The Wild meta shows that there is very real power creep in the ongoing expansions. The power creep is caused by both increased quality and increased synergies. You can be very successful in Wild playing a completely Standard meta-deck.
Last month I laddered with Hunter in Wild. I played Giant Hunter, but I couldn't make it to Rank 5. I looked up the new Standard agro-Hunter deck. The only Wild substitution I made was substituting Glaivezookas for Candleshots. (Well, I had to sub Belchers for Creepers because I don't have Creepers, but I would have used Creepers.) I cruised quickly from Rank 7 to Rank 5 to get my epic.
Wild is just Standard+. I don't think we expected that to happen.
In Wild you can get lots of powerfull cards that you don't have in Standard so facing a Standard-only deck there should be an advantage. Also consider that when the new Year rotation will come then what is now Standard will become Wild so what will be the point of getting some limit? What now you don't want to see on Wild will become Wild-only in few months anyway.
Wild should never get any kind of restriction, or at last until we have only Wild and Standard as format. Consider also that Wild will get its own identity in due time: with each Standard rotation the pool of Wild will grow more and more until it will be probably unbearable for Standard-only deck to get there due to the powerhouse of cards that they'll face but without having access to them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
For what profit is it to a man, if he gains the world and loses his own soul?
In Wild you can get lots of powerfull cards that you don't have in Standard so facing a Standard-only deck there should be an advantage. Also consider that when the new Year rotation will come then what is now Standard will become Wild so what will be the point of getting some limit? What now you don't want to see on Wild will become Wild-only in few months anyway.
Wild should never get any kind of restriction, or at last until we have only Wild and Standard as format. Consider also that Wild will get its own identity in due time: with each Standard rotation the pool of Wild will grow more and more until it will be probably unbearable for Standard-only deck to get there due to the powerhouse of cards that they'll face but without having access to them.
The last 4 expansions have had a very high power level, so only 10-15 Wild only cards have a true impact right now. Also, Wild is not really taken that seriously, and it not played much, so the level is lower.
With the next rotation, the powergap will be noticeably bigger, maybe even more than when the format was introduced.
The Wild meta shows that there is very real power creep in the ongoing expansions. The power creep is caused by both increased quality and increased synergies. You can be very successful in Wild playing a completely Standard meta-deck.
Last month I laddered with Hunter in Wild. I played Giant Hunter, but I couldn't make it to Rank 5. I looked up the new Standard agro-Hunter deck. The only Wild substitution I made was substituting Glaivezookas for Candleshots. (Well, I had to sub Belchers for Creepers because I don't have Creepers, but I would have used Creepers.) I cruised quickly from Rank 7 to Rank 5 to get my epic.
Wild is just Standard+. I don't think we expected that to happen.
I'm guessing the main reason for that is because there aren't tons of people who have robust collections going all the way back forever.
It's hard to imagine any midrange deck being made worse by Loatheb, for example.
As another example, Mysterious Challenger still makes for a very powerful tempo Paladin deck, but you probably don't see a lot of it because the proportion of active players who own it is continually shrinking.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
As Draco Cracona says, mid-range decks aren't great in Wild. Others have noted that the Wild meta is warped between Reno decks and agro decks. Before the Standard and Wild split, the most powerful decks tended to be mid-range. The new Reno and agro decks destroy the old midrange decks.
Mid-range decks like Secret Paladin can get you to rank 10, but they probably won't get you to 5, and certainly not to Legend. My Giant Hunter deck had Loatheb. Sure, I won a few games because of him, but he's generally irrelevant in current match-ups.
Another reason that newer strategies are better than older ones is that a lot of cards used in older decks like Face Hunter and Handlock were nerfed.
That's stupid. What if a player that only started playing during Un'Goro wants to get into wild? They'd have to craft new cards for every different deck they'd want to play. This kind of thing would cut down on the number of people playing wild altogether
What's wrong with people playing standard decks in wild anyways? If they want to play lower power level, easier to play around netdecks and give me free wins, I don't think too much about it
Standard format big priest gave me free wins in will till about rank 10. Then I started to get steamrolled by reno decks. Most would just concede on turn 4 or 5.
There's no need to change Wild right now the problem is mostly time.
Standard is currently on the max expansions ever in terms of cards (1 adventure +5 expansions) and some of those cards were made to sinergize with wild cards(kazakus and reno for example, and the 3 sets rotating out in general have sinergy) so when the new hearthstone year comes all reno decks will be only wild since there will be no payoff for playing only one of each card in standart anymore for example, this year we also got some really auto include legendarys(DKs) and that is natural.
The meta difference will be huge next expansion with Jade, Razakus and patches going out from standard.
Eternal formats in CCGs develop their own identities over time. Given the comparatively small card pool in HS - the Wild format won't have as many cards as MtG Standard until the winter expansion releases at the end of this year - it seems like a safe bet that Wild will resemble something like "Standard+" for the next few years. There was an old format in MtG called "Extended" - essentially double Standard. It was never popular because it was too similar to Standard, and often featured upgraded versions of Standard decks, and relatively few unique decks which lent a unique identity to the format. The last Wild meta-report prior to K&C featured only a single "Wild only" deck - Naga Hunter - among the twenty most-popular decks on ladder. Everything else was basically an upgraded Standard deck. Some of the upgrades are quite powerful - Dude Paladin is a dominant deck in Wild, and non-existent in Standard; Reno is a big deal; N'Zoth is far more powerful owing to all the premium DRs . . . etc. But at the current rate of release, it will likely take another four or five years, or longer, in order to flip that ratio - 19 Wild-only decks and only a single upgraded Standard deck. And that's fine - in fact, it's part of the allure of playing an eternal format, experiencing its growth, the emergence of "pillars" which prove powerful enough to perpetually survive the introduction of new content and ultimately give the format its identity.
For all of these reasons, and others, the OP's suggestion seems completely unnecessary.
MTG has a situation where older cards are generally more powerful. In HS, thuogh, you have the opposite problem, which kind of obviates the entire point of an eternal format - STD cards are getting srtinger. Depends if blizz decide to weaken cards they print in STD or continue powercreeping.
HSReplays posts a list of the 100 most-played cards in each format - it's a good indicator of the impact which each set has in Standard and Wild, and the overall power level of the cards being printed. Community perception notwithstanding, it doesn't appear to be true that cards are power-creeping. Forty-one of the most-played cards in Wild are from the Classic, Basic and HoF sets (10% of 382 cards). Altogether, Year of the Mammoth has twenty-eight cards on the list (7% of 405), Year of the Kraken has twelve (4% of 311), and Naxxramas through LoE has nineteen (5% of 361). Year of the Mammoth has slightly higher representation owing to the designers figuring out how to make late-game cards that will actually see play. The first three years of HS development managed to put only three cards on the list which cost 7+ mana, while Year of the Mammoth managed to contribute nine. The numbers for YotM are also inflated by the recent release of K&C - the meta-game hasn't settled, and people are trying out new cards.
Typically, community discussion of power-creep occurs without any consideration of context. As I pointed out in my original post, HS releases very few cards each year compared to IRL games. Less than half as many as MtG - the game will be five years old before the Wild format enjoys a card pool as large as the Standard card pool in MtG. Consideration of power-creep only makes sense after a game establishes a baseline power level for the game - given that it was only this year that the game figured out how to make 7+ mana cards that would see play, it's safe to say that HS is still in its infancy. It took the designers of MtG about a decade to settle on the contemporary power level of creatures - in the olden days, the most powerful 4-mana creatures would be similar to "Chillwind Yeti, with a drawback." The learning curve for the designers of HS is obviously much steeper - plenty of members of the design team formerly worked on IRL card games, and already learned all the lessons from the genres' early days. Yet it still took four years (but only 1,459 cards) to figure out the appropriate power level of 7+ mana cards, to ensure that some of them would actually see play. If you wish to say that a card like N'Zoth, the Corruptor is power-creeping on the territory of Force-Tank MAX, or Mekgineer Thermaplugg - it's a free country, and no one will stop you. But taking a step back and taking a more global perspective of the game suggests that there is considerably more to the story.
Typically, mature eternal formats develop "pillars" - decks which are capable of perpetually surviving the addition of new content, and (in Hearthstone's case) ladder attrition. In MtG, there are a handful of cards which were designed before anyone understood anything about the genre - they broke the fundamental rules of CCGs. Those cards, and a handful of others, have defined the Vintage format in MtG and decks abusing those cards have dominated the format for over twenty years - the "Power Nine" and a few other cards which define decks like Oath and MUD. HSReplays tracks the play-rates of cards in Wild - I'd suggest that there are three early candidates for the future "Power Nine" of Hearthstone. The three most-played legendaries in the format are all neutrals - Patches the Pirate, Reno Jackson and N'Zoth, the Corruptor. All are powerful build-arounds, and the power levels of the latter two appear quite likely to continually increase over time. A secondary group of cards which have synergy with the "Power Three" - Kazakus, Sylvanas Windrunner, Ship's Cannon, etc. - will also develop over time. A third group of cards, like Bloodmage Thalnos and Azure Drake, or class cards like Muster for Battle and Mad Scientist (if you know what I mean) will see play for years to come because of their general versatility - none of the cards defines a deck, but they all fit nicely into virtually any deck. Ten years from now, I'd guess that the dominant decks in Wild will feature as many synergistic "Power Nine" cards as possible, supplemented by all the best cards from groups two and three.
After reading the comments i came to realize ,this is more of an sentimental problem that something else.
It feels bad losing to an 100% standard deck. Most deck can be upgraded with wild cards so implementing an restriction of 1 only card wouldn't be that bad. Not like crafting an common or 1 rare that makes the deck better is that much of an punishment.
The pro is your opponent feels less bad losing to an wild deck than standard. and 2 people wont be able to play an wild game by accident it had happened to me before thinking im playing standard but it was wild instead and losing horribly.
1 game was particulate funny an reno deck with only reno as the only wild card was think it was an standard game until he played reno.
It does have requirements - 30 cards per deck, nor more than 2 of each, 1 of each legendary. Why another salt thread wearing Groucho glasses?
I fail to see the salt. Just promoting a different idea. I won’t rage quit if I continue to face Standard decks in Wild nor rant if this does not get accepted by the community.
I wish I was as lucky as you to face that many subpar decks :)
Do we really care if people want to play at low ranks with their shitty Standard decks in Wild?
Part of the problem is certainly the small card pool in Hearthstone. Prior to the fall rotation in MtG, the Standard format in that game enjoys its largest card pool - typically between 1,600 to 1,900 cards. The Wild format in HS currently has a card pool featuring only 1,459 cards, 371 of which are "Wild only." Assuming we continue receiving three sets of 135 cards each year, in a few months, Wild will have 1,594 cards, 682 of which will be "Wild only." At rotation next year, about 2,000 cards, half of which will be "Wild only." If MtG Standard were suddenly split into two comparable formats, it would suffer the same problems that currently effect Wild HS - virtually all the decks from the "new MtG eternal format" would simply be Standard decks with a few upgrades. Given the small card pool, there simply isn't any other option. Wild will begin to be more interesting when the "Wild only" card pool becomes larger than the shared-format card pool - in a couple years, the format will begin carving out its own identity. But it's already fun, and the differences between formats, while small, are still differences, and allow for some interesting deck construction possibilities. And it will only get better in the future.
does anyone else think that Wild should have some requirements? Something like “Deck must contain X number of Wild cards” would be fine. Ideally it would be enough to slow down the number of Standard T1 meta decks from entering.
Only reason this should exist is that some people want to play a truely Wild format to escape the current metas oppressive decks. Wild is a place we should be able to escape the current meta.
In the past, I never ran into the same decks in Wild. Lately though it seems like everyone is playing the same shit that Standard is full of. I’ve even added people just to ask what cards in their deck we’re Wild, and nearly no one has one. Seems odd, like why play Wild if your deck is Standard?
It makes sense if you think about it. Laddering in Wild should mean that you are playing a truely Wild deck. It should be different than Standard, thats the point, at least to me.
what does everyone else think?
I do believe that the point of wild as a format is that you can use every single card that has ever existed on the game, like yeah the main appeal of it is obviously playing with cards that are no longer available on the standart format but banning standart cards makes no sense at all and it's just a weird proposition overall why should any card get banned or why should there be an specific condition to the format in where anything can happen and any card can be used? seems pretty dumb to me and extremely counter intuitive if you ask.
Something like 10-20% which is only 3-6 cards. At least 1 freaking wild card. But then we’d just see Highlander Priests that sub out one insignificant card. I guess in 4 months all the cards/decks people hate will continue in Wild, so there’s never a true escape. Let’s hope people enjoy shaking things up and forego playing the exact same decks after the next expansion.
I always loved HS for the diversity. Lately I’m seeing so much similarity between decks it’s a little sad. I’ve stopped netdecking because the deck building element is THE core of any card game imo, and once I stopped my enjoyment greatly increased. I know I know, different strokes for different folks, but I urge people to try building their own decks or at least modifying the decks we see here.
I agree - the fact that you cant escape the usual cancer decks is what sucks. Its like once you've had enough of the bull shit Priest, Warlock and Mage cooki-cutter decks in standard you head over to wild and seem to que up against a good number of the same style decks with like ONE card different or even none. Its like, yo - take that shit back to Standard please. The try-hards just cant get enough of their borken, brainless decks I guess.
How about a compromise and make it so Wild mode can use any cards EXCEPT the latest expansion. So, everything but Kobolds and Catacombs? At least that would calm stuff down a bit.
I'm fine with the way it is, the idea of Wild is that you have the freedom to make any deck you want with all collectible cards in the game.
If people want to play a full Standard deck in Wild, they're putting themselves at a disadvantage. Could you imagine if things like Tinker's Sharpsword Oil or Voidcaller were still available in Standard?
The Wild meta shows that there is very real power creep in the ongoing expansions. The power creep is caused by both increased quality and increased synergies. You can be very successful in Wild playing a completely Standard meta-deck.
Last month I laddered with Hunter in Wild. I played Giant Hunter, but I couldn't make it to Rank 5. I looked up the new Standard agro-Hunter deck. The only Wild substitution I made was substituting Glaivezookas for Candleshots. (Well, I had to sub Belchers for Creepers because I don't have Creepers, but I would have used Creepers.) I cruised quickly from Rank 7 to Rank 5 to get my epic.
Wild is just Standard+. I don't think we expected that to happen.
In Wild you can get lots of powerfull cards that you don't have in Standard so facing a Standard-only deck there should be an advantage. Also consider that when the new Year rotation will come then what is now Standard will become Wild so what will be the point of getting some limit? What now you don't want to see on Wild will become Wild-only in few months anyway.
Wild should never get any kind of restriction, or at last until we have only Wild and Standard as format. Consider also that Wild will get its own identity in due time: with each Standard rotation the pool of Wild will grow more and more until it will be probably unbearable for Standard-only deck to get there due to the powerhouse of cards that they'll face but without having access to them.
For what profit is it to a man, if he gains the world and loses his own soul?
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
As Draco Cracona says, mid-range decks aren't great in Wild. Others have noted that the Wild meta is warped between Reno decks and agro decks. Before the Standard and Wild split, the most powerful decks tended to be mid-range. The new Reno and agro decks destroy the old midrange decks.
Mid-range decks like Secret Paladin can get you to rank 10, but they probably won't get you to 5, and certainly not to Legend. My Giant Hunter deck had Loatheb. Sure, I won a few games because of him, but he's generally irrelevant in current match-ups.
Another reason that newer strategies are better than older ones is that a lot of cards used in older decks like Face Hunter and Handlock were nerfed.
There's no need to change Wild right now the problem is mostly time.
Standard is currently on the max expansions ever in terms of cards (1 adventure +5 expansions) and some of those cards were made to sinergize with wild cards(kazakus and reno for example, and the 3 sets rotating out in general have sinergy) so when the new hearthstone year comes all reno decks will be only wild since there will be no payoff for playing only one of each card in standart anymore for example, this year we also got some really auto include legendarys(DKs) and that is natural.
The meta difference will be huge next expansion with Jade, Razakus and patches going out from standard.
Just for the record, I think these cards are the "format defining" ones in wild:
Mal'Ganis
Voidcaller
Shielded Minibot
Muster for Battle
Keeper of Uldaman
Ship's Cannon
Reno Jackson
Living Roots
Mad Scientist
Ice Lance
Haunted Creeper
Lightbomb
Note that expected powerhouses like Piloted Shredder, Dr. Boom, Sludge Belcher and Mysterious Challenger are not on the list... Many of the "format deciding" cards are there because of very strong synergies with new cards, like Patches the Pirate + Ship's Cannon and Shielded Minibot + Call to Arms.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
No. Every card is Wild. That's why it's called WILD.
After reading the comments i came to realize ,this is more of an sentimental problem that something else.
It feels bad losing to an 100% standard deck. Most deck can be upgraded with wild cards so implementing an restriction of 1 only card wouldn't be that bad. Not like crafting an common or 1 rare that makes the deck better is that much of an punishment.
The pro is your opponent feels less bad losing to an wild deck than standard. and 2 people wont be able to play an wild game by accident it had happened to me before thinking im playing standard but it was wild instead and losing horribly.
1 game was particulate funny an reno deck with only reno as the only wild card was think it was an standard game until he played reno.
I know its easy to see what format your playing.
Part of the problem is certainly the small card pool in Hearthstone. Prior to the fall rotation in MtG, the Standard format in that game enjoys its largest card pool - typically between 1,600 to 1,900 cards. The Wild format in HS currently has a card pool featuring only 1,459 cards, 371 of which are "Wild only." Assuming we continue receiving three sets of 135 cards each year, in a few months, Wild will have 1,594 cards, 682 of which will be "Wild only." At rotation next year, about 2,000 cards, half of which will be "Wild only." If MtG Standard were suddenly split into two comparable formats, it would suffer the same problems that currently effect Wild HS - virtually all the decks from the "new MtG eternal format" would simply be Standard decks with a few upgrades. Given the small card pool, there simply isn't any other option. Wild will begin to be more interesting when the "Wild only" card pool becomes larger than the shared-format card pool - in a couple years, the format will begin carving out its own identity. But it's already fun, and the differences between formats, while small, are still differences, and allow for some interesting deck construction possibilities. And it will only get better in the future.
I don't care if I play against standard deck in wild, nobody should
if my opponent wants to limit his deck to standard list in WILD?! be my guest
I win due to skill and lose due to bad RNG. :D
In a few months, Razakus Priest will be Wild, and you'll get the Wild you asked for. Don't think you should look forward to it, though.
I'm fine with the way it is, the idea of Wild is that you have the freedom to make any deck you want with all collectible cards in the game.
If people want to play a full Standard deck in Wild, they're putting themselves at a disadvantage. Could you imagine if things like Tinker's Sharpsword Oil or Voidcaller were still available in Standard?