do that. Why play “armor Druid” when mages and priests can already handle aggro, all you’re doing is racing to try and out OTK the better-OTK’s…not going to happen.
Wait there’s spell hunter, reno hunter, recruit hunter, deathrattle hunter, otk hunter, vault hunter…mega class-diversity Rex is so diverse…yea…about all those…gl and hf? Whats the point of an archetype if its too-weak to matter?
250 + about 120 cards (super zoomed out guess).
I mean seriously, theres like about 400 playable wild cards.
give a few hundred if its too stingy of an estimate.
Like id bet the wild-meta is 1/2 of standards, am I correct, as far as playable cards?
If this totally-wrong on an actual basis guess of 400 ish cards (in Wild) is remotely correct, that’s pathetic. Why have a format with “all these years of cards” if the meta is like 1/2 of what standard is, just because standard gets balance design-wise and rotation for the ones that escaped blizzard’s eye the whole time?
400 card wild meta, on a totally 20 second guess.
9 aggro decks, 5-6 ish combo decks, and like a lonely soul Mill Rouge who’s still believing it can handle aggro or just likes the archetype-hate, but not ranking up. I mean yea theres > 9 aggro decks but aggro’s not that hard to pick the winner per class so that’s why I went w 9.
is 400 cards the wild meta? Was I correct I hope? If it’s 402 or 398 I get that breathing room, I spent all but 20 seconds brainstorming it. But for real Wild’s meta is tiny RN, its like less than Hearthstone Season 1 2014 chillwind yeti defias pog. Maybe the years of powercreep wasn’t such a good idea Blizz, or lack of format-attention?
It feels like World of Warcraft where every class feel the same and the only “class identity” they have is the different name…
Because every class in WoW can do pretty much anything…with the skill/ability bloat this game has…and when an ability prune happens for the good of the game, a few vocal elitists cry on the forums because they want their class to do pretty much anything and be OP…
1 Like
That’s why listening to the community isn’t always the best idea game design wise.
3 Likes
Class identities including strengths and weaknesses should have never been released. Not because it wasn’t a good idea but because they were never adhered to. It was used as an excuse to nerf or HoF certain cards while being completely ignored for other classes.
For example, class identity was used as the justification for sending mind blast to hall of fame, because priests are not supposed to be good at face damage, however it was almost immediately ignored when giving shaman the battlecry quest and lackeys (massive card generation/draw).
In addition to just not following their own rules, the dev’s ideas about classes and their their ideas about fun and unique cards will change over time and as the team experiences changes.
The concept was flawwed from the start, and unfortunately the post will forever be referred to by players seeking to understand why a deck that behaves like (again) battlecry shaman exists that flies in the face of supposed design goals.
To me it would have made much more sense to designate a few different types of decks, and work to ensure that each class always has viable options in 2 of those categories.
As players, we usually can’t quite agree on definitions, so I will place mine here and try to outline my concept.
Aggro - dumps hand very quickly, attempts to rush opponent down with high early pressure
Token - summons seemingly endless amounts of small minions to try to overwhelm the opponent
Mid-range - attempts to finish off opponent before turn 10, but does so with bigger minions and more powerful effects than aggro/token.
Value - attempts to beat opponent by maintaining more resources and outlasting the opponent in the late game.
Control - attempts to beat the opponent through various means of resource denial. Creates a card advantage through the use of powerful spells or minions and overwhelms opponent by exhausting their win conditions.
Combo - attempts to defeat opponent by drawing into a win condition that results in a OTK or unbeatable repetitive sequence.
(Obviously this list will not meet everyone’s expectations)
So in my mind each hero should have successful decks that fall into at least 2 of these categories.
For example again
Demon Hunter - aggro, token
Druid -aggro, value
Hunter - aggro, combo
Mage - aggro, token
Paladin - midrange, token
Priest - midrange, value
Rogue - midrange, combo
Shaman - control, token
Warlock - control, value
Warrior - control, combo
Please don’t read too much into the assigned archetypes, I just went down the list mechanically, the idea is to ensure that each class has a couple of unique ways to play and to fully support each archetype
2 Likes
they did after years
you make it sound like theve been doing between expansions in the same year
Because they did year after year.
While you’re looking only at the theme of this topic I looking at all other scenarios like the Raven year try to transition from highroll effects to start of game ones to create consistency since the “hate” of mammoth year was extreme highroll effects". We all know how it ended.
The mage massive change of identity.
Most of those changes not had any actual planning other than “someone did not like this and we not wanna lose even a single costumer even if it means make the game better for who did stay”.
You can go to the past and find that almost every year an drastic change at the core design philosophy did happen and will know why they to not satisfy a decent part of the players.
The answer is because they are knee jerk reaction level changes going from one extreme to another and priest changes suffer from the exact same problem.
They got rid of any reach tools in a game were most removals are already pretty powerful.
That to not say that they got rid of shadow priest.
That sense of inevitability that everyone hates about priest is what actually make it viable and while they removed everything that makes it happen they replaced that capacity with nothing.
The class has just a big hole that everyone that actually plays the game enough knows that can’t be replaced just by the new cards or the buffs.
Limitations is the wrong word
It should be strengths and lesser strengths.