There are certain features in hearthstone which appears to exist just to allow the A.I. to manipulate the outcome of a game. The random attacking order in Battlegrounds is one of those.
Coincidentally with hitting the 6000 milestone and following the most recent updates, the random choice of which minion is being attacked has become the decisive factor of every single loss.
The purpose of the game is to build the strongest line-up but, with with the random attacking order in-place, a much stronger line-up can potentially lose against a much weaker one, given a certain sequence of attack.
That combined with the also random match with the next opponent, which can systematically place you against the current strongest line-up, leaves me with the unpleasant impression that Battlegrounds is currently heavily doctored.
yes, a higher mmr does coincide with better opponents and thus better boards. so itâs not that surprising that you start losing more.
tbh I donât really understand what youâre saying. I could see it two ways:
-
you think that the game is rigged (âheavily doctoredâ?). in this case I suggest not playing a game mode that you think influences your experience in an underhanded manner.
-
in your opinion itâs a mistake to have (for example) random attack sequences. in which case Iâd like to ask what exactly you would change. the way I see it, whichever non-random attack sequence you implement, you suddenly make the game a lot easier (or should I say âcomputableâ?) because then there is exactly one right answer. with the random attack sequence you frequently run into situations where you could go either way.
even a much stronger line-up can lose against a much weaker one 
jokes aside, Iâm thinking youâre talking about rigging here:
- what would be the point of this? = what is there to gain for blizzard?
- following your logic it could also systematically place you against the current weakest line-up
- this is a zero-sum game anyway: if youâre playing against a much better line-up, it means that your opponent plays against a much weaker one. and vice versa.
I would very much prefer a behaviour such as the attacking minion vs. the opponent left-most minion (or taunt-gifted left-most).
There are already fire effects triggered by some minions and/or hero powers to introduce random hits in the game and those may suffice.
In my experience is very unpleasant to lose (or even win) a game because some minions âdecidedâ to go right instead of left at the decisive moments.
Considering it a game of strategy, the more âcomputableâ the better.
I understand this sentiment, but I believe that it would make the mode much more predictable and thus boring. in any case, I doubt that they change on of, if not the core design principle of this mode.
Sorry but you come through like somebody who is doing marketing for the product. Actually, your language pretty much shows that. The use of the word sentiment, so dear to customer servicing, the excuse of the religious core design principle to deny the obvious. A game doesnât become less boring by flooding it with random factors. Your suggestion of not playing a game that influences my experience in an underhanded manner was a good one though. Too bad that also sounds like another corporate policy to get rid of customers who âthink too muchâ and become aware of situations in which the game could be underhanded.
I do think that âBlizzardâ should do more to avoid the possibility of the game being underhanded by whomever, evidently, has too much power over it.
Actually I dared give you my opinion of your post. Too bad you dragged
this onto the personal level. So thatâs gonna be it then. Just one thing that I canât let stand as is:
You misunderstood me here. You missed two words that I wrote that give that sentence a totally different meaning than how you presented it.
Yes you think too much (into it)
He really likes that mode. Belive me. Thats why it maybe sounds like that to you.
But i agree as well with the attack pattern.
For me personally it would kinda ruin it because ut would be too predictable. But those are just my 2 cents.
Have a good one
Attack order and choice can be implemented in multiple ways.
- Purely random: Random minions attack random opponents in random order (not even necessarily switching turns)
- Least random: Predictable who goes first, players take turns, minions attack left to right (or other predictable way), targets chosen left to right (or other predictable way).
Most random means there is almost no strategy. Just build the best possible board. One might prioritize poison, or divine shield, or pure stats, depending on what most opponents run, but itâs still mostly hit and miss.
Least random means that the game becomes extremely strategic. "Opponentâs Brann will attack first, I do this to make him run into a bigger minion and not hit a divine shield:.
Hearthstone itself is a game that tries to pair strategy with high RNG. The best player will not win every game (as they would in a purely strategic game), but the better player will win more than 50% over time when paired with worse players.
My guess is that Blizzard went for a similar mix in BG. Thatâs why we have:
- High control over attack order on player level (players take turns, player with more minions goes first, random only used when both have same number of minions).
- Total control over attack order of minions (always left to right).
- Limited control over attack targets (chosen random, but taunts offer some control by protecting non-taunts).
- Zapp Slywick as a tech card to deliberately disrupt opponentâs attempt to influence your attack target selection.
I personally like it that way, but I do understand how other people might want there to be even more control, even less RNG.
Phrasing like this makes it harder to take your post seriously.
Had you written âbad luck streaks get too much influenceâ, I would have seen that as a valid point.
But âmanipulate the outcomeâ ⌠this is not a casino game where you play against the bank. You play against other players. Blizzard has no interest in manipulating the results. If they deliberately make you lose, they equally deliberately make someone else win. If you want to convince me that thatâs exactly what they are doing, then you will need to fill in the blanks in the sentence âBlizzard hates PardoG and likes their opponents much more, because âŚâ
True. And thatâs exactly what I like.
Iâve had games where there were two people left, we queue, and I see a board that is much better than mine. I lose, but still have some health left.
Iâll then buy and reroll and try to improve my board. Not to beat his (no way that can be done in a single turn) but to set up a situation that at least gives me a small chance to win, if enough rolls are lucky.
And then I sit with curled toes, watching the battle unfold. Nine out of ten (or more) I obviously still lose. But that one time when all the pieces fall into place and I pull a win ⌠feels good man!
Cut too much RNG out of the game, and youâll have games where some of the players can already concede in turn 6 or so because theyâll never catch up anymore.
The effects of deterministic approach will be huge balance changes to cards. It will make some cards more powerful and others less. So all cards would need rebalancing.
And still the game would have tavern phase randomness.
Actually, I donât see the point in discussing about any concept related to the game when so much depends on RND. I really seen too much of itâŚ
The funniest is when you talk about ârebalancing cardsâ⌠as if the current ones are balanced against some magical lucky scale.
Perhaps there are actual spells in this game, if so, I definitely missed the whole point of it.
Than why are you posting to a discussion forum?
If you just want to share your opinion with the world without opening for discussion, I recommend using a blog instead.
âRebalancingâ refers to game balance, and adjusting that balance by making changes.
A lot of games do that, not only Hearthstone. For instance, League of Legends has a patch every month, with usually a long list of changes. Many small ones, some big ones. And if you read the accompanying notes, youâll see that most changes are driven by trying to lower the strength of champions or items that are too strong, and increasing the strength of things that are too weak.
Rebalancing is a rather standard term in the gaming world for exactly that. Blizzard used to be very slow and restrictive with rebalancing in Hearthstone, but over the past two years they have changed that; we now see much more balance patches then before, and we see them happen much sooner when they are needed.
Battlegrounds is still in beta, so it makes sense that rebalancing BG happens even more often than in the regular game.
There are spells in the regular Hearthstone game. There are (at least currently) no spells in Battlegrounds.
I fail to see why you bring this up, I see no connection to the preceding discussion.
I am not saying cards are balanced. But a deterministic attack order will make some already powerful cards more powerful.
Pure nonsense. I am pointing at the moon and you are looking at my finger. The only thing made stronger by determinism is the stronger player. Everything in the game is designed to give idiots big chances of winning and, in the process, allow for plenty of backdoor-like control, if and whenever needed.
Can you name an example for everything?
And what do you mean by backdoor control?
If you are going to take me literally on the everything assertion, then it is not honest to ask for one example. Since I stated that everything in the game is designed to give idiots big chances of winning then, it is you the one who should pick-up a feature that, in your opinion it is not. Regarding backdoor control, I meant that every non-deterministic aspect allows for cheating/manipulation from whomever defines and controls the systemâs implementation.
On the first part i was aware that the everything isnt litterally.
I mean playing a minion and attacking is a way gor an idiot to win.
I mean i wanted to know what you mean apart from the absolutly obvious.
Also yes the backdoorcontrol might be a thing. But honestly that could ve a thing in any Game then
Im not saying its impossible but i just dont see a reason
But just my 2 cents
I am the first one to feel stupid to come here to whine but, I still feel is the right thing to do. It is the right thing to do, for me, to communicate that the âdumbing-downâ of battlegrounds hurts even the stupid like me because, even the stupid like me, can start understanding that the game model is based on making stupid people happy (on the cynical account that there are more stupid than geniuses in the world). So, coming here to whine is the right thing to do because the game model is not delivering: I am stupid and I am not happy.
Iâve given this some more thought now and in the interest of getting a discussion going:
at least for this version thereâd have to be many changes in the card pool because âengineâ cards (for example hyena, soul juggler, baron rivendare) would be nearly unkillable until theyâve reached their maxed-out value.
especially soul juggler together with voidlord and malganis would be insane.
but the deathrattle buff cards (like goldrinn or spawn of nâzoth) would also always get their maximum value.
so those cards would need to be taken out of the card pool. Iâm struggling to find replacement cards that would be interesting to play with.
but given the number of those game-breaking combos, I think that a deterministic attack order would have to have the option of killing those âenginesâ, without making it so easy that those âengineâ cards would be powerless.
do you have an idea for that?
I cannot think in your terms sorry.
I would not be afraid of playing against demons with soul juggler or malganis, nor I would have nightmares if my opponent had spawn of nâzoth in the leftmost position or baron rivendare in the rightmost, for instance.
I know I could win anyway.
There are so many other factors (heroesâ power, the other card and mechanics available that are not related to position Brann Bronzebeard, for instance plus the fact that you still have to find those cards in the tavern!)
The thing that I liked the most in Battlegrounds is that all players have access to exactly the same set of cards (theoretically - tavern permitting).
I donât know why players approach the game with so little confidence to request cards to be banned.
Being stupid, I am extremely confident, of course.
I am used to play in battle mode against âhighlanderâ decks that regularly pick legendary cards (or even common, rare or epic which are indeed âlegendaryâ in an highlander deck) in the correct/needed order and I do not play highlander decks because, aside from being very expensive, I would never ever draw those cards in the order I need (I tried and it seemed âlogicalâ to me that I do not draw them in the right order - itâs not likely! no matter how frequently some of my opponents draw them in the exact right sequence - A.I. subliminal marketing?).
Enough⌠I uninstalled the game earlier, even if I am still participating in this conversation.
Being addicted, as everyone else here (except/included employers who have the excuse of being paid to be here to mask their addiction), I might reinstall it sooner than later but I really would like to do better with the time I spend on it.
As I wrote previously in this thread, complaining is the right thing to do because playing the game is a pain more than it is fun and not simply because of the win/loss ratio or the lack of cards/resources but simply because it looks more and more like a game which only skill required is to push a button.
not a problem. I wanna explain myself better though:
my point with the deathrattle minions wasnât that they would be overpowered, but rather that they (or some of them) would become autopicks because their maximum value is guaranteed.
the thing with the soul juggler though is this: you put the juggler to the right and have 6 demons to its left, one of which is voidlord. this is a relatively easily achievable build.
before your juggler dies, he has dealt at least 27 damage to your board. this is not counting that you could have other demons that produce demons like imp gang boss. if your juggler is golden, he deals at least 54 damage.
and this is not including the damage that your minions do themselves.
Iâm not saying that itâs unbeatable, but it takes a special build to defeat it nonetheless.
anyway, I expect other such examples to emerge over time and I wanted to use this to show how problematic a deterministic build order can be and that there needs to go a lot of thought into it.