So what do you think about Set 8 limited so far?

    • Dislike it. This particular set is the definition of rng.

      Verdict is poorly programmed and ZEDDEK has too low charge activation for what it does with the supposedly "smart programming". Had a candles mirror match but opponent went with Zeddek instead of Cassia and all 3 times he gave me option my troops -1/-1 or opposing troops +1/+1.

      Portal is the 2nd new another rng feature as well kinda like improved conscript. Thankfully most portal cards are slow and not that good.

      And finally transform maybe should be fixed at some point. I was 4-2 evo last match and opponent played a common "wild knight" on his 3 drop which transformed into an "exalted pathfinder" followed by a palm. Guess who lost...

      If the game goes like this I 'd rather play heartstone.

      Also too much furiko/cassia/Zeddek and sometimes lady avalanche, the other champions barely see play. You can see a swampbutt or plagueroot from time to time but rarely.
    • The more I play with portal the worse/dumber I think it is. It's completely anti-skill. You can't plan your turns around cards you get because your next turn they are something completely different. You can't plan your blocks, attacks, etc. Pure rng. I actually liked the rng element of conscript and didn't mind losing to it. You also knew what you got when you played a conscript card on turn 1 and then the game progressed as normal. Portal is nonsense.

      Feel the same way about verdict. You're spinning the rng wheel hoping to hit the daybreak (if your opponent is the one verdicting). Not really a mechanic I enjoy playing.

      Hexstone is not a game I want to play. People have fond memories of 111 and a 2/4 vanilla flier for 4 was a good card in that format. You don't need to bastardize the game to get more people interested. Simpler cards aren't a bad thing if the game play is engaging.
    • GobBluth wrote:

      Feel the same way about verdict. You're spinning the rng wheel hoping to hit the daybreak (if your opponent is the one verdicting). Not really a mechanic I enjoy playing
      You are aware that factually speaking verdict has LESS rng to it than 'draw a card' - even in a perfectly tuned constructed deck. Right?
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.
    • Eraia wrote:

      GobBluth wrote:

      Feel the same way about verdict. You're spinning the rng wheel hoping to hit the daybreak (if your opponent is the one verdicting). Not really a mechanic I enjoy playing
      You are aware that factually speaking verdict has LESS rng to it than 'draw a card' - even in a perfectly tuned constructed deck. Right?
      What's your point? Drawing cards is an inherent part of a tcg. Flooding, scew, drawing a shard or non impact card at the wrong time will happen. That's unavoidable. How does that impact whether I want rng forced into the game in places it doesn't need to be?
    • GobBluth wrote:

      What's your point? Drawing cards is an inherent part of a tcg. Flooding, scew, drawing a shard or non impact card at the wrong time will happen. That's unavoidable. How does that impact whether I want rng forced into the game in places it doesn't need to be?
      The point is that it's pure hypocrisy to be upset about 'Verdict' but not be upset about 'Bounty of the Magus' if your problem is RNG. The latter has more RNG than the former. Now, if your problem is that you dislike the specific effects tied to verdict, that's fine. But oif it's the RNG then you should complain about draw a card too, because it has more rng.

      Portal on the other hand... portal has a lot of rng. I get some of the complaints about it. It's kind of a weird effect.


      Edit: I had some time to think about verdict while cleaning. I suspect most of the feel bad is not because of the randomness... it is - as I said above - a VERY low rng mechanic overall... but rather the fact that you have to pick which poison you're going to take. It creates a feel bad experience since you have a say, but allt he choices are bad... so you're constantly getting that sensation of 'did I pick wrong?' at every turn, making it feel harsher than it might otherwise feel.
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Eraia ().

    • GobBluth wrote:

      The more I play with portal the worse/dumber I think it is. It's completely anti-skill.
      I disagree heavily with this. I played many matches with portal cards, and found myself often thinking about whether to play the decent card with portal, or make another line of play, but taking the chance of the card transforming into something worse/less useful for the given situation. So there is significant skill involved in making the right judgment of when to play the portal-card. And it is very unlikely to receive this insane bomb from lower-rarity portals, which are of course the ones that make up the majority of all portal-sources.

      Apart from whether using portal-cards takes skill or is 'anti-skill', I think the portal mechanic incorporates RNG in a very elegant and healthy way:

      1) It reduces the low-end of random generation, by allowing you to simply wait for something better.

      2) It minimizes the likelihood of a bomb card in comparison to conscript, as only rare or legendary portal-sources create those rarities, and game winning bombs are few and far between in lower rarities.

      3) There aren't really any (well, actually there are two -- Portalscape and Bleeding Heart) portal-creating cards that create the portal as the only/main effect of the card. It's an add-on card advantage that is brought in line with balancing goals by not giving you card draw -- which would be much stronger, and likely way too strong -- but instead just a random card of X rarity.

      So, in conclusion I think portal is a 'good' way of implementing RNG, and it is absolutely not 'anti-skill'.
    • the problem i have with verdict is it is pseudo rng... by eliminating the options which have 0 effect on the game you restrict the amount of rng... it is always going to have an effect that will 100% impact the game. If the effects that wouldn't have any effect on the game would be available then i believe it would be fairer but guaranteeing a choice that impacts you is unfair especially with the amount of verdict available for cheap
    • So I have played quite a bit more of this limited, gonna compile my thoughts:

      Portal: RNG. It's kinda slow but in the right decks its good for card advantage. Extremely frustrating when your opponent portals the exact card they need and the exact card you need is portaled when you can't play it. Then, proceed to get unplayables after. Overall, dislike as it's more RNG. Lack of counterplay for portal cards too as you dont know wtf your opponent portaled.

      Verdict: Mixed on this. Its cool to play a control deck that spams this, but this is a frustrating mechanic. 80% of the time it's not really a choice here. What I mean by this is one option is GOD AWFUL and the other is mediocre, so there is no question with picking the mediocre option. Cool control mechanic, but again, RNG is not fun, especially when it just fucks you over with the worst possible options. Therea are few options to counterplay this IMO, aside from choices.

      Momentum: EXTREMELY strong aggro/midrange mechanic that turns any weenie troop to an absolute bomb. Decks using momentum don't run out of gas in top deck wards because they either get a card to play or a shard to buff their troops. This mechanic can be absolutely disgusting, I made a post in here of how disgusting it can get. This mechanic requires early and or quick removal or you will just die to continually-growing troops. It can lead to frustrating situations as many momentum troops are low cost and this format feels like there isn't as much removal as there was in other sets. This can be frustrating to deal with as troops with momentum get HUGE.

      Transformations: .... Stop with the RNG please. Fire and forget, let kismet take the wheel. Dislike the random transformations, but the butterfly and squirrel transformations are cool.

      Elementals: a really cool archetype. It does have synergy with frostform, candlekin, and other elementals that can add up to be very good. One of my favorite archetypes this set, but hard to draft/make.

      As for the formats themselves:

      Evo:
      Strongly disliked this. I have never had so many games determined by rng than in any other set's evo. Yes it may be fixed with 887, but a lot of the cards are trash when they lack the synergy in set 7 meaning you can get, and in addition to the large amount of RNG itself, it just added up too much RNG to make an unsatisfying experience.


      Sealed:
      n/a, haven't tried, nor do I plan to.

      Draft:
      This was the most fun format of the set to me. I just found most of the time I wanted to go for t2 archetypes as the T1 archetypes such as verdict control and momentum aggro are HIGHLY contested. Still plenty of rng which really hurts the format, but there are some fun decks i pulled off 3-0s with.

      Others:
      Love having strong artefacts, it lets you round out your decks easier compared to other formats

      -Furiko and Lady Avalanche are too strong compared to the rest of the champs.

      -Format is both fast and slow, it really depends on decks used. A momentum deck will make the game fast.

      Overall:

      I dislike this set for limited. This set makes it feel like I am playing Hexstone. There is simply WAY WAY WAY too much rng. Momentum can make games feel like a herofall limited game, where decks are just so fast you just didn't stand a chance off the opening hands. RNG makes so many losses frustrating, and many of your wins feel like you stole it, and didn't really earn it. Hopefully the addition of set 7 can tone this down a bit, but I am sad with this set as set 7 was such an amazing limited format. Please hexent, tone down the RNG for future sets.
    • GobBluth wrote:

      The more I play with portal the worse/dumber I think it is. It's completely anti-skill. You can't plan your turns around cards you get because your next turn they are something completely different. You can't plan your blocks, attacks, etc. Pure rng.

      You have to evaluate if the card is usefull to win the game or not than chose to play it or wait an other turn.

      This imply evaluation and decision so it involve skill.
    • Too much luck involved, at least in evo, didn't try the others. Half of my games seem to be decided by a shard screw or shard abundance for my opponent or for me.
      In the previous set, fateweave really helped balance the luck mechanic but now only a few diamond and wild cards have it.
      Also, portal, verdict and the new random transform cards seem to favor players betting on RNG. My easiest evo run was with a Portal deck, which was probably super frustrating for my opponents.
    • Gregangel wrote:

      If you dont like it well play draft because sets are designed with draft in mind and certainly not evo.
      Do you have a citation for that or is that just another assumption?

      Game design without keeping the entry format in mind is kinda flawed from a business standpoint. So I doubt that they do not at least take evo into account when designing the set.
    • arub wrote:

      Gregangel wrote:

      If you dont like it well play draft because sets are designed with draft in mind and certainly not evo.
      Do you have a citation for that or is that just another assumption?
      Game design without keeping the entry format in mind is kinda flawed from a business standpoint. So I doubt that they do not at least take evo into account when designing the set.

      You would think that, and I'm not necessarily defending what Gregangel is saying, but set 7 evo was terrible. Not uncommon to have 10-15 unplayables due to all of the shards and unplayable artifacts. I was watching the dev stream before set 8 launch and he got 4 uncommon shards and literally said, "Wow, this many uncommon shards in evo feels pretty bad." It was like 2-3x worse when it was just set 7 and how a dev wouldn't know that is kind of mind boggling.
    • of course sets are never designed for sealed. Not need some dev to quote to back up this affirmation.
      Set are designed with synergy in mind around several well identified archetypes.
      Sealed and even more evo sealed do not allow to optimize build around these.

      So luck is greatly involved to acheive a ok build in these archetypes. And most of the time it will not be possible and then you just picks the colors with the most good stuffs in them and a ok curve.

      And so you will always have a waterdown limited experience with evo.

      Either you accept it and are ok with the incertainty of this format ( and no point to set after set say how bad your evo experience feel) or you just stick to draft to be able to match what devs really had in mind when they designed it
    • Please go watch/listen to this week's 2 Turns Ahead podcast with @HEXRysu (find it here or wait until Thursday and download the podcast from fiveshards).

      He clearly says that they don't test for the celebration weekend and it was unfortunate that this time the celebration lasted so long. They might start testing future sets after this incident. The set is balanced for 8-8-7 play and I'm glad I had the patience to wait and not waste any packs for the past 10 days.
    • People who think 8-8-7 will fix the Furriko problem. Can you explain to me how will it, exactly?

      Is it because it will open up the Fateweave archetype where the majority of the cards are uncommons/rares?
      Is it because +2/+2 to your entire board becomes bad?
      Is it because there are less ramp cards - something Furriko never needed in the first place?

      Please just help me understand how Furriko will become worse with 8-8-7 where it doesn't trump every other champion.