Hearthstone

[Gustaran]

Gustaran, I'm not sure if you're really trying to argue that random card effects introduce more uncertainty than card draw, but while your examples are certainly all part of the game, there are like 20 instances of card draw in the average match. Obviously both factors play a role, but Bruce is just, IMHO correctly, pointing out that if we're upset over randomness removing random card effects will only get us so far.

Of course, card draw is even a more random factor, but you can't really get around that in a card game. There will always be some randomness involved. I am just wondering if it is really necessary to introduce even more randomness on top of that?
I would just prefer to have cards with clear effects. I don't mind cards like Mekkatorque which are obviously supposed to be fun, but other TCG games work very well without a large amount of random card effects aside from draw/discard.

With your SC2 example, no doubt you're right. It's just very unclear to me SC2 is the ideal target. A 70% win rate for the more skilled side seems roughly what people expect from sporting or other skill contest, or at least not wildly wrong.

Are you kidding me? We are talking about casual amateurs vs pro players here.
Just one example: I played Civ 4 casually until noble/prince level. If I were to challenge any of the top player in this forum (and I assume nobody here gets regular money for playing on streams) how many games would I win if I were to play 10 matches? None. How many matches could the average League of Legends silver/gold team win against a pro circuit team? None. SC2? The same.

Now of course I understand that in Hearthstone there is inherently some luck involved which I admit is part of the fun if you draw that perfect card just when you need it. However, I think the luck factor should be limited to drawing/discarding and not be increased by a lot of additional random card effects.