Disclaimer #2: if you are in the "Wild is Wild" mindset, this is not a thread for you. You are free to skip it and read something else. It is also a long text so... No need for cynical toxicity here. I don't care if you are a tough guy. ;)
Disclaimer #3: this is not a call for nerf thread (well, not directly at least). I am talking about an entire design policy.
Premises
Premise #1: the nerf to Ironbeak Owl (from (2) to (3)) happened because they didn't want a powerful tech such as silence, to be available for cheap AND neutral. Indeed, you can just look at spellbreaker to see that their point was not about raw card power.
Premise #2: Naga Sea Witch nerf happened along the same lines: the effect was maintained, but delayed by many turns (from (5) to (8)).
The above seems to show that they intend the mana curve as a non-linear one, that is, something powerful can happen out of the normal Mana/Value ratio, as long as it is in a fitting part of the mana curve for it (ie no sooner than a given turn).
IMHO, this is a fair point about designing cards, as it allows madness to happen, as long as it happens late enough to let players do something more normal during the earlier turns.
The current problem
Now, in Wild, we all know some problematic cards, not the same cards for everyone, some may think none is a problem at all. But recurring claims will show how some specific cards are indeed problematic at least. Maybe not entirely broken, but problematic.
Now, I daresay a good number of these problematic cards share the same problem: they enable something extremely powerful, that is normally attached to a card that is far above in the mana curve. That is, these effects invalidate the same restrictions/definitions as in the premises.
I will label these effect under the generic term: curve-cheating (not to be confused with 'mana-cheating', which is a more simple Value/Tempo swing: the whole game is based on mana-cheating, something OP can happen with mana-cheating as well, but that's another problem, that possibly deserves a completely different thread).
Notice that curve-cheating often involves hand-cheating as well: they trigger effects/cards directly from the deck, completely bypassing the card draw restrictions.
All these effects are hardly restricted in their highest possible mana target, and they can easily hit something that is normally much higher in the mana curve.
> Normally, in Standard, there are always a bunch of curve-cheating cards, but they are kept in check by the limited collection available. That is, curve-cheating is kept in check by RNG and highroll, to chances that are low enough to be acceptable - in average.
Alternatively, curve-cheating effects are bound to secondary resources or conditions, that also contribute to keep them in check.
> So, in general, the current mana-evaluation is mostly context-driven. And there lies the problem.
HOWEVER, in Wild, where the cardpool is increasingly big, the highroll drawback can be manipulated (during the deckbuilding phase), up to the point where it is irrelevant, and highroll can consistently perform towards the best results possible. The same happens with secondary resources (be it health, or minions on board, etc)
And there come the problems: effects sealing the game way too early, where by 'early' I mean exactly a low point of the mana curve, so that there is no way out for the opponent to react, unless they hold a very specific tech.
A possible solution in a New Deal of Card Design?
My point is that Wild is slowly ruined by these cards, AND Standard has no benefit whatsoever from them, because they are too meme-y in that context.
So, IDEALLY, I think there should be a more restricted design policy about mana, and curve-cheating effects, incidentally determining of the correct mana evaluation of a card.
That is, maintaining all the current curve-cheating effects (make some more if necessary!), but at the following conditions:
no card can be played without a proper mana cost, no matter the secondary conditions
any curve-cheating effect should happen no earlier than turn-6 (they should cost (6) mana or MORE)
if the curve-cheating effect also involves hand-cheating [playing from deck, bypassing card draw], the earliest turn should be turn-8 (they should cost (8) mana or MORE)
If all these 3 conditions (or similar ones, with very similar numbers) were SYSTEMATICALLY respected, Standard would be just as enjoyable as it is now, and Wild could never really be broken, and would be even more varied and enjoyable than it is already: it would be a win-win situation!
> ie: Dimensional Ripper, and Fel Lord Betrug are perfectly fair cards, despite being both curve-cheating and the former being deck-cheating as well: insane potential value, but it happens no earlier than turn-10 and turn-8/9 respectively!
SO, again, I am not talking rubbish. I am just suggesting their own policies about MANA evaluations should have harder restrictions, so that balance is more long-term, and not just context-driven.
Because let's be fair: it's fun to play with broken stuff, but the unfun to play against them largely overthrow the upside of brokenness.
What do you think?
FYI: my main class is Rogue, where I can (and do) use Sap and even Vanish, and I am lately developing Mage, where I can use Polymorph, Polymorph: Boar, and Counterspell. As you can see, the most of my gameplay is only partly influenced by the factors I deemed as problems above.
I am not salty at all. I just wish Wild was the most fun possible for everyone who would dare to play with/against the full collection, while taking nothing away from Standard.
Mmh, I understand it's a wall-o-text, but I guess I have to be more poignant to trigger a discussion here...
ie, for curve-cheating cards i was referring to stuff like Voidcaller(while Princess Talanji is perfectly fine in her turn-8, together with the post-nerf Naga Sea Witch).
Notice that Darkest Hour is also a problematic card in the same way, although they added board status as an additional condition.
I should also mention both Bloodbloom and Preparation, as they can allow a card to be played before its normal turn is allowed. I am well aware that touching Preparation may kill Rogue (and I should remind you that Rogue is my main class). But the fact the card is problematic is undeniable.
Instead, cards like Far Sight are still ok IMO (but debatable ofc), because you pay the respective mana up-front. In particular, even if it allows you to play a big card before its normal turn is due, you are still wasting a whole earlier turn to do so.
Please, read my OP, and no toxicity. Keep the arguments clean and as objective as possible.
I agree with u, but since the players of hearthstone care more about Standard they don't give a shit about what u said, the only way Blizzard would do something about that is IF that affects Standard.
And since the changes you mention affects a bunch of cards, and that means a lot of Dust, I doubt something will change.
Finally, what you expect writting and essay here? Most of players didn't even read the card.
I accept wild as being the place of broken combos, cards and decks in general. I don't take my play there too seriously, I use it as 'casual mode'...i don't worry about ranking up and play memey and pure tribal decks. But I do care about the overall health of the mode. Sometimes i've climbed by accident and regretted it once I start hitting the big priest wall, usually between rank 10 and 5 in my experience. I imagine it only gets worse the higher you go.
There is something about Big Priest - more than any other deck, it's just rage inducing for me. Sucks the fun right out the game. I don't care if I beat them cause it usually just means they drew poorly and sat there doing relatively little, no satisfaction in that. If they draw even moderately well they just steamroll the game, using what feel like insanely unfair mechanics, even by wild standards.
If i was Blizzard I would just 'nuke from orbit to be sure' and pull the entire archetype from wild.
Devs have made an attempt to make "cheat" effects less easy to pull off. However, old cards that were made before devs realised that are problemtatic. (Bloodbloom makes Darkest Hour problematic in wild).
I can't agree with you more than ever, RavenSun. Anything related to cheating should be 6-mana or above, even 8-mana or above dare I say, and must be on-par with previous cards. Look at N'Zoth, the Corruptor and Darkest Hour as example. You play 10-mana card and gain board control that where answers are endless vs 6-mana board control (cheat) that where answers are limited. That's so absurd. Even so, N'Zoth, the Corruptor and Bloodreaver Gul'dan should have summoned up to 3 minions, similar to Master Oakheart and 10-Mana Kazakus-Summon Potions. Because of these cheats and larger summon shenanigans in Wild, Midrange decks are dead (if you played Midrange decks during GvG/TGT/LOE, you would understand what I mean) and games circle around Aggro/Combo/Control system.
Sorry about my English, since it's not my native language, but this is sadly how Wild works, and I still miss the old-school Midrange decks to this day after the division of formats.
The current expansion outlines how they've at least partially corrected the mana cheating problem, but as you've said that's standard exclusive. I stand by that Barnes is a nerf waiting to happen; there's nothing for me to believe they'll touch ANY of the rez package cards, and let's be honest: most people complaining about Big Priest limit it to Barnes shenanigans. All they have to do is 1 nerf and never listen to any talks of nerfs ever again, which seems far more likely than anything else happening.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you thought you knew what you think I know, then you'd know I knew you knew I know.
the real solution is just implementing card bans in eternal formats, that way you dont privy standard jhonies from their memes, and keep the eternal formats rather balanced, vintage and modern in mtg have bans for those formats, and even the pokemon tcg who were strictly against bans in eternal formats, had to ban a ton of cards from expanded recently.
Disclaimer #1: SORRY FOR THE LONG TEXT
Disclaimer #2: if you are in the "Wild is Wild" mindset, this is not a thread for you. You are free to skip it and read something else. It is also a long text so... No need for cynical toxicity here. I don't care if you are a tough guy. ;)
Disclaimer #3: this is not a call for nerf thread (well, not directly at least). I am talking about an entire design policy.
Premises
Premise #1: the nerf to Ironbeak Owl (from (2) to (3)) happened because they didn't want a powerful tech such as silence, to be available for cheap AND neutral. Indeed, you can just look at spellbreaker to see that their point was not about raw card power.
Premise #2: Naga Sea Witch nerf happened along the same lines: the effect was maintained, but delayed by many turns (from (5) to (8)).
The above seems to show that they intend the mana curve as a non-linear one, that is, something powerful can happen out of the normal Mana/Value ratio, as long as it is in a fitting part of the mana curve for it (ie no sooner than a given turn).
IMHO, this is a fair point about designing cards, as it allows madness to happen, as long as it happens late enough to let players do something more normal during the earlier turns.
The current problem
Now, in Wild, we all know some problematic cards, not the same cards for everyone, some may think none is a problem at all.
But recurring claims will show how some specific cards are indeed problematic at least. Maybe not entirely broken, but problematic.
Now, I daresay a good number of these problematic cards share the same problem: they enable something extremely powerful, that is normally attached to a card that is far above in the mana curve. That is, these effects invalidate the same restrictions/definitions as in the premises.
Notice that curve-cheating often involves hand-cheating as well: they trigger effects/cards directly from the deck, completely bypassing the card draw restrictions.
All these effects are hardly restricted in their highest possible mana target, and they can easily hit something that is normally much higher in the mana curve.
> Normally, in Standard, there are always a bunch of curve-cheating cards, but they are kept in check by the limited collection available. That is, curve-cheating is kept in check by RNG and highroll, to chances that are low enough to be acceptable - in average.
Alternatively, curve-cheating effects are bound to secondary resources or conditions, that also contribute to keep them in check.
> So, in general, the current mana-evaluation is mostly context-driven. And there lies the problem.
HOWEVER, in Wild, where the cardpool is increasingly big, the highroll drawback can be manipulated (during the deckbuilding phase), up to the point where it is irrelevant, and highroll can consistently perform towards the best results possible. The same happens with secondary resources (be it health, or minions on board, etc)
And there come the problems: effects sealing the game way too early, where by 'early' I mean exactly a low point of the mana curve, so that there is no way out for the opponent to react, unless they hold a very specific tech.
A possible solution in a New Deal of Card Design?
My point is that Wild is slowly ruined by these cards, AND Standard has no benefit whatsoever from them, because they are too meme-y in that context.
So, IDEALLY, I think there should be a more restricted design policy about mana, and curve-cheating effects, incidentally determining of the correct mana evaluation of a card.
That is, maintaining all the current curve-cheating effects (make some more if necessary!), but at the following conditions:
If all these 3 conditions (or similar ones, with very similar numbers) were SYSTEMATICALLY respected, Standard would be just as enjoyable as it is now, and Wild could never really be broken, and would be even more varied and enjoyable than it is already: it would be a win-win situation!
> ie: Dimensional Ripper, and Fel Lord Betrug are perfectly fair cards, despite being both curve-cheating and the former being deck-cheating as well: insane potential value, but it happens no earlier than turn-10 and turn-8/9 respectively!
SO, again, I am not talking rubbish. I am just suggesting their own policies about MANA evaluations should have harder restrictions, so that balance is more long-term, and not just context-driven.
Because let's be fair: it's fun to play with broken stuff, but the unfun to play against them largely overthrow the upside of brokenness.
What do you think?
FYI: my main class is Rogue, where I can (and do) use Sap and even Vanish, and I am lately developing Mage, where I can use Polymorph, Polymorph: Boar, and Counterspell. As you can see, the most of my gameplay is only partly influenced by the factors I deemed as problems above.
I am not salty at all. I just wish Wild was the most fun possible for everyone who would dare to play with/against the full collection, while taking nothing away from Standard.
Mmh, I understand it's a wall-o-text, but I guess I have to be more poignant to trigger a discussion here...
I should also mention both Bloodbloom and Preparation, as they can allow a card to be played before its normal turn is allowed. I am well aware that touching Preparation may kill Rogue (and I should remind you that Rogue is my main class). But the fact the card is problematic is undeniable.
Instead, cards like Far Sight are still ok IMO (but debatable ofc), because you pay the respective mana up-front. In particular, even if it allows you to play a big card before its normal turn is due, you are still wasting a whole earlier turn to do so.
Please, read my OP, and no toxicity. Keep the arguments clean and as objective as possible.
I agree with u, but since the players of hearthstone care more about Standard they don't give a shit about what u said, the only way Blizzard would do something about that is IF that affects Standard.
And since the changes you mention affects a bunch of cards, and that means a lot of Dust, I doubt something will change.
Finally, what you expect writting and essay here? Most of players didn't even read the card.
I accept wild as being the place of broken combos, cards and decks in general. I don't take my play there too seriously, I use it as 'casual mode'...i don't worry about ranking up and play memey and pure tribal decks. But I do care about the overall health of the mode. Sometimes i've climbed by accident and regretted it once I start hitting the big priest wall, usually between rank 10 and 5 in my experience. I imagine it only gets worse the higher you go.
There is something about Big Priest - more than any other deck, it's just rage inducing for me. Sucks the fun right out the game. I don't care if I beat them cause it usually just means they drew poorly and sat there doing relatively little, no satisfaction in that. If they draw even moderately well they just steamroll the game, using what feel like insanely unfair mechanics, even by wild standards.
If i was Blizzard I would just 'nuke from orbit to be sure' and pull the entire archetype from wild.
That's a pretty good analysis.
Devs have made an attempt to make "cheat" effects less easy to pull off. However, old cards that were made before devs realised that are problemtatic. (Bloodbloom makes Darkest Hour problematic in wild).
Btw, there is also another option i didn't mention:
Restricting the highest target of curve-cheating and deck-cheating.
Silver Vanguard is a virtuous example of that.
I can't agree with you more than ever, RavenSun. Anything related to cheating should be 6-mana or above, even 8-mana or above dare I say, and must be on-par with previous cards. Look at N'Zoth, the Corruptor and Darkest Hour as example. You play 10-mana card and gain board control that where answers are endless vs 6-mana board control (cheat) that where answers are limited. That's so absurd. Even so, N'Zoth, the Corruptor and Bloodreaver Gul'dan should have summoned up to 3 minions, similar to Master Oakheart and 10-Mana Kazakus-Summon Potions. Because of these cheats and larger summon shenanigans in Wild, Midrange decks are dead (if you played Midrange decks during GvG/TGT/LOE, you would understand what I mean) and games circle around Aggro/Combo/Control system.
Sorry about my English, since it's not my native language, but this is sadly how Wild works, and I still miss the old-school Midrange decks to this day after the division of formats.
The current expansion outlines how they've at least partially corrected the mana cheating problem, but as you've said that's standard exclusive. I stand by that Barnes is a nerf waiting to happen; there's nothing for me to believe they'll touch ANY of the rez package cards, and let's be honest: most people complaining about Big Priest limit it to Barnes shenanigans. All they have to do is 1 nerf and never listen to any talks of nerfs ever again, which seems far more likely than anything else happening.
If you thought you knew what you think I know, then you'd know I knew you knew I know.
the real solution is just implementing card bans in eternal formats, that way you dont privy standard jhonies from their memes, and keep the eternal formats rather balanced, vintage and modern in mtg have bans for those formats, and even the pokemon tcg who were strictly against bans in eternal formats, had to ban a ton of cards from expanded recently.
I always said Recruit and similar effects were a terrible idea. The mana economy exists for a reason.
"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
Well, I added an edited post on Reddit.
Let's see if the issue gets some attention (hopefully a thoughtful one, not just a 'git gud' approach).
https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/bg344t/we_need_a_new_design_policy_about_summon_mechanic/