Wild needs CPR. Please discuss and spread the word

  • FirePaladinHS's Avatar Anduin 235 40 Posts Joined 05/31/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    November month 2019. A month where a lot of new content arrives into the game. And a month where Wild is more dead than ever

    Because of that I ask you,the players,the streamers and most importantly the developers to help and save the format which is not the most popular one but truly is the oldest one.

    There is no doubt that the format has amazingly big deck variety that Standard format can't even dream of. However. There's also no doubt that format has a lot of issues which drags the players away not only from Wild,but from the whole game:

    1.The SNIPlock

    There's a lot of controversy about this deck. There are some players that are cheating. There are some genuine players. Either way the deck causes amazingly huge frustration and Team 5 still haven't said a clear statement about this deck since the last ban wave. As it stands by now, the deck is one of the only deck in HS history which is placed in Tier S(same as AK47 Druid and Secret Mage at the beginning of Uldum). The deck revolves around certain combo strategies and has: Card draw of a Miracle deck. Clear of Control Warlock. Big boards of Big decks. And finishing force of Cubelock or Mechathunlock. All those traits make this extremely frustrating deck to play against and causes a lot of drama and headache for whole Wild community. It needs to be addressed. Even some clear statement about what is considered cheat and what not will be very helpful. The links below will provide you a closer information about this whole deck

    Tier S status

    https://teamrankstar.com/meta/hearthstone-wild-meta-snapshot-november-2019/

    https://tempostorm.com/hearthstone/meta-snapshot/wild/2019-11-01

    https://www.vicioussyndicate.com/wild-vs-data-reaper-report-19/

    Deck preview

    https://youtu.be/QsaJYv6Lmtw

    Confirmed cheater cases

    https://www.reddit.com/r/wildhearthstone/comments/dq0228/navis1mple_is_t3ss3rakt_confirmed_i_pretended_to/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

    2.The competitive scene of the format

    Due to the fact that there's only 1 official Wild tournament. The motivation of players to play Wild and spend money on packs is quite low. As it stands by now there were more streamer vs streamer single player tournaments than all oficial Wild tournaments combined.

    3.The card balance and nerfs regarding the Wild format:

    This topic was brought not so long time ago and remains unanswered. Wild experienced some really odd card changes and design policy. For anyone interested in closer approach,here is the link to he mentioned thread

    https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/dpd3it/we_need_more_communication_from_team_5_regarding/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

    All those points contribute to the lowering amount of Wild players which were staying in the game for Wild only. The format has amazing deck variety, astonishing community and streamers like Dane,Roffle,Solem or Control and is home for a lot of old players. It is truly heartbreaking to see the Wild in agony and lack of competitive tournaments and feedback. So I ask you for help and solutions. Spread the word and spread the information about Wild issues.

    I would like to end this post with a song which usually helps people to do CPR so we all have a a better chance at saving Wild.

    Well, you can tell by the way I use my walk

    I'm a woman's man, no time to talk

    Music loud and women warm, I've been kicked around

    Since I was born

    And now it's alright, it's okay

    And you may look the other way

    We can try to understand

    The New York Times' effect on man

    Whether you're a brother or whether you're a mother

    You're stayin' alive, stayin' alive

    Feel the city breakin' and everybody shakin'

    And we're stayin' alive, stayin' alive

    Ah, ha, ha, ha, stayin' alive, stayin' alive

    Ah, ha, ha, ha, stayin' alive

    Well now, I get low and I get high

    And if I can't get either, I really try

    Got the wings of heaven on my shoes

    I'm a dancin' man and I just can't lose

    You know it's alright, it's okay

    I'll live to see another day

    We can try to understand

    The New York Times' effect on man

    Whether you're a brother or whether you're a mother

    You're stayin' alive, stayin' alive

    Feel the city breakin' and everybody shakin'

    And we're stayin' alive, stayin' alive

    Ah, ha, ha, ha, stayin' alive, stayin' alive

    Ah, ha, ha, ha, stayin' alive

    Life goin' nowhere, somebody help me

    Somebody help me, yeah

    Life goin' nowhere, somebody help me, yeah

    I'm stayin' alive

    Well, you can tell by the way I use my walk

    I'm a woman's man, no time to talk

    Music loud and women warm

    I've been kicked around since I was born

    And now it's all right, it's okay

    And you may look the other way

    We can try to understand

    The New York Times' effect on man

    Whether you're a brother or whether you're a mother

    You're stayin' alive, stayin' alive

    Feel the city breakin' and everybody shakin'

    And we're stayin' alive, stayin' alive

    Ah, ha, ha, ha, stayin' alive, stayin' alive

    Ah, ha, ha, ha, stayin' alive

    Life goin' nowhere, somebody help me

    Somebody help me, yeah

    Life goin' nowhere, somebody help me, yeah

    I'm stayin' alive

    Life goin' nowhere, somebody help me

    Somebody help me, yeah

    Life goin' nowhere, somebody help me, yeah

    I'm stayin' alive

    Life goin' nowhere, somebody help me

    Somebody help me, yeah

    Life goin' nowhere, somebody help me, yeah

    I'm stayin' alive

    Life goin' nowhere, somebody help me

    Somebody help me, yeah

    Life goin' nowhere, somebody help me, yeah

    I'm stayin' alive

    A semi-competitive player of card games. Deckbuilder and overall fan of both MTG and HS

    -3
  • Marega's Avatar 565 808 Posts Joined 05/28/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    Wall of.complains about snipsnaplock and a crazy part with lyrics from a beegees song.

     

    What the hell.  I'll take losing to snipsnaplock any time instead of losing to idiots that play secret mage or big priest 

    5
  • RavenSunHS's Avatar Refreshment Vendor 865 1481 Posts Joined 03/27/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    Sniplock is probably the biggest problem, but Secret Mage (post SoU) and Mechadin (post Crystology-completely-unnecessary-buff) are also broken (not just OP, but broken).

    All these three decks are capable of repeated insane spikes of power. Unhealthy for fun purposes.

    > All of them revolve around discounting specific cards to (0).

    The game needs a new hard-rule: no battlecry, spell or aura can discount a card below (1) mana.

    Right now Wild at rank 5 and higher is a complete trashbin. No variety is possible at all (unless you like to suffer), against those meta-warping topdecks.

    EDIT: i made my hard-rule suggestion more precise, leaving out end-of-turn effects, by virtue of their non-immediate impact.

    3
  • AliRadicali's Avatar 460 713 Posts Joined 06/06/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago
    Quote From RavenSunHS

    Sniplock is probably the biggest problem, but Secret Mage (post SoU) and Mechadin (post Crystology-completely-unnecessary-buff) are also broken (not just OP, but broken).

    All these three decks are capable of repeated insane spikes of power. Unhealthy for fun purposes.

    > All of them revolve around discounting specific cards to (0).

    Wild needs a new hard-rule: no card can be discounted below (1) mana.

    Additionally: make Sap and Beneath the Grounds into reasonable Neutral legendary Battlecry cards ffs.

    That couple of things together would fix Wild for a very long while, avoiding spikes, and allowing any deck a tech card against major synergies. No nerf required.

    Right now Wild at rank 5 and higher is a complete trashbin. No variety is possible at all (unless you like to suffer), against those meta-warping topdecks.

    Isn't the problem really with passive reduction auras (Mechwarper, portal, Sorcerer's Apprentice, etc.) more than one-time cost reductions like Galvaniser, Emperor T and the like? I think that by instituting a hard rule against reducing cards to zero a lot of non-problematic OTK comboes would become collateral damage.

     

    It's not the most elegant solution, but I think adding the line "this cannot reduce a card's cost below (1)" as and when needed is the least invasive fix. For example, I'm not convinced that adding the line to Sorcerer's apprentice is the best solution as the card has been central to just about every mage deck in the game. I think it'd be better to target key cards in the secretmage deck with nerfs than to take out a card that's crucial to cyclonemage, freezemage, Exodia mage, etc.

    0
  • ShotgunSoul's Avatar 235 168 Posts Joined 06/04/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    Add Shudderwock endless copying, Mill Rogue and BEES! Armor Druid on the list of stuff that needs addressing.

     

    Agree with Sniplock and ultra-aggro mechadin needing to be kneecapped.

     

    Secret Mage ... yeah, annoying, but I've gotten by them as well. But they've been atop the wild ladder for a while now, and it needs to be periodically cleansed.

    0
  • RavenSunHS's Avatar Refreshment Vendor 865 1481 Posts Joined 03/27/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago
    Quote From AliRadicali
    Quote From RavenSunHS

    Sniplock is probably the biggest problem, but Secret Mage (post SoU) and Mechadin (post Crystology-completely-unnecessary-buff) are also broken (not just OP, but broken).

    All these three decks are capable of repeated insane spikes of power. Unhealthy for fun purposes.

    > All of them revolve around discounting specific cards to (0).

    Wild needs a new hard-rule: no card can be discounted below (1) mana.

    Additionally: make Sap and Beneath the Grounds into reasonable Neutral legendary Battlecry cards ffs.

    That couple of things together would fix Wild for a very long while, avoiding spikes, and allowing any deck a tech card against major synergies. No nerf required.

    Right now Wild at rank 5 and higher is a complete trashbin. No variety is possible at all (unless you like to suffer), against those meta-warping topdecks.

    Isn't the problem really with passive reduction auras (Mechwarper, portal, Sorcerer's Apprentice, etc.) more than one-time cost reductions like Galvaniser, Emperor T and the like? I think that by instituting a hard rule against reducing cards to zero a lot of non-problematic OTK comboes would become collateral damage.

     

    It's not the most elegant solution, but I think adding the line "this cannot reduce a card's cost below (1)" as and when needed is the least invasive fix. For example, I'm not convinced that adding the line to Sorcerer's apprentice is the best solution as the card has been central to just about every mage deck in the game. I think it'd be better to target key cards in the secretmage deck with nerfs than to take out a card that's crucial to cyclonemage, freezemage, Exodia mage, etc.

    Surely targeted nerfs would be the best solution.

    But since the devs are so incredibly reluctant with nerfs in Wild, WHILE being also so eager to release stupidly out-of-place-cards (Arcane Flakmage shouldn't exist at all), a hard-rule would fix the issue now, AND in the future as well, with future flawed cards.

    In other words, they release flawed cards and they know it. Things are ok until a synergy abuses the flaw to its full potential. A hard-rule would proactively fix the flaw, by preventing it from becoming real (in Combo with other cards), whenever in time, for any present and future card.

    I also dislike hitting Exodia Mage or other OTK with what i proposed, as well as QMage (which is one of my preferred decks ever) but since i have no faith in them applying the right nerfs in Wild, and since i am 100% sure that new flaws would appear not far in the future, because of their inherently flawed design policy, i would go with some brutal hard-rule, and be done with it.

    1
  • iWatchUSleep's Avatar 795 749 Posts Joined 05/28/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago
    Quote From ShotgunSoul

    Add Shudderwock endless copying, Mill Rogue and BEES! Armor Druid on the list of stuff that needs addressing.

     

    Agree with Sniplock and ultra-aggro mechadin needing to be kneecapped.

     

    Secret Mage ... yeah, annoying, but I've gotten by them as well. But they've been atop the wild ladder for a while now, and it needs to be periodically cleansed.

    None of those three decks need addressing. It's a joke that you want to add those three decks to the same group as Sn1p-sn4p warlock, mech paladin and secret mage.

     

    Wild is super fun right now. I haven't played it for a few months and dropped all the way to rank 11. Ranks 5 and above are warlock, paladin and mage. Below those ranks over half of the games are losers who still play big priest all day (seriously all of them have 500 or 1000 wins and yet they still make the stupidest plays and 'tech' choices) so you can't even try fun decks.

    I thought standard was bad but oh boy...

    2
  • DoubleSummon's Avatar Ancestral Recall 1580 2241 Posts Joined 03/25/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    Lol blizzard doing something about their game XD. They don't seem to care anymore 1 month shaman has been around 50% of standard meta and yet they don't think retiring evolve is a good idea. And you are optimistic they will balance wild. 

    1
  • Lightspoon's Avatar Merfolk 495 405 Posts Joined 04/01/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    Sadly Team 5 doesn't consider Wild as an extended format, but just as a dumpster for whatever leave Standard or is too hard to balance there and goes into HoF. Even if the main issues of Wild are a few general interaction, they won't look into it properly any time soon.

    The only time they've done something is when they've nerfed Raza the Chained and Patches the Pirate a week before they would rotate out of Standard. Or when they've stealth buffed Naga Sea Witch for no reason at all.

    "For what profit is it to a man if he gains the world, and loses his own soul?"

    0
  • LyraSilvertongue's Avatar 355 383 Posts Joined 06/01/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    Thread pretty much seems like another copy pasta combo hate thread. Nerf things like Thaurassian due to wild players not liking to lose to combos will guarantee that many wild players may potentially quit the game, hurting the format even more. 

    I know I play wild primarily because you can make so many cool combos and I know many other players who primarily use the format for decks like that as well.

    -2
  • jensen06's Avatar 145 14 Posts Joined 05/28/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    Wild was always going to be a nightmare to balance, but Team 5 could do better than they're doing right now. They're just way too slow with the changes. Naga Sea Witch took forever to be changed and it's the same thing this time as well I feel.

    There's still a lot of people playing wild based on my personal experience so I don't think it's too much to expect them to at least fix the outright broken cards.

    Then again, people playing wild isn't in their best interest as using old cards means spending less on packs, so from a buisness perspective it makes sense that they don't care that much about balancing it.

    I'm currently jumping between wild and standard, depending on how broken the meta feels.

    1
  • RavenSunHS's Avatar Refreshment Vendor 865 1481 Posts Joined 03/27/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago
    Quote From LyraSilvertongue

    Thread pretty much seems like another copy pasta combo hate thread. Nerf things like Thaurassian due to wild players not liking to lose to combos will guarantee that many wild players may potentially quit the game, hurting the format even more. 

    I know I play wild primarily because you can make so many cool combos and I know many other players who primarily use the format for decks like that as well.

    And i know many including myself who don't give a damn about combos and yet would like to play decks that are not bashed by current broken top tiers.

    And keeping Wild as it is will possibly keep your group there, but it will make many others to leave the game, and the mode to die out (assuming it is not already dead).

    Now, i am not willing to kill Thaurissan or any other OTK for that matter, but Wild is not fine now, and demanding for a serious fix is not a hate thread just because you are not involved by current problems.

     

    0
  • AliRadicali's Avatar 460 713 Posts Joined 06/06/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago
    Quote From RavenSunHS

    Surely targeted nerfs would be the best solution.

    But since the devs are so incredibly reluctant with nerfs in Wild, WHILE being also so eager to release stupidly out-of-place-cards (Arcane Flakmage shouldn't exist at all), a hard-rule would fix the issue now, AND in the future as well, with future flawed cards.

    In other words, they release flawed cards and they know it. Things are ok until a synergy abuses the flaw to its full potential. A hard-rule would proactively fix the flaw, by preventing it from becoming real (in Combo with other cards), whenever in time, for any present and future card.

    I also dislike hitting Exodia Mage or other OTK with what i proposed, as well as QMage (which is one of my preferred decks ever) but since i have no faith in them applying the right nerfs in Wild, and since i am 100% sure that new flaws would appear not far in the future, because of their inherently flawed design policy, i would go with some brutal hard-rule, and be done with it.

    If you think the devs don't care about wild at all, why on earth would they institute a rule-change with wide-ranging consequences for all hearthstone formats on behalf of wild? Why would that be more plausible than targeted nerfs to cards that only exist/see play in wild? That doesn't follow for me at all. I agree that the devs are rather conservative, but that would make them less inclined to go for radical changes, not more so.

     

    With enough nagging from the community, Barnes got nerfed even though Res Priest was not a problem in terms of balance. It was and is vastly overrepresented despite being Tier 2. It might come at a glacial pace, but the devs do, sometimes, make changes for wild.

    -1
  • RavenSunHS's Avatar Refreshment Vendor 865 1481 Posts Joined 03/27/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago
    Quote From AliRadicali
    Quote From RavenSunHS

    Surely targeted nerfs would be the best solution.

    But since the devs are so incredibly reluctant with nerfs in Wild, WHILE being also so eager to release stupidly out-of-place-cards (Arcane Flakmage shouldn't exist at all), a hard-rule would fix the issue now, AND in the future as well, with future flawed cards.

    In other words, they release flawed cards and they know it. Things are ok until a synergy abuses the flaw to its full potential. A hard-rule would proactively fix the flaw, by preventing it from becoming real (in Combo with other cards), whenever in time, for any present and future card.

    I also dislike hitting Exodia Mage or other OTK with what i proposed, as well as QMage (which is one of my preferred decks ever) but since i have no faith in them applying the right nerfs in Wild, and since i am 100% sure that new flaws would appear not far in the future, because of their inherently flawed design policy, i would go with some brutal hard-rule, and be done with it.

    If you think the devs don't care about wild at all, why on earth would they institute a rule-change with wide-ranging consequences for all hearthstone formats on behalf of wild? Why would that be more plausible than targeted nerfs to cards that only exist/see play in wild? That doesn't follow for me at all. I agree that the devs are rather conservative, but that would make them less inclined to go for radical changes, not more so.

     

    With enough nagging from the community, Barnes got nerfed even though Res Priest was not a problem in terms of balance. It was and is vastly overrepresented despite being Tier 2. It might come at a glacial pace, but the devs do, sometimes, make changes for wild.

    The radical change would spare them from repeatedly coming back to Wild and nerf things.

    And it would spare us all years of frustration before the nerfs actually hit.

    I do not think they don't care about Wild. I think they care too little, and too rarely. I deem their glacial pace extremely insufficient - hence the radical change hypothesis still holds its value, at least as much as a set of timely nerfs (now and in the future, when similar problems with (0) will certainly happen).

    0
  • AliRadicali's Avatar 460 713 Posts Joined 06/06/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago
    Quote From RavenSunHS
    Quote From AliRadicali
    Quote From RavenSunHS

    Surely targeted nerfs would be the best solution.

    But since the devs are so incredibly reluctant with nerfs in Wild, WHILE being also so eager to release stupidly out-of-place-cards (Arcane Flakmage shouldn't exist at all), a hard-rule would fix the issue now, AND in the future as well, with future flawed cards.

    In other words, they release flawed cards and they know it. Things are ok until a synergy abuses the flaw to its full potential. A hard-rule would proactively fix the flaw, by preventing it from becoming real (in Combo with other cards), whenever in time, for any present and future card.

    I also dislike hitting Exodia Mage or other OTK with what i proposed, as well as QMage (which is one of my preferred decks ever) but since i have no faith in them applying the right nerfs in Wild, and since i am 100% sure that new flaws would appear not far in the future, because of their inherently flawed design policy, i would go with some brutal hard-rule, and be done with it.

    If you think the devs don't care about wild at all, why on earth would they institute a rule-change with wide-ranging consequences for all hearthstone formats on behalf of wild? Why would that be more plausible than targeted nerfs to cards that only exist/see play in wild? That doesn't follow for me at all. I agree that the devs are rather conservative, but that would make them less inclined to go for radical changes, not more so.

     

    With enough nagging from the community, Barnes got nerfed even though Res Priest was not a problem in terms of balance. It was and is vastly overrepresented despite being Tier 2. It might come at a glacial pace, but the devs do, sometimes, make changes for wild.

    The radical change would spare them from repeatedly coming back to Wild and nerf things.

    And it would spare us all years of frustration before the nerfs actually hit.

    I do not think they don't care about Wild. I think they care too little, and too rarely. I deem their glacial pace extremely insufficient - hence the radical change hypothesis still holds its value, at least as much as a set of timely nerfs (now and in the future, when similar problems with (0) will certainly happen).

    No it wouldn't. Instituting your rule change would create a bunch of chaos after which new metas would emerge with their own problems. Given the wide-ranging consequences of the proposed change and the chaotic, emergent nature of metagames, you may well end up with a game that's far more toxic and stale than what you have now.

     

    But even if the proposed rule change were guaranteed to leave wild a peaceful, tranquil place for years to come I'd still say the price was way too high. Getting cards to 0 is absolutely fundamental to a ton of combo decks. Chopping my arm off might permanently cure my RSI but that still sounds like a bad deal to me.

    2
  • RavenSunHS's Avatar Refreshment Vendor 865 1481 Posts Joined 03/27/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago
    Quote From AliRadicali
    Quote From RavenSunHS
    Quote From AliRadicali
    Quote From RavenSunHS

    Surely targeted nerfs would be the best solution.

    But since the devs are so incredibly reluctant with nerfs in Wild, WHILE being also so eager to release stupidly out-of-place-cards (Arcane Flakmage shouldn't exist at all), a hard-rule would fix the issue now, AND in the future as well, with future flawed cards.

    In other words, they release flawed cards and they know it. Things are ok until a synergy abuses the flaw to its full potential. A hard-rule would proactively fix the flaw, by preventing it from becoming real (in Combo with other cards), whenever in time, for any present and future card.

    I also dislike hitting Exodia Mage or other OTK with what i proposed, as well as QMage (which is one of my preferred decks ever) but since i have no faith in them applying the right nerfs in Wild, and since i am 100% sure that new flaws would appear not far in the future, because of their inherently flawed design policy, i would go with some brutal hard-rule, and be done with it.

    If you think the devs don't care about wild at all, why on earth would they institute a rule-change with wide-ranging consequences for all hearthstone formats on behalf of wild? Why would that be more plausible than targeted nerfs to cards that only exist/see play in wild? That doesn't follow for me at all. I agree that the devs are rather conservative, but that would make them less inclined to go for radical changes, not more so.

     

    With enough nagging from the community, Barnes got nerfed even though Res Priest was not a problem in terms of balance. It was and is vastly overrepresented despite being Tier 2. It might come at a glacial pace, but the devs do, sometimes, make changes for wild.

    The radical change would spare them from repeatedly coming back to Wild and nerf things.

    And it would spare us all years of frustration before the nerfs actually hit.

    I do not think they don't care about Wild. I think they care too little, and too rarely. I deem their glacial pace extremely insufficient - hence the radical change hypothesis still holds its value, at least as much as a set of timely nerfs (now and in the future, when similar problems with (0) will certainly happen).

    No it wouldn't. Instituting your rule change would create a bunch of chaos after which new metas would emerge with their own problems. Given the wide-ranging consequences of the proposed change and the chaotic, emergent nature of metagames, you may well end up with a game that's far more toxic and stale than what you have now.

     

    But even if the proposed rule change were guaranteed to leave wild a peaceful, tranquil place for years to come I'd still say the price was way too high. Getting cards to 0 is absolutely fundamental to a ton of combo decks. Chopping my arm off might permanently cure my RSI but that still sounds like a bad deal to me.

    Yes, it would, in the same way nerfs would, just with some side-effects.

    I should remark i precised my hard-rule suggestion, excluding end-of-turn effects from it.

    Getting cards to (0) from battlecry, spell or aura may is not fundamental (many OTKs do not need (0) already, and variations of Emperor Thaurissan could be printed in the future), but availability of such a discount in the same turn, sooner or later leads to problems that will take months or years to nerf, while the game is more of a frustration than a fun activity.

    Either way, as i said, timely and thorough nerfs would obviously be fine. But since that isn't the case, nor it's any likely to be, a new hard-rule on all discount cards (except end-of-turn effects) would still be a fair solution to the current situation, and any future ones from the same issue. While not really breaking the usual metagame fundamentals.

    Afterall, at some point they printed Reckless Experimenter. They just need to extend that to any non-end-of-turn cards.

    0
  • doingtheobvious's Avatar Child of the Night 900 422 Posts Joined 06/01/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    Team 5 does not care about Wild as a format. It is debatable even if they have developers who play the format at all on their team.

    You see the pile of mess of shit they manage to call 'balanced' in Standard? You really want them to make Wild even worse by having people who don't play the format 'balance' it?

    0
  • Lightspoon's Avatar Merfolk 495 405 Posts Joined 04/01/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    Imho, no one want a costant balance for Wild but just some attention for when the meta become too polarized toward certain decks, those that are classified as Tier S (or terribly obnoxius, like Big Priest). If the meta will not self-correct probably an intervention from Team 5 may be appreciated: no change to basic mechanics and no nerf to cards currently on Standard (to avoid messing with that meta).

    Just targeted nerfs to problematic cards that enable broken situations with too much consistency.

    "For what profit is it to a man if he gains the world, and loses his own soul?"

    5
  • doingtheobvious's Avatar Child of the Night 900 422 Posts Joined 06/01/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    Oh, I agree. I do not want Wild to be anything like Standard. The more potential each class has for insane combos, the better. The problem is (from my perception) mana-cheating cards that Team 5 refuses to do anything about.

    The frustration comes mostly from a willful ignorance of a format that has the potential to be amazing with just a tiny soupçon of thought and care.

    1
  • griffior's Avatar 720 262 Posts Joined 05/31/2019
    Posted 1 year, 7 months ago

    1. The problem of Sniploc stems from the fact that Wild allows players to use their ENTIRE collection to build decks, this is it's biggest strength while simultaneously being its biggest weakness. Of course Team 5 knew this would eventually come about, they also understand that one of three things will happen. If they step in and nerf the deck, a new Bad Guy will reveal himself and everyone will complain about that deck. The second comes from the release of a set of cards that unlock more possibilities for counters to the deck itself. Lastly, just other decks coming up that are even more powerful overall. If you ask me, Wild should never be touched/re-balanced, but instead a new format with limits should be introduced (See link at bottom of comment)

    2. Yeah I don't see why they don't push Wild harder. There's a vast library of cards that can only be gained with real world money. It's just a really weird missed opportunity on Blizzard's part. Maybe they're waiting for the "Oh fuck we haven't made our financial quota this quarter, hit the emergency button" and push Wild HARD.

    3. I've already said it once but I'll say it again, they should not nerf cards in wild and should've un-nerfed (Yogg, Tuskar, Molten Giant to name a few) cards when they rotated 

    My stance on this matter is that there are simply too many cards to cram into two formats and we need more. My ideas aren't perfect but they're something to think about and digest, and I'm sure at least one of them would be a welcomed addition.

    https://outof.cards/forums/hearthstone/hearthstone-general/1488-six-formats-hearthstone-could-easily-have

    0
  • Leave a Comment

    You must be signed in to leave a comment. Sign in here.

    Remove Ads - Go Premium