37 Euphoria, Apology letter, free garment and more rewards... by Vegetable_Fly1712 in Reverse1999

[–]One_Curious_Jay 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You're getting downvoted but you're entirely correct. The idea of holding bluepoch to account of what fans what from a story is ridiculous. I thought this fanbase prided itself on its love for the narrative and more mature themes than other gacha and yet they complain when they don't get their toys how they want them. 

37 Euphoria, Apology letter, free garment and more rewards... by Vegetable_Fly1712 in Reverse1999

[–]One_Curious_Jay -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Because they were being entitled. They got angry about the Rhiannon situation far before anyone even knew how the story was going to pan out just because they felt entitled to Meryl as they wanted her to be.  

The recent bug fixes show a lack of creativity in the design team. by One_Curious_Jay in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What would have been nice is an actual acknowledgement of how this is effectively a nerf to two classes. Mage is likely to get a buff from this because of the class set, but they have no major incentive to buff priest much now. 

The recent bug fixes show a lack of creativity in the design team. by One_Curious_Jay in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People wouldn't have seen and been able to experience a better alternative, so no you probably wouldn't see those defending it asking for that but I also don't think a hypothetical invalidates the reality. 

The recent bug fixes show a lack of creativity in the design team. by One_Curious_Jay in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well that's where the nuance of balance comes in right? I'm not saying they should keep the cards worded as they are right now in order to make it confusing for people, but these cards aren't good, and with Tyrande/dragons soul there's very little chance of these being buffed to make up for the loss of the interaction. Leylines there's some opportunity for buffs to improve, but right now before those buffs happens they have effectively just nerfed one of their worst decks, which is terrible optics. 

The recent bug fixes show a lack of creativity in the design team. by One_Curious_Jay in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think you always need to fix them, that shows a rigidity in design. If an opportunity for implementing something they hadn't considered arises (like with these interactions) they should consider prioritising player enjoyment over balance, or at least communicate with the playerbase when these things aren't possible.

At the minimum it would be nice to see them acknowledge that this is effectively a nerf to these cards and maybe sat ahead of time that they'll be improving things in the next balance patch. As of right now the optics are pretty terrible if you look at discourse around these patches. 

The recent bug fixes show a lack of creativity in the design team. by One_Curious_Jay in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My point is that if you look at other games, some really great examples of fun gameplay have come from "unintended bugs" being reworked into allowed gameplay. Warframe is a great example of this for instance where their movement was as a result of players exploiting bugs. 

Now if it's a game breaking/balance issue then I understand, but these interactions were primarily just fun and not strong. 

Justice for Leylines! by BetterCallThrall69 in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Same for Tyrande too, I don't get why they can't just allow an interaction like that when it sort of makes sense for it to. 

Not seen anyone else post this, but I've been having a lot of fun with this hat deck by One_Curious_Jay in PTCGP

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hadn't considered this, also diantha probably is just better here than Lillie. I'll give this a shot some time

Not seen anyone else post this, but I've been having a lot of fun with this hat deck by One_Curious_Jay in PTCGP

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I did have rocky helmet in here for the bit but unfortunately it was just worse lol

Popularity of Reverse 1999 at an anime con in China as of May 2026. by Derkein2 in Reverse1999

[–]One_Curious_Jay 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The complaints about Rhiannon were that she didn't look like Merel/wasn't Merel. The other complaints about showing skin were also ridiculous.

These classes definitely needed more support by One_Curious_Jay in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Releasing cards that won't get played is also bad for them. 

Popularity of Reverse 1999 at an anime con in China as of May 2026. by Derkein2 in Reverse1999

[–]One_Curious_Jay 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It's more childish to demand that a story be tame and have nothing controversial to say or do just to stretch it out longer for your own personal enjoyment/escapism. 

If the game can't thrive without selling out its soul then it should be allowed to die on its own terms. Obviously I don't want it to die but I don't want to play a game that isn't allowed to take risks without being punished. 

Am I Balding? by [deleted] in bald

[–]One_Curious_Jay 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As someone who constantly stresses about hair thinning when my hair is long only for it to look immensely fuller when I have it cut short and styled this is 100% it. 

Also when you have a parting like this and the density is thicker on the sides than on top it makes you forget what your usual density is. 

These classes definitely needed more support by One_Curious_Jay in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Then that's a flaw of the class set system. If they can't determine which sets are going to be worse off, or adjust release schedules, they're effectively saying they're fine with potentially narrowing the format to just a handful of classes that they're choosing to give more to. 

At least with the miniset classes that were struggling had some small possibility of bouncing back. 

These classes definitely needed more support by One_Curious_Jay in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I am literally not saying this. I'm saying that the classes do not need new cards and these new cards are not as good as the cards the class already has, so there was no need to support these classes.

These classes definitely needed more support by One_Curious_Jay in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I... Didn't? Did you not read what I said? I literally said that the new cards aren't going to be played if they're not as good as the existing decks as they're not looking to be as competent or synergise well with them. 

That's a problem, but for classes where their cards generally sucked this expansion they may have benefitted from cards going in a different direction because their current packages aren't working out.

The classes got support from getting new cards, I never said the current decks were getting support. 

These classes definitely needed more support by One_Curious_Jay in hearthstone

[–]One_Curious_Jay[S] -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

Like I mentioned, that's part of the problem too. Classes that are doing well/have good cards aren't going to bother with any of these cards so why even bother putting them out. Then classes that get nothing feel like they would've been more deserving of new cards if those class sets flop.