I'm an old MtG player. So old that I played almost a decade before Veeky Forums was even a thing...

I'm an old MtG player. So old that I played almost a decade before Veeky Forums was even a thing, and I remember the days when Veeky Forums was a thing and MtG still wasn't discussed around here (unlike now, when it seems like there's constantly at least three or four generals concerning the game up).

Anyway, as Veeky Forums gained interest in MtG, I lost mine. Over the last few years I've played less and less, until about this summer when I sold my online collection for a few thousand bucks and started moving my physical collection as well. However, the last couple of weeks I've instead started playing some Hearthstone.

Now, started is a strong word. I played it right around release and reached a pretty good rank before dropping the game almost entirely because I didn't like the mechanics at all. One year or so later I tried it again and found that I could no longer compete in the new meta that had developed, so I dropped it again. What changed recently, I think, was that I started watching Brian Kibler play the game and that I also realized that yeah, I could play for free and grind for hours, or I could just pay some money and play the decks I actually want to play. And you know what, Veeky Forums? I didn't hate it.

So, what's your thoughts on this game? What does it o well? What does it do poorly? What does it better than MtG? And what does it do worse than MtG?

Too much RNG. Otherwise fine.

Expansions don't realise fast enough combined with too many players and everyone online, so the meta becomes solved/stale really quickly. It's good for say the month after expansion release. Playtesting is weak so the designers have also been prone to some major fuck-ups across expansions.

The new dungeon run mode looked really fun on the preview stream and they advertised 48 bosses, but in practice it's usually 1-of-2 and 1-of-5 for the final fight and a lot of upgrades are similar so it gets old pretty quick.

Arena is great and I never get tired of it, it's what I primarily play HS for.

When you say "online collection", do you mean that you actually have to pay Wizards money for the cards you use in MTGO? I was under the impression that it was just a subscription service. It doesn't seem fun to pay for jpgs.

Yes, you have to pay for packs and/or tickets (which are essentially MODO currency).

>So, what's your thoughts on this game?
I like it.
>What does it o well?
Cards. I mean art, effects(could be better thou), voiceovers. I like how cards feel in your mouse, how they talk in the game, how they all pewpewpew fire, ice and lighting. Mtg never done that, all it have is boring arrows few monster grounts and lame special effects.
>What does it do poorly?
Balance decisions. Blizzard terrible at balance in games, their taking turn phylosophy is retarded. Some interactions broken and not fixed. Some cards are boring. Some decisions are stupid(Locking old adventurers from newer players for example).
>What does it better than MtG?
Visuals, sologaming, F2P.
And what does it do worse than MtG?
Restrictions. Stuff like no more than X creatures on screen, no proper graveyard etc.

>I like how cards feel in your mouse

It is. Combination of good fps, animations, sounds creates a pleasant feeling when you drag something. I feel im playing the game, not dragging some browser window around the screen.

>I mean art, effects(could be better thou), voiceovers.
I can agree with this. A lot of effort has clearly been put into the visuals of the game. That said, visuals aren't everything. Sure, they make things more interesting for the audience at an e-sports event, for example, but it doesn't mean that the mechanics are any better.

That said, I don't think the mechanics are inherently much worse than they are in MtG. The biggest gripes I had about the game when I started playing was the huge number of RNG cards and the mana crystals. The latter may seem strange to some, but in Magic, the very real threat of not being able to play five drops on curve is what enables aggro decks, for example. In Hearthstone, everyone knows that they'll reach 10 mana by turn 10, which impacts deckbuilding immensely. I play a lot of Warlock Zoo which is practically /the/ aggro deck of the game and even it plays some 7-drops and one 10-drop.

The former I have come to live with it and I have realize that many of the cards are simply decent cards with "draw one of three cards" attached, or "at the end of your turn draw a card that's not in your deck," or otherwise are just cards where you have to try and create a board where even the worst outcome isn't horrendous, or use them as a get out of jail free card that doesn't always work.

It's a better game than MtG at its core, but it does have several visible flaws like a bit too much rng, general imbalance, and not enough depth. The game today is certainly deeper than it was at launch, and they are rectifying some of the rng problems by introducing tutor cards in the latest expansion.

One thing I miss from the WoW tcg was raid decks. Several players teaming up to take on another player who is utilizing the raid boss deck and staving off adventurers, in essence. 2v2 and 3v1 would be fantastic modes to add into the game. Just as well, taking a note from Starcraft 2 and adding in automated in-game tournaments would be a great addition.

The game does present a pretty terrible experience for new players. The ranking system goes from rank 25 to 1, and then on to Legend. From rank 20 onward, nearly everyone is playing meta decks, so a new player with shitty basic cards is going to get destroyed. I really think they need to take a look at the matchmaking system and tweak it. Another small issue I have with the game is deck-building - I'd like to be able to customize my decks more (from an aesthetic appeal standpoint).

Here's an example of a deck I'm currently playing - Big Priest. It revolves around having a 5-6 minions only and a ton of spells that ensure those huge minions are played over and over again, overwhelming the opponent.