I would like to preframe this commentary by saying, this is purely opinion based, I am not an expert by any means.
No one likes nerfs to their favorite or go to cards, that is obvious. But over time there are enough valid complaints, evidence, and data that supports a card or combination of cards that need to be addressed. A nerf is required and put into effect.
How cards are nerfed is the issue when the news is released, some say it's too harsh the card has no value anymore. Others say it won't change a thing. Others yet call for the end of days for the game as a whole.
My opinion comes from a different view currently after a couple comments I saw from blizzard with the most recent nerfs.
First- 'When Basic and Classic cards become so broadly effective—no matter what you’re facing—that they drive what deck styles are considered viable every expansion, then it makes that goal difficult to achieve.'
Second- 'Basic and Classic are sets that, ideally, should embody the flavor and mechanics of each Class. As we’ve mentioned before, cards in these sets can become an issue when they make all other strategies look less interesting.'
If you read these 2 comments separately they make sense and sounds solid. If you read them together a subtle problem appears.
If basic cards 'ideally' embody the flavor and mechanics of a class then that in itself will drive what decks and styles are viable in every expansion. Basic cards are in every expansion.
If a variety is needed then that is the purpose of expansions, the expansions should co-exist with basic cards and alter or evolve the ideals of each classes style.
If that is not possible (which seems to be the current situation) then the cycling of the Basic cards (some or all) would solve the issue of creating variety. Nerfing cards is a bandaid solution to the issue of variety and generally leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the community.
What I have covered has more impact on standard, in wild, it is a whole different story.
Wild, a place where every overpowered deck in the game can call home. Nerfs to the game create huge ripples in this area since it doesn't affect a small pool of cards but instead the entirety of the game.
How do you address power creep or unbalanced card interactions for wild without hindering standard?
The idea that I see here is that wild is a nuclear testing grounds for the game. This is where the developers or R&D can really see what cards are being used as staples driving the communities choices for style and viability.
What cards are used in the top decks consistently, what combination of cards create a balance issue?
These cards can then be handled, as well the interactions and outcome of those cards can be addressed so that future expansions are protected from repeating the same mistakes.
If variety is an issue in wild then those cards can be handled in wild specifically just as HoF was initiated for standard.
To wrap this up for the TL;DR people: (this is my opinion not facts) Standard and Wild are completely different animals treat them as such. If Basic cards are meant to be the identity of a class and its mechanics then either work with/around them or cycle them out just like other sets. Nerfs which create the 'need' for creativity rather than rewarding it generally leaves a bad taste in the communities mouth. Nerfs that fix broken gameplay are good.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cute, ineffective, but cute.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Nerfs as a whole in Hearthstone.
I would like to preframe this commentary by saying, this is purely opinion based, I am not an expert by any means.
No one likes nerfs to their favorite or go to cards, that is obvious. But over time there are enough valid complaints, evidence, and data that supports a card or combination of cards that need to be addressed. A nerf is required and put into effect.
How cards are nerfed is the issue when the news is released, some say it's too harsh the card has no value anymore. Others say it won't change a thing. Others yet call for the end of days for the game as a whole.
My opinion comes from a different view currently after a couple comments I saw from blizzard with the most recent nerfs.
First- 'When Basic and Classic cards become so broadly effective—no matter what you’re facing—that they drive what deck styles are considered viable every expansion, then it makes that goal difficult to achieve.'
Second- 'Basic and Classic are sets that, ideally, should embody the flavor and mechanics of each Class. As we’ve mentioned before, cards in these sets can become an issue when they make all other strategies look less interesting.'
If you read these 2 comments separately they make sense and sounds solid. If you read them together a subtle problem appears.
If basic cards 'ideally' embody the flavor and mechanics of a class then that in itself will drive what decks and styles are viable in every expansion. Basic cards are in every expansion.
If a variety is needed then that is the purpose of expansions, the expansions should co-exist with basic cards and alter or evolve the ideals of each classes style.
If that is not possible (which seems to be the current situation) then the cycling of the Basic cards (some or all) would solve the issue of creating variety. Nerfing cards is a bandaid solution to the issue of variety and generally leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the community.
What I have covered has more impact on standard, in wild, it is a whole different story.
Wild, a place where every overpowered deck in the game can call home. Nerfs to the game create huge ripples in this area since it doesn't affect a small pool of cards but instead the entirety of the game.
How do you address power creep or unbalanced card interactions for wild without hindering standard?
The idea that I see here is that wild is a nuclear testing grounds for the game. This is where the developers or R&D can really see what cards are being used as staples driving the communities choices for style and viability.
What cards are used in the top decks consistently, what combination of cards create a balance issue?
These cards can then be handled, as well the interactions and outcome of those cards can be addressed so that future expansions are protected from repeating the same mistakes.
If variety is an issue in wild then those cards can be handled in wild specifically just as HoF was initiated for standard.
To wrap this up for the TL;DR people:
(this is my opinion not facts) Standard and Wild are completely different animals treat them as such. If Basic cards are meant to be the identity of a class and its mechanics then either work with/around them or cycle them out just like other sets. Nerfs which create the 'need' for creativity rather than rewarding it generally leaves a bad taste in the communities mouth. Nerfs that fix broken gameplay are good.
Cute, ineffective, but cute.