I think it's inevitable it will happen: there's a growing audience of players who shun Wild for its notorious op crap BUT whose collections are becoming big enough to even compete... especially with this rotation in April there will be a huge surge to wild, e.g. to play DK's.
If I have any pulse on this community that I belong to, I am going to say over 90% of it would approve of some kind of algorithm that lowers the chance of drawing any certain card that RECENTLY has proven to be above an acceptable win rate. Thus, it would make grinding such a deck and kicking out the vast majority of subscribers' beloved decks out not nearly as viable. As you are aware, losing just isn't fun, especially to a same thing again and again.
Wild would still exist. Fans of the current meta could still play the same way it is, but I am boldly predicting a new game mode will eventually surface that will allow the masses to play in the Wild format with more confidence.
I.E.: Let's say your pre-nerf Naga Sea Witch when drawn wins players 62% of games; It's occurrence to be drawn becomes 38% less. That is probably not the final number, just an example. 19% may be better or even less than that. The point is some kind of regulator to allow cards that $ was spent on not to fade away into the demon pit that is Wild.
What do you think? They can call it Wild Lite for all I care.
*** fun fact: on Hearthstone's own forums I have tried posting this twice and their staff has deleted it both times. Juicy controversy for such a humble discussion topic, I think. ***
I think there will always be people who want the full-bore Wild experience and it should stay just that.
That said, I would LOVE a wild-rotation experience, maybe a sub-mode of Wild, where the applicable decks rotate periodically. I think it would be great to see Classic/Basic + two random sets for a one-month period with a special card back earned for winning 5 games for each permutation. So we might have Classic/Basic + GvG and Boomsday with some over-the-top mech style card back. We'd see plenty of interesting combos that are hyper-focused on the smaller card set. Then the next month it might rotate to Classic/Basic + Naxx and Witchwood. You get the idea.
Anyway, I love the idea of a more limited card-pool Wild with some kind of incentive for players to at least dabble, but that might just be me.
I hate the idea of lowering a chance to draw a card. It doesn’t change the problem of feeling bad to lose to. It complicates the simple mechanic of drawing a card. It can be abused by putting that card into a deck to effectively make a smaller deck, increasing your odds at drawing other cards.
Well, then it sounds like my idea isn't for you, then. That's why I wrote it should be a 3rd game mode that is somewhere between wild and standard. Purist Wild players shouldn't be denied all the cornball antics they are accustomed to.
A lot of this is from crafting a nearly golden Spell Hunter deck (all but Rhok) and am sad if I can only play it against ruthless Wild decks. It does do pretty well at the moment. Might even be biting myself in the ass actually since DK Rexxar would almost certainly fall under the criteria I described >.>
I like JLC776's idea of limiting the Wild card pool. I was actually thinking of something along those lines (but way more punishing) - in Wild, you cannot use cards from Standard-legal expansions. So, right now, Wild would not be able to use Journey through Rumble. Everything else is free to use.
Then, Wild players would only get the new toys after Standard is done playing with them. It'll never happen, but just an idea.
I like JLC776's idea of limiting the Wild card pool. I was actually thinking of something along those lines (but way more punishing) - in Wild, you cannot use cards from Standard-legal expansions. So, right now, Wild would not be able to use Journey through Rumble. Everything else is free to use.
Then, Wild players would only get the new toys after Standard is done playing with them. It'll never happen, but just an idea.
Oh wow, yeah let’s totally kill the free expansive mode of wild
oh well once standard blesses us with a rotation then we can be allowed to play the game
You're suggesting making the game micro manage players' play experience by intentionally manipulating draw rng... ? And you're suggesting this to make players draw even worse... ?
Have you seen the tinfoil hats everywhere complaining about how the game must assuredly be rigged and how they hate it based on their unproven theories, and you want to implement a mode that actually does force such an algorithm on the players, something that social media has shown time and again that many players dislike (again basing it on their theories that the current game is in fact rigged against them)?
If you rig card draw, it isn't a card game anymore.
If you introduce a 3rd mode, you make Wild population even lower, which is not good.
I am pretty sure the only problem of Wild comes from the design policy for which it is ok to release some Standard powerhouses to spice things up, and then let them slip into Wild, untouched. Standard clean once more, Wild who cares.
Imo, Rotations should include a set of nerfs applied to some of the rotating problematic cards. These nerfs could actually be prepared together with the design of the card.
That way, Wild will be powerful, but not stupid broken like a Big Priest can be. And cards that turned fully Wild become virtually eternal, as they should be.
You're suggesting making the game micro manage players' play experience by intentionally manipulating draw rng... ? And you're suggesting this to make players draw even worse... ?
Have you seen the tinfoil hats everywhere complaining about how the game must assuredly be rigged and how they hate it based on their unproven theories, and you want to implement a mode that actually does force such an algorithm on the players, something that social media has shown time and again that many players dislike (again basing it on their theories that the current game is in fact rigged against them)?
Um, no. Opening up a THIRD game mode would not be forcing people to play it (repeating for the THIRD time. Hearthpwn people seriously need to work on their reading. wow.)
The reason it's a good idea is because there is noooo way to keep out oppressive combos and so forth that arise with the 100's upon 100's of cards that exist in Wild. It's just not enjoyable to have a "join or die" format when there's a few overpowered cards running around.
It's a good idea and you know it. Typical disagree with anything attitude this website is famous for...
This is an awful idea. As a matter of fact, it is the worst card game idea ever concived besides maybe, maybe Purge: Sins of Science (I pitty those who know about this abomination). Let's rigg the game because l2p is too hard. Let's make sure that cards that win games, cards that are actually good, are nearly impossible to draw because our malygos 0tk 8 card setup warrior can only work that way.
Would rather they introduce a rotating monthly (or whatever period you want) constructed format, where only Basic/Classic cards plus three randomly selected sets are legal. That would eliminate the Wild problem of oppressive decks never dying, without requiring a major overhaul of the game’s mechanics. I’m not even sure Blizzard tracks that data (which is why HSReplay exists), but I’m certain they wouldn’t want to introduce a concept where the better (and generally more expensive) cards have a lower chance of being drawn.
I'd rather have a rotating system in wild, where each one-month season featured a mix of sets in never-to-be-repeated combinations. The month of new set releases could remain the fully unlimited wild, but the other nine months would be something like BASIC + GvG + Kara + Un'goro + Witchwood, or something similarly random, or possibly things like "Only cards that start with A-J", or whatever. The point being is that those nine months of the year would have unique metas that last just long enough for them to settle, and then disappear with the next month's reset. Deck-building would become a stronger element of the game, and that's a good thing.
Ok...While OP's suggestion sucks and is essentially trying to add a ban list to Wild (which defeats the whole point of Wild), the concept shown in the title is actually a possibility in the future, when we have more sets. Look, it's hard to do because there's so little in Hearthstone's card pool(I know we have 11 full sets (including Classic/Basic) and 4 adventure sets, but that's still not a lot in comparison to the card games (MTG, Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh) many people would have pseudo-immigrated from), but down the line, when we have 20+ full sets of this game, we could get something like a literal middle-ground. The idea would be akin to MTG's Modern, where the legal sets would start at a certain point (the hard choice would be having the starting point be Journey to Un'Goro or Witchwood, as these two would be the 'most likely' options for a somewhat balanced starting point for this new set) and then having all sets after that point be legal for play in that format. It would be still unbalanced as hell (1+1+1=7, Tron math) in the end (especially if we started with Journey as the 'first' set), but it wouldn't be like Wild, where the top tier decks abuse the older sets, like LoE, Whispers, and the Hall of Fame to make their decks powerful. Also, if it wasn't obvious, the Hall of Fame would not be legal in this middle-ground format, I consider the HoF to be like the reserve list in MTG, it's basically a bunch of cards that will never see printing again for reasons (With the HoF having much better reasoning than MTG's reserve list...seriously, fuck TCG collectors).
Look, the idea of a banlist for Wild needs to stop being considered, it defeats the whole purpose of Wild and is just a mess to attempt to figure out regardless. A new mode with sets between Standard and Wild, now that's the kind of stuff that really butters my croissant.
For me, I feel there should be a Legacy Mode, where players can play the cards in their unnerf state. I came into Hearthstone when Un'goro was just announced, upon studying the game history, I didn't have the opportunity to play Patron Warrior or Sunshine Hunter. Even during the KOFT period, I only had the chance to play APM Anduin for week before it was nerfed and I haven't even learned how to play the deck properly. Since Blizzard often nerf or famed Classic and Basic cards, the changes sometimes destroy the combos and rendered them forever lost.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
JagBone's Wild Adventures! 3 Videos Per Week. Fun, wacky Wild decks and plays!
I think it's important to consider the fact that wild exists as a game mode so blizzard can toss cards into a dumpster. This dumpster exists because Blizzard most likely doesn't want to get lost in a rabbit hole of balance concerns. Wild exists so you can keep the cards you bought, and Blizzard can develop the game without giving a shit about every single one of them.
Wild is fun. So is standard. Everything sucks when you spend too much time with it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think it's inevitable it will happen: there's a growing audience of players who shun Wild for its notorious op crap BUT whose collections are becoming big enough to even compete... especially with this rotation in April there will be a huge surge to wild, e.g. to play DK's.
If I have any pulse on this community that I belong to, I am going to say over 90% of it would approve of some kind of algorithm that lowers the chance of drawing any certain card that RECENTLY has proven to be above an acceptable win rate. Thus, it would make grinding such a deck and kicking out the vast majority of subscribers' beloved decks out not nearly as viable. As you are aware, losing just isn't fun, especially to a same thing again and again.
Wild would still exist. Fans of the current meta could still play the same way it is, but I am boldly predicting a new game mode will eventually surface that will allow the masses to play in the Wild format with more confidence.
I.E.: Let's say your pre-nerf Naga Sea Witch when drawn wins players 62% of games; It's occurrence to be drawn becomes 38% less. That is probably not the final number, just an example. 19% may be better or even less than that. The point is some kind of regulator to allow cards that $ was spent on not to fade away into the demon pit that is Wild.
What do you think? They can call it Wild Lite for all I care.
*** fun fact: on Hearthstone's own forums I have tried posting this twice and their staff has deleted it both times. Juicy controversy for such a humble discussion topic, I think. ***
I think there will always be people who want the full-bore Wild experience and it should stay just that.
That said, I would LOVE a wild-rotation experience, maybe a sub-mode of Wild, where the applicable decks rotate periodically. I think it would be great to see Classic/Basic + two random sets for a one-month period with a special card back earned for winning 5 games for each permutation. So we might have Classic/Basic + GvG and Boomsday with some over-the-top mech style card back. We'd see plenty of interesting combos that are hyper-focused on the smaller card set. Then the next month it might rotate to Classic/Basic + Naxx and Witchwood. You get the idea.
Anyway, I love the idea of a more limited card-pool Wild with some kind of incentive for players to at least dabble, but that might just be me.
I hate the idea of lowering a chance to draw a card. It doesn’t change the problem of feeling bad to lose to. It complicates the simple mechanic of drawing a card. It can be abused by putting that card into a deck to effectively make a smaller deck, increasing your odds at drawing other cards.
Well, then it sounds like my idea isn't for you, then. That's why I wrote it should be a 3rd game mode that is somewhere between wild and standard. Purist Wild players shouldn't be denied all the cornball antics they are accustomed to.
A lot of this is from crafting a nearly golden Spell Hunter deck (all but Rhok) and am sad if I can only play it against ruthless Wild decks. It does do pretty well at the moment. Might even be biting myself in the ass actually since DK Rexxar would almost certainly fall under the criteria I described >.>
I like JLC776's idea of limiting the Wild card pool. I was actually thinking of something along those lines (but way more punishing) - in Wild, you cannot use cards from Standard-legal expansions. So, right now, Wild would not be able to use Journey through Rumble. Everything else is free to use.
Then, Wild players would only get the new toys after Standard is done playing with them. It'll never happen, but just an idea.
Oh wow, yeah let’s totally kill the free expansive mode of wild
oh well once standard blesses us with a rotation then we can be allowed to play the game
a terrible idea, but an idea none the less
You're suggesting making the game micro manage players' play experience by intentionally manipulating draw rng... ? And you're suggesting this to make players draw even worse... ?
Have you seen the tinfoil hats everywhere complaining about how the game must assuredly be rigged and how they hate it based on their unproven theories, and you want to implement a mode that actually does force such an algorithm on the players, something that social media has shown time and again that many players dislike (again basing it on their theories that the current game is in fact rigged against them)?
or maybe introduce more formats hmmm?
if your post got deleted twice, maybe there is something in the works
If you rig card draw, it isn't a card game anymore.
If you introduce a 3rd mode, you make Wild population even lower, which is not good.
I am pretty sure the only problem of Wild comes from the design policy for which it is ok to release some Standard powerhouses to spice things up, and then let them slip into Wild, untouched. Standard clean once more, Wild who cares.
Imo, Rotations should include a set of nerfs applied to some of the rotating problematic cards. These nerfs could actually be prepared together with the design of the card.
That way, Wild will be powerful, but not stupid broken like a Big Priest can be. And cards that turned fully Wild become virtually eternal, as they should be.
I'd agree with not allowing Wild to use the current Standard sets.
Um, no. Opening up a THIRD game mode would not be forcing people to play it (repeating for the THIRD time. Hearthpwn people seriously need to work on their reading. wow.)
The reason it's a good idea is because there is noooo way to keep out oppressive combos and so forth that arise with the 100's upon 100's of cards that exist in Wild. It's just not enjoyable to have a "join or die" format when there's a few overpowered cards running around.
It's a good idea and you know it. Typical disagree with anything attitude this website is famous for...
This is an awful idea. As a matter of fact, it is the worst card game idea ever concived besides maybe, maybe Purge: Sins of Science (I pitty those who know about this abomination). Let's rigg the game because l2p is too hard. Let's make sure that cards that win games, cards that are actually good, are nearly impossible to draw because our malygos 0tk 8 card setup warrior can only work that way.
i can think of hundreds of other game modes id love to see implemented into the game rather than this weird unplayable thing
Would rather they introduce a rotating monthly (or whatever period you want) constructed format, where only Basic/Classic cards plus three randomly selected sets are legal. That would eliminate the Wild problem of oppressive decks never dying, without requiring a major overhaul of the game’s mechanics. I’m not even sure Blizzard tracks that data (which is why HSReplay exists), but I’m certain they wouldn’t want to introduce a concept where the better (and generally more expensive) cards have a lower chance of being drawn.
horrible idea, less people in wild is bad
Lol you seem to be the one with the attitude. Take some criticism; if you only want people to agree with you, then talk to a mirror.
I'd rather have a rotating system in wild, where each one-month season featured a mix of sets in never-to-be-repeated combinations. The month of new set releases could remain the fully unlimited wild, but the other nine months would be something like BASIC + GvG + Kara + Un'goro + Witchwood, or something similarly random, or possibly things like "Only cards that start with A-J", or whatever. The point being is that those nine months of the year would have unique metas that last just long enough for them to settle, and then disappear with the next month's reset. Deck-building would become a stronger element of the game, and that's a good thing.
Ok...While OP's suggestion sucks and is essentially trying to add a ban list to Wild (which defeats the whole point of Wild), the concept shown in the title is actually a possibility in the future, when we have more sets. Look, it's hard to do because there's so little in Hearthstone's card pool(I know we have 11 full sets (including Classic/Basic) and 4 adventure sets, but that's still not a lot in comparison to the card games (MTG, Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh) many people would have pseudo-immigrated from), but down the line, when we have 20+ full sets of this game, we could get something like a literal middle-ground.
The idea would be akin to MTG's Modern, where the legal sets would start at a certain point (the hard choice would be having the starting point be Journey to Un'Goro or Witchwood, as these two would be the 'most likely' options for a somewhat balanced starting point for this new set) and then having all sets after that point be legal for play in that format. It would be still unbalanced as hell (1+1+1=7, Tron math) in the end (especially if we started with Journey as the 'first' set), but it wouldn't be like Wild, where the top tier decks abuse the older sets, like LoE, Whispers, and the Hall of Fame to make their decks powerful.
Also, if it wasn't obvious, the Hall of Fame would not be legal in this middle-ground format, I consider the HoF to be like the reserve list in MTG, it's basically a bunch of cards that will never see printing again for reasons (With the HoF having much better reasoning than MTG's reserve list...seriously, fuck TCG collectors).
Look, the idea of a banlist for Wild needs to stop being considered, it defeats the whole purpose of Wild and is just a mess to attempt to figure out regardless.
A new mode with sets between Standard and Wild, now that's the kind of stuff that really butters my croissant.
For me, I feel there should be a Legacy Mode, where players can play the cards in their unnerf state. I came into Hearthstone when Un'goro was just announced, upon studying the game history, I didn't have the opportunity to play Patron Warrior or Sunshine Hunter. Even during the KOFT period, I only had the chance to play APM Anduin for week before it was nerfed and I haven't even learned how to play the deck properly. Since Blizzard often nerf or famed Classic and Basic cards, the changes sometimes destroy the combos and rendered them forever lost.
JagBone's Wild Adventures! 3 Videos Per Week. Fun, wacky Wild decks and plays!
Follow me on Social Media:
YouTube: JagBone| Twitter: JagBone | Instagram: JagBone | Video Thread: JagBone
I think it's important to consider the fact that wild exists as a game mode so blizzard can toss cards into a dumpster. This dumpster exists because Blizzard most likely doesn't want to get lost in a rabbit hole of balance concerns. Wild exists so you can keep the cards you bought, and Blizzard can develop the game without giving a shit about every single one of them.
Wild is fun. So is standard. Everything sucks when you spend too much time with it.