Is balancing hearthstone possible?

General Discussion
I want to know if you guys even believe that balancing Hearthstone is even possible at this point. People say that adding a Public Beta Testing Enviorment would help, but would it really? Look at Overwatch, it only has 25 heroes and they still can't balance it, so how do you expect to balance all classes, with 1,324 cards in all? To get it perfectly balanced in my opinion, you'd need fractions of damage and mana, and get NASA or something on the blizzard team.
Absolutely not. They have way too many gimmick cards that change the whole outcome and build up of the game throwing strategy out the window.

And when they announced Ocktober Brawl they said the players in the tournament will start with the SAME amount of cards so it will be FAIR!!!

Which is hilarious because I guess the rest of us just have to deal with the power creep or newbs vs GODS of the game.

The only way I see balance is if you one day earn all the cards like Pavel or Silvername and then everyone can take the best cards and build the highest percentage chance of winning decks and then....then it will be based on skill and of course the lovable RNG.

Right now its all random chaos my power cards vs your power cards. But yet the whacked RNG can give you the perfect spread while the other guy is going - "okay I have the perfect card for this situation - where the hell is it!" Repeating that for 3 turns until its too late THEN draw the card.
Balanced is a relative term.
I believe it's part of the nature of CCGs that they are impossible to balance completly. At any given time, a certain combination of cards will be the most powerful. Nerfing that combo will result in a new set of "OP" cards. Balance becomes even harder if you want to keep 9 classes with their own identity. So imo when speaking about balance in HS, we should look at the possibility to make all classes have 2 or 3 viable archetypes. Un'Goro was pretty good from that point of view (if you ignore Warlock). So yes, I believe HS is possible to balance, as long as they don't pile too many powerful cards into a single class like they did with Druid. Cards should not be auto-includes in all decks simply because all other options are inferior.

@nimabi, you're talking about balance in a single game, which is a completly different thing. It's impossible to balance the game in such a manner that each player has a 50% chance to win each game. Skill level, collection, rng and matchups are impossible to balance over all HS players...
Phillybear i disagree.

Any card game can be balanced correctly. Few cards result in balance. Any card game becomes imbalanced the moment you have several hundreds or thousands of cards to chose from because you simply at some point cannot keep an eye on every possible combination. Which is why MTG for example became imbalanced, and hearthstone was very balanced before they released any expansion.
Blizzard could balance their game properly at least in standard if they stoped releasing cards with ever increasing power levels and broken effects that result in auto includes.
23/09/2017 08:51Posted by Yoshi
Phillybear i disagree.

Any card game can be balanced correctly. Few cards result in balance. Any card game becomes imbalanced the moment you have several hundreds or thousands of cards to chose from because you simply at some point cannot keep an eye on every possible combination. Which is why MTG for example became imbalanced, and hearthstone was very balanced before they released any expansion.
Blizzard could balance their game properly at least in standard if they stoped releasing cards with ever increasing power levels and broken effects that result in auto includes.


Even with fewer cards, it never is completly balanced. Besides, a game with less cards quickly becomes stale, as it only has a limited amount of possible combinations.

Early HS already had stupid stuff like Leeroy with double PO/cold blood. True, later expansions added stuff that had broken effects or just made other cards obsolete. But that doesn't mean that "the good old days" were a better period.

I do agree that they should put more thought into the cards they release: broken combos are discovered within the first week of an expansion. Like I said, I believe HS can be balanced (though never as completly as people would want it), but they have to stop making broken stuff.

Blizz doesn't believe it's power creep though, because "the cards rotate out of Standard after a period". Pretty wrong way to think about power creep imo.
If you mean can there be an equal viable deck with all 9 classes, then in standard yes but it really comes down to how precisely you want it balanced plus how many archetypes you want each class to have. For wild there's probably too many cards to fluke a balanced meta.
Problem is that you have alot of common cards which struggle the game alot.
For etc combo mage with Alex.
Barely see another class using Alex except for mages. Same thing with Doomsayer and mages.
If you want balance in HS then remove the common cards and start focus on class cards only but then the game would be very static. With one tuned deck for each class.

But Blizz made a great balace in last update. Hex cost as much as Sheep now difference 1/1 vs 0/1 taunt. Kinda equal balancing.
FWA is quite balanced as well 3 3/2 = 6 Dam
Perditions Blade 3 mana 2/2 but deal 1/2 dam extra depending on combo or not = 6 Dam

So if you only have classes the game would be easy to balance but it isnt because of all the commons with class combos which become lethal.
Answer this simple question for me first:

What is balance?
Phillybear stated above that "with less cards this game would become stale", the problem is the game is already stale. That's because you have over powered cards in certain decks and certain neutral cards that people "have" to put in there deck. If people would use a bit of creativity the game would be less stale.

In answer to the question what is balance, in a 2 player game it's both players having the same chance to win, without one player having certain models, cards or pieces that over power every other model, card or piece. Its also both players luck/range being the same over the course of the game. No game is ever balanced while the above things are in play.
The very notion of balance equilibrium or w/e you want is impossible.
Say there are three decks that beat one another rock paper scissors style, played by equal amount of players.
That's balanced.

Now say scissors is an aggressive fast deck, which plays two games on average compared to it's counterparts.
Due to this rock will come off op, and paper weak, since the observed scissors will be greater than it's actual presence.
Say there's still an equilibrium, because the number of scissors reduce and both paper and rock rise.

What if during workhours more people are inclined to play faster decks or below rank 5 your preference to play faster games fall?

Keep in mind that's three decks with definitive wr% against each other.

And yet they can't all have the same winrate and presence at the same time the moment further factors are introduced.
A deck is cheaper? Faster? Fun? Easier?
It skews it.

You only reach true balance, where no longer can anyone make an improvement to their winrate with changing up the cards, and a perpetual dynamic sets in.
However that can be achieved with everyone playing the one strongest uncounterable deck, what you all want is a heathly diversity .

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum