What agries me the most, is Blizz talked a lot about cost reduction and how it's no good for the game, and then they print a lot of Libram support and a lot of spell cost reduction for Mage.
I have the theory they want Standard to be annoying to make people play Classic. It's working with me at least.
I don't think that would make a lot of sense from a business perspective. Once you've collected all the Classic cards, you'll have no reason to spend money. They always have and always will want Standard to be the main game mode played by most players. Their real goal is to make Standard slightly too hard and disappointing to play with just the Core set, so that players are incentivized to buy expansion cards.
As for the mana cost reduction that is still too present in the game, I'm as confused as you are. I, too, remember them saying mana cheating has been a big problem in the past. In Iksar's recent AMA, he acknowledged that the power level got way out of control in the Year of the Raven, and I think he has to know that mana cheating was a huge part of that.
I don't think Jaraxxus is that big of a problem, because he only really punishes Control decks that have no win condition.
A well timed Rattlegore can shut Warlock down quite easily, regardless of Jaraxxus. If you're talking about Control Priest, that's just because the deck doesn't have a real win condition (or way to get there yet).
I beg your pardon, but outlasting the opponent is a perfectly valid, very real win condition, especially for a class like Priest that doesn't get a lot of offensive tools.
The deck of lunacy mage is a RNG feast ... in my last game I got two Survival of the Fittest, which for a no minion deck is ridicolous ...
The problem is NOT that it's random. The problem is that it's not random enough. The card pools are so small at the higher mana costs that you are guaranteed to get massive draw at 6, and you can expect Nagrand Slam and Survival of the Fittest pretty consistently if you started with the right spell costs originally.
If there were more spells in the pool that were less generally useful (while still being powerful in their intended classes), Lunacy would be much less problematic.
I'm not sure a "player-made solution" is possible when two very different archetypes are so co-dominant. You can focus your hate on one or the other and farm that class pretty easily, but you're going to lose every game against the one you did not choose to target.
No matter what you pick -- no matter what players pick in aggregate -- Mage and Paladin are still going to come out on top.
If you want to talk problematic winrates talk paladin. Because Uther's the meta tyrant here, with a near-perfect match-up spread. Close to being on-par with AoO demon-hunter, yet everyone would rather go to the casino with Jaina it seems.
It was not my intent at all to talk about problematic win rates generally. I brought up win rates specifically in comparison to Lunacy Mage to illustrate that the deck everyone is talking about isn't necessarily the actual worst problem in the meta.
Paladin is an obvious problem and has been for some time now, but Iksar seems very aware of that, so I'm not worried about it. On the other hand, devs have shown very little concern about Warlock beyond Tickatus, so I wanted to point out that Tickatus might not be the only offender in that class. That card's "feels bad" effect is strong, and it tends to eclipse all of Warlock's other OP control tools in the hearts and minds of players.
If anything, both Tickatus and Jaraxxus need to be nerfed simultaneously to give control decks breathing room once Paladin and Mage are dealt with.
I definitely agree. I already assumed Tickatus would get nerfed because it was on the watch list, and I honestly can't imagine a world where they don't nerf it. My worry is that it's hard to see how much Jaraxxus contributes to the problem because of Tickatus' ability to foil every deck's game plan.
I know nostalgia has rendered the old boy sacrosanct for a while, but I believe the writing is on the wall. When will the community be willing to read it?
Consider Dr. Boom, Mad Genius. I think a lot of players would agree that he was extremely problematic -- and the devs finally agreed and nerfed him. Well, Lord Jaraxxus shares several similarities with Boom, but they are exacerbated by certain aspects of the current meta.
Infinite value hero power -- only it's far worse with Jaraxxus because the value is much higher and totally consistent.
Minimal competition from other hero cards -- only it's worse with Jaraxxus because he is the only hero card in Standard right now.
Belongs to a class with too much control to begin with -- only it's worse with Jaraxxus because other control classes lost some control tools.
I understand that Lunacy Mage is top of mind for everyone at the moment, but that deck seems a lot worse than it is, simply because it's fun to play and therefore popular. Meanwhile, Control Warlock has quietly maintained win rates that rival or exceed Lunacy Mage, and this will only get worse when the hate-of-the-week decks get nerfed.
I hope Team 5 is able to recognize this problem before they decide on the next round of nerfs, or things will be a whole lot worse than they are now.
"Evergreen" is not a spectrum; it's binary. A set is either evergreen or it isn't. The fact that they could change out literally every card next year means it isn't.
I'm glad to see the end of all the Galakronds. I guess I just don't like Hero cards. I hated all the Death Knights, and I hated all of these. I'm no fan of Jaraxxus, either, but at least he's the only one left.
I guess The Amazing Reno's not so bad once you get past the poof, but I did hate having to play around that stupid poof.
It's funny how everyone seems to love singleton decks, but eventually everyone starts to hate the payoff cards. I'm definitely tired of all the singleton legendaries.
But for me, the card that should have made this list is Khartut Defender. It doesn't matter whether I'm aggro, midrange, or control; I always hate to see this guy show up and stop the fun.
Rogue has plenty of easy ways to Frenzy Efficient Octo-bot. When the combo finally surfaces (I'm sure it will involve Scabbs Cutterbutter), pinging the Oct-bot will be your signal to the opponent that their life is about to end.
But look at how ripped Bru'kan is ...
The flavor text on the card removes all doubt.
I don't think that would make a lot of sense from a business perspective. Once you've collected all the Classic cards, you'll have no reason to spend money. They always have and always will want Standard to be the main game mode played by most players. Their real goal is to make Standard slightly too hard and disappointing to play with just the Core set, so that players are incentivized to buy expansion cards.
As for the mana cost reduction that is still too present in the game, I'm as confused as you are. I, too, remember them saying mana cheating has been a big problem in the past. In Iksar's recent AMA, he acknowledged that the power level got way out of control in the Year of the Raven, and I think he has to know that mana cheating was a huge part of that.
I beg your pardon, but outlasting the opponent is a perfectly valid, very real win condition, especially for a class like Priest that doesn't get a lot of offensive tools.
The problem is NOT that it's random. The problem is that it's not random enough. The card pools are so small at the higher mana costs that you are guaranteed to get massive draw at 6, and you can expect Nagrand Slam and Survival of the Fittest pretty consistently if you started with the right spell costs originally.
If there were more spells in the pool that were less generally useful (while still being powerful in their intended classes), Lunacy would be much less problematic.
I'm not sure a "player-made solution" is possible when two very different archetypes are so co-dominant. You can focus your hate on one or the other and farm that class pretty easily, but you're going to lose every game against the one you did not choose to target.
No matter what you pick -- no matter what players pick in aggregate -- Mage and Paladin are still going to come out on top.
It was not my intent at all to talk about problematic win rates generally. I brought up win rates specifically in comparison to Lunacy Mage to illustrate that the deck everyone is talking about isn't necessarily the actual worst problem in the meta.
Paladin is an obvious problem and has been for some time now, but Iksar seems very aware of that, so I'm not worried about it. On the other hand, devs have shown very little concern about Warlock beyond Tickatus, so I wanted to point out that Tickatus might not be the only offender in that class. That card's "feels bad" effect is strong, and it tends to eclipse all of Warlock's other OP control tools in the hearts and minds of players.
I definitely agree. I already assumed Tickatus would get nerfed because it was on the watch list, and I honestly can't imagine a world where they don't nerf it. My worry is that it's hard to see how much Jaraxxus contributes to the problem because of Tickatus' ability to foil every deck's game plan.
I know nostalgia has rendered the old boy sacrosanct for a while, but I believe the writing is on the wall. When will the community be willing to read it?
Consider Dr. Boom, Mad Genius. I think a lot of players would agree that he was extremely problematic -- and the devs finally agreed and nerfed him. Well, Lord Jaraxxus shares several similarities with Boom, but they are exacerbated by certain aspects of the current meta.
I understand that Lunacy Mage is top of mind for everyone at the moment, but that deck seems a lot worse than it is, simply because it's fun to play and therefore popular. Meanwhile, Control Warlock has quietly maintained win rates that rival or exceed Lunacy Mage, and this will only get worse when the hate-of-the-week decks get nerfed.
I hope Team 5 is able to recognize this problem before they decide on the next round of nerfs, or things will be a whole lot worse than they are now.
Refreshing Spring Water --> 5 mana
Font of Power --> 2 mana
Deck of Lunacy --> Transform spells in your deck into random* ones that cost (1) more.
There's no need to change Apexis Blast. These other nerfs would fix the problem.
*The word "random" should have appeared on the original card for the sake of accuracy and consistency.
Considering all the more problematic cards in the meta, you've sure chosen a strange one to complain about.
"Evergreen" is not a spectrum; it's binary. A set is either evergreen or it isn't. The fact that they could change out literally every card next year means it isn't.
The whole point of the Core set is that it is NOT evergreen.
I'm tired of all but Flik Skyshiv. That is a fantastic card, strategic but not overbearing.
I'm glad to see the end of all the Galakronds. I guess I just don't like Hero cards. I hated all the Death Knights, and I hated all of these. I'm no fan of Jaraxxus, either, but at least he's the only one left.
I guess The Amazing Reno's not so bad once you get past the poof, but I did hate having to play around that stupid poof.
It's funny how everyone seems to love singleton decks, but eventually everyone starts to hate the payoff cards. I'm definitely tired of all the singleton legendaries.
But for me, the card that should have made this list is Khartut Defender. It doesn't matter whether I'm aggro, midrange, or control; I always hate to see this guy show up and stop the fun.
Tavish Stormpike finally brings the Ironforge theme to Hearthstone! Noice.
Rogue has plenty of easy ways to Frenzy Efficient Octo-bot. When the combo finally surfaces (I'm sure it will involve Scabbs Cutterbutter), pinging the Oct-bot will be your signal to the opponent that their life is about to end.
Good grief, how many Thrall skins do we need?
I'd love to see a Tauren Shaman, or maybe a Troll. Zappy Boi skin, anyone?
Lemonade when?