I would like to know, why blizz still add more and more cards with random effects? Imho, in the game is now so much these cards that make me feel from the game that I play dices and all matter is the Luck. It seems to me, that these type of cards steal any need of skill from this game. Just ay your random stuff and pray… Player cant count on nothing, because you dont know what you exactly play, players just hope… And that made from strategic game really bullsheet, when you must hope almost every turn… Why blizz make from this game more and more just stupid Dices?
Random effects serve two purposes. The first one is sheer fun. Not everyone enjoys playing the game for a highly strategic plays. Even top players use cards like Yogg just for giggles. The second one is that random effects increase variance of outcomes, which brings all players close to the 50% win rate mark.
I’m guessing that what you are referring is the second one. The problem is that you are making every single thing about luck, which it isn’t. Think of it this way, I play Hearthstone for some years now. Now imagine that someone learned the rules of the game and was going to play against me in conquest format. The decks were exactly the same for both me and the new player and had no random effects. What would be the result? According to your logic, the expected result would be me winning 3-0 and I think that’s fair.
Now let’s imagine the same and all of them had a lot of random effects. Do you really believe that the result would be 3-2 and that both me and the new player had the same likelihood of winning? Not really. I would win, probably 3-0. 3-2 or me losing would happen only if I drew REALLY badly, just like with the non-random decks. The reason for that is that although random effects would play a part, they will affect, on average, both me and the new player equally. Therefore the end result would be determined by knowledge and skill, just like with the non-random effect decks.
If you look at random effects from what they are and how they affect all players over large samples of matches, you’ll find out it’s irrelevant. It may be relevant in one game or a set of games but that will average out. The rest is on you.
Have fun and good luck.
a couple of days ago I had a thought about a possible third reason for implementing random effects, which was technical.
a random effect like 'give a random minion in your hand +2/+2) is easier to program than 'give a specific minion in your hand +2/+2) because with the latter you need another interface in which the player can choose the minion.
this sounds a bit like the discover mechanic, but what if you have 8 minions in hand? they don’t fit well on the screen, especially in the mobile client.
Indeed. They don’t want to target anything in hand, that’s why they use generic targets like “all”, “leftmost”, “random”, “cheapest”, etc. I don’t know how well HS is doing on mobile, but it was a massive early boost to the game. I personally see it as a “mobile first” game and, for that reason, never discard the fact that it exists as a mobile app when considering technical and design decisions.
I don’t think that’s the motivation for random effects but certainly is relevant as far as interactions with cards in hand goes.
I played HS for years(I think 3 or 4) and some rnd effects were in the game always. But during the times seems to me that rnd effect is on more and more inportant cards, almost every deck has some… And I understand quote that rnd is good for that all players will have wins around 50%, but this is a lame in my eyes… Devs dont know how balance game, so give rnd everywhere and good players will lose with bad players, because of Luck(bad rolling Dices)…
I agree with you that hearthstone feels quite RNG heavy now. I’m not sure if it’s more RNG heavy than it previously has been because quite frankly that’s not something I’ve kept a mental note on. While you can’t exactly control what RNG your opponent plays with you can control the RNG you play with by playing more “honest” decks. I don’t use the term honest in that they don’t mana cheat or they don’t do crazy powerful things but what they do do is far more consistent and predictable. Bomb hunter and token druid are fine examples of decks that have a small amount of RNG. While I disagree that RNG takes away the skill entirely from the game I definitely feel your sentiment though and I want to have more options for decks to play that are a bit more simple in their play style.
How did you arrive to the conclusion that they don’t know how to balance the game and that randomness is the solution to that?
Also, did you miss my point about averaging out and the better players winning more than worst players? Do you believe that a worst player than you will win on average 50% of the games against you? Do you care to explain how those percentages would change without random effects?
1 Like
Excellent explanation by Vlad. But I’ll add a few more thoughts.
In his scenario of a newbie playing a veteran, he left out one extra consideration that should not be overlooked. Controlled RNG. The card pool has changed and I think it’s not true anymore, but a few expansions ago the card pool for random summons was best at 8 mana - a fact that every experienced player would use if they ever got Forbidden Shaping in their hand. (I had Arena games where I healed a perfectly healthy character, just to make sure I had 8 mana left for Shaping).
Another thing is balance. Khisana mentions that giving +2/+2 to a random minion in hand is easier to program than making it targeted, but making it targeted would also make the effect much stronger. I could choose to buff my cheap rush minion, play it, and remove your big threat. Or I could choose to bugg a taunt that’s cheap enough to play the same turn and protect me.
Now none of that is necessarily bad. They would be valid strategies if the effect had not been targeted randomly, and they are now valid strategies that require either luck or careful hand management to ensure a desired target.
But if the +2/+2 is guaranteed to hit what I want, then it is a stronger effect than it is now. So if I were a game designer and someone would ask me if it’'s okay to change that effect to be targeted, I’d probably say that I’d only do it if I take away some strength elsewhere - perhaps lower the buff to +1/+1, or increase the mana cost.
There’s also a playability consideration. The entire philosophy of the game is that a player can sit back and watch during the opponent turn. In card games such as Magic (from what I’ve heard and seen) you need to stay active because you can still do stuff on the opponent turn. Which means, in an online game, the opponent often has to wait for you to respond. Which, in turn, makes the game slower and a maximum turn timer abusable.
Blizzard decided against all that. When the opponent plays, you are inactive. And that means that all deathrattles HAVE to be random.
And then, my final words: not all randoms are created equal. “Deal 1 damage to a random opponent” obviously has the opportunity for low roll or for high roll. Yogg-Saron also has opportunity for low roll and for high roll. But where that single point of damage can result in minor but surmountable (dis)advantage, Yogg can make or break a game.
I think many people that complain about RNG don’t really want to remove ALL randomness from the game. I think most of them just want to reduce the number of situations with a too high variation between low roll and high roll.
1 Like
you could tone down the effect though. say a random +2/+2 equals a targeted +1/+1.
but I didn’t mean that random effects shouldn’t happen. I don’t think random effects are bad per se, but I think the complete absence of hand targeting has technical reasons among other reasons and adding targeted effects would make it more interesting both regarding card design and gameplay.
edit: just reread your post and saw that you pretty much said that yourself. sorry ![:wink:](https://d30yn6ctwpaot1.cloudfront.net/en/hearthstone/images/emoji/twitter/wink.png?v=6" ":wink:")
@BigHugger, you made some excellent points from a balance and design point of view that I’ve not consider or even thought of at all.
Just want to note that I fully agree that not all randomness is equal. Although I find Yogg played by other players as entertaining, it is a card I genuinely despise and wouldn’t play it myself. I had a thread about this in the old forums. There’s randomness I’m quite ok with, e.g. most Discover effects, which I believe increase the skill cap. A unpopular opinion that I have is that Quest Warrior hero power is one of the most skill testing random effects. Most people think (and play it) as if it’s just “click and hope for the best”.
That’s where I’m putting this thread. That all random effects are just casino gambles, when many of them are actually skill intensive. The problem is the perception of “bad luck” when in fact a skilled player will use them in his favor.
1 Like
This game is skill based.
That’s why there are so many RNG cards
I don’t see the RNG as a bad thing.
It takes a great player to maximise chances of the RNG rolling in your favor. And a great player has backups in case Lady Luck gives them the finger.
A bad player will rely on RNG to get a favorable outcome.
1 Like
coming to think of it, as far as I recall, whenever people give examples of the dreaded RNG (as opposed to simply rant about RNG in general), in the vast majority of times those examples are “my opponent always draws the perfect answer / I always draw cards that I can’t play”.
those are examples of the only non-optional RNG in a card game.
so unless I’ve missed different examples that are given on a regular basis, this game currently has no real RNG problems as far as the community is concerned.
I was going to establish a difference between Wild and Standard as far as this sentence is concerned, but the truth is that the heavy RNG outcomes are currently mostly in meme decks. I’m looking at you Yogg.
I do think that the Yoggish card in the next expansion is going to add a bit of RNG to the game, but I would be surprised if it saw play in high end competitive decks.
just to clarify: I only regard situations as RNG that potentially have good and bad outcomes. stuff like resurrecting in big priest isn’t RNG in my book because whatever minion gets randomly resurrected, it’s gonna be good.
maybe this is too much of a personal preference to not mark it as such. Idk.
You are right actually. In fact, and using the example of Big Priest, you as the Big Priest opponent should be looking to increase the variance of the resurrect outcome. Which takes us to the initial point: an experienced player uses RNG to his/her benefit.
I agree.
However my point was that the only (‘true’) RNG that people seem to complain about is the one that is inherent in card games. Thus there’s currently no real problem with RNG (as far as this community behaves).
I’ve been wondering… Imagine I play against a Big Priest, kill off Vargoth, play Mad Summoner, kill all the imps. Now when he plays Eternal Servitude, will he just get the 2 options, 1 imp and 1 Vargoth?
You can’t have the same card twice in a discover selection, so it would have only 2 choices: vargoth or imp.
For resurrecting a random minion, there’s only 1 Vargoth, but a bunch of imps.
1 Like
does that mean that if there’s 1 vargoth and 4 imps that died before, I have a 20% chance to get vargoth from ‘resurrect’?