**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options
Comments
Only place you are restricted is EQ and SQ. It isn't as egregious as BG is. EQ is the only one that is progression gated, so it's binary not like you can do TB EQ but get lower rewards for it. SQ changes from time to time. There have been a lot of SQs even recently where you could get all the rewards if you could complete the content, irrespective of progression.
Stop complaining.
Arena is point based on roster too.. more 6-7* more points....
The question is not why am i not getting the same rewards as TB if I am beating TBs in BGs ..
The question is WHY THEY ARE NOT TB.
All I said is story progression should not be a determinant of what rewards you get in another mode. If "Cavs with over inflated accounts for a Cav player", as you put it, can compete in BG they should be eligible for the same rewards the people they are beating have access to.
You said it's their fault that they didn't do story content. My point is story content should not be relevant to BG rewards. You asked which other SOLO content doesn't gate rewards by story progression. Well, Arena and Incursions don't.
Up to then they face similar rosters, that's how they even get to Plat, by being catered similar matches
If you have a decent 6-star roster, it is fairly common to have to face people with 6r5 and 7 stars in their decks. I'm assuming at least some of them are Paragons.
U can't have it all.. U wanna face similar rosters.. you get a progression based get store and a "cap" of how far u get...
U want the same rewards.. u fight everyone from the start...
Your argument is that matchmaking is not progression based.. its roster... Thats why the store should be open to everyone...
Well if they got a roster similar to TB they should be TB...and unlock their "deserved" rewards..
Also u keep on argueing that its not progression based.. its roster.. well yeah.. further progression also means better roster most likely...
Now what is more likely? That Cav players get to plat by beating Paragons or Stronger rosters or by being catered easier or equal matches?.. Cause there are a lot of Paragons still in the lower tiers ..and I would believe there are more Cavs than Paragons.. which means if they werent catered all Paragons should have moved up before Cavs
And if u got a "decent 6* roster" u shouldn't be Cav in the first place and complain about the store gates..
But you don't get the same rewards. So a compromise on the matchmaking is ok, so that everyone has a decent playing experience.
Therefore people shouldn't complain about it... BECAUSE ITS A COMPROMISE
While I was unfamiliar with the term "ranked seasonal restarts" and sought clarification. Now that I have clarified its intended meaning, I can relate I feel pretty familiar with the concept and certain aspects of its impact over time on the older Hearthstone Ranked system.
Including Hearthstone not having such a system, then adding such a system while still in the older Hearthstone Ranked system. Before then overhauling to the Star Bonus thing I mentioned for the new (current) Hearthstone Ranked system.
All that said, I don't play Hearthstone anymore and have not played or really tracked much of this current Star Bonus system. So I have no idea how it affects things outside of mostly just theory concepting. Also, Hearthstone was already fairly (subjectively) dumpster fire across much of the game even before I left (even when they had some fun and innovate stuff, they often lit it on fire), which really should make me more hesitant to embrace an unfamiliar system created during their dumpster fire era.
Consequently, I gotta conclude I don't know with any real certainty which system is best to use. If I were in charge of design for it, I'd probably do more research and testing, and brainstorming and testing, and figure out what was what before I committed to any of that as game design implementation.
One perk I saw in the Bonus Star system was that it does require players to do some measure of play to unlock rewards each month. Whereas a bye system lets players either (a) lock in monthly rewards to then not need to put in time, or (b) players can slide back out of the byes at which time they are trolling lowbies again. Mankind took thousands of years to invent the wheel. Hot Wheels did it on day one. Is Hot Wheels thousands of times smarter than mankind?
I suppose it depends on your metric.
On a side note, but one related to matchmaking. I find Gladiator's Circuit's rewards system to include elements that can disincentivize playing. Specifically, because you can't lock in the highest Reward Tier you've hit. So at some point, if you think you've hit a higher tier than you're likely to be able to keep if you were to keep playing, you're incentivized to stop playing... unless your rank shifts during the season in a way that others pass you and you slide back down.
Seems silly to have a mode that incentivizes people not to play it. And that means of course it will affect matchmaking as well, because fewer people in the pool means a greater number of mismatches.
But whatever it is, I’m glad the changes were made.
Those who participate get Plat rewards, those who are more advanced than that blaze through Plat into GC (on a 30 fight win streak since getting to Plat).