If we’re at a point where a card that draws 2 cards for absolutely nothing (no mana, cards, or tempo) isn’t overpowered then I believe something has went tragically wrong.
I think that there should be more taxation effects in Hearthstone. Not like, loads more - but a few more neutral cards to let tax decks develop in classes that can use them. Watch Posts are a really cool addition to the game, and I hope they inspire more similar things from the devs. If we get more taxation cards, in theory that might balance out the insane tempo and freebie stuff that so many decks are capable of. Ultimately it would depend on what new cards are made, and for whom they are made.
Mage is an issue - it's so easy to break it in half with new cards each expansion. It's been a long standing problem, and the devs refusal to do balance changes for Wild exacerbates the issue. It's not like it's impossible to climb or play with other decks in Wild, of course. But if most of the ladder is dominated by Mages, it just isn't fun. And games are supposed to be fun.
for starters you have to actually draw these cards, second.. you still have to have something in your hand to immediately neutralize the flamewaker, else all you did was save the mage 3 mana on their next turn and third... chances are they just play their -2nd- flamewaker and OTK you anyway
a few suggestions would be to have flamewaker not trigger on 0 cost spells
another I've seen would make it so that sorcerer's apprentice can't bring spells below 1
If we’re at a point where a card that draws 2 cards for absolutely nothing (no mana, cards, or tempo) isn’t overpowered then I believe something has went tragically wrong.
Well, first of all it is a card to draw two cards. Not sure why you included that, but you definitely went overboard with that point.
Secondly, there are creatures in the decks we're talking about, so "no mana" is frequently inaccurate.
I'm not missing your point, but it's unnecessary to fill these threads with knowingly inaccurate hyperbole.
@3nnui
I know, you can't manage to read ten lines without getting a headache, so I'll inform you I was talking about neither Blizzard nor mods. Just pointing out idiocy as usual.
At least you didn't try to defend the clearly incorrect original reply again, so kudos there. Real progress.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
Where is the hyperbole? How am I being ‘knowingly inaccurate’? Why are you accusing me of lying?
I’ve stated what the card does IN SPELL MAGE (actually try reading the posts you’re arguing against before throwing fallacies about) and tried to give a layman's explanation or two of why the card is an issue in that archetype. It’s a very powerful card and a really cheap way of boosting the winrate of a deck they want to be meta viable.
This has obviously triggered something off with you, I’m not sure what or why but maybe try taking a few deep breaths.
You can debate the power level of Auctioneer or Apprentice all you like, I’m not arguing whether they are or are not overpowered. They aren’t really relevant to the problems with RSW.
Personally, I feel like Refreshing Spring Water is a dumb and too strong card. You could say that it's only as powerful as it is in Spell Mage, and it's more unreliable in Mage decks that run Minions, but the problem I see here is that Arcane Intellect is a card that exists. So if you want to play a Mage deck with Minions you can just not run Refreshing Spring Water and run Arcane Intellect instead. And if you play a Spell Mage, you get a direct upgrade, and not a small one at that.
But let's be fair, Refreshing Spring Water may be a strong card, but it's not the card that makes or breaks the OTK decks. Sorcerer's Apprentice and Incanter's Flow are the problematic cards and should be nerfed to not be able to make Spells cost less than (1).
Where is the hyperbole? How am I being ‘knowing inaccurate’? Why are you accusing me of lying?
I’ve stated what the card does IN SPELL MAGE (actually try reading the posts you’re arguing against before throwing fallacies about) and tried to give a layman's explanation or two of why the card is an issue in that archetype. It’s a very powerful card and a really cheap way of boosting the winrate of a deck they want to be meta viable.
This has obviously triggered something off with you, I’m not sure what or why but maybe try taking a few deep breaths.
You can debate the power level of Auctioneer or Apprentice all you like, I’m not arguing whether they are or are not overpowered. They aren’t really relevant to the problems with RSW.
To add to this:
It seems clear that you don’t regard any card as OP unless it’s breaking the game in an obvious and obnoxious way. That’s fair enough, but that comes from a different view of card design.
I’m not ‘lying’, I don’t have ulterior motives, I just believe cards should be designed with restraint, and to loosely abide by a set of rules which ‘tries’ to enable card viability across the board. The playerbase is then tasked with trying to break the rules and create powerful decks.
What Blizzard do is they decide X archetype is going to be in the meta, they then give them cheap/free card draw and/or some absurdly overstatted minion/spell that is only viable if the deck it is played in abides by a set of rules. Instead of the effect and stats of the cards themselves being restricted, it’s the deck itself which is restricted, which means the card can be as powerful and broken as necessary. If the archetype doesn’t have a ridiculous winrate then it’s ‘balanced’. Again I just find it a cheap and uninteresting way to balance the game. Nothing is OP if everything is OP and aslong as your opponent has a 50% chance to draw their broken stuff first everything is golden.
Auctioneer is a bad card since years. Way too slow. Spring water is much better, it would even be better if it refreshed no mana. At least in wild, auctioneer is unplayable in everything but meme decks, while spring water broke an already okish deck. you cannot pay 6 mana for a card that has no impact and needs many other cards to work, unless it kills your opponent instantly, which auctioneer doesn’t.
In wild, it’s pretty ambitious to play a 6 mana card in general, unless it is insane tempo / value on turn 6 (auctioneer isn’t)
for the big auctioneer turn, you need enough mana, and Most Games are over by this point.
I cannot recall a single meta deck in wild using auctioneer for years (maybe mexhathun druid, but yeah that’s not a real deck). The card is bad now because the game changed.
After reading more of the post: please tell me what broken auctioneer combos there are in wild? I play nothing but wild and get to legend every month and I haven’t seen a single auctioneer in years outside of roffle streams.
gadgetzan was good years ago. Right now it’s just bad
Guys I play wild and managed to hit legend this month. Like most of you, I hated APM mages as the climb to legend (and legend itself) is infested with them. So, I spent most of my dust on a Odd Warrior deck...been farming mages ever since. Just gain enough armor so they cant kill you.
(There was, however, one game where a Mage managed to hit a perfect draw and burst me down from 60 HP using only 1 flamewaker...so blizzard DO need to fix that deck ASAP)
(There was, however, one game where a Mage managed to hit a perfect draw and burst me down from 60 HP using only 1 flamewaker...so blizzard DO need to fix that deck ASAP)
That's not how it works, a good matchup doesn't mean you should always win. As you said they had perfect draw and you have been farming mages otherwise and managed to get legend with a deck that is usually pretty weak in Wild. You're living proof that APM mage isn't broken, just needs counterplay... like any Wild deck.
Trust me APM mages hated your Odd warrior too. Anything that can build a huge board or gain armor (or both) is a huge pain for APM mage, people just need to pick their counter and deal with it.
In my opinion, APM mage is like Rez priest, a very polarized deck, but overall not that strong and very slow to set up the win condition, do literally nothing in the early game, it preys on meme decks, fatigue decks (Blizzard hates fatigue) and people who are unwilling to counter meta. They are the Wild "borders", decks like these prevent the format from descending into pure greed and chaos.
It doesn't punish greed it punish everything that can't kill it by turn 5. I played the deck, and while it's not that simple to pilot, it's just too strong. Win against aggro, midrange and control, it's breaking the meta. Having tech cards for a specific deck doesn't automatically give a bad matchup, it just gives a chance to decks that otherwise will lose inevitably. Even armor decks like jade/hadronox druids and control warrior can be steamrolled by atm mage. They have a 50/50 not a favorable matchup. A good hand is a instawin and that is not acceptable for a otk deck. Otk decks make a meta healthy by killing things like big priest or other greedy/ i do nothing until turn 5-8 decks, not everything on the ladder unless the draw rocks for five turns in a row
Where is the hyperbole? How am I being ‘knowingly inaccurate’? Why are you accusing me of lying?
I’ve stated what the card does IN SPELL MAGE (actually try reading the posts you’re arguing against before throwing fallacies about) and tried to give a layman's explanation or two of why the card is an issue in that archetype. It’s a very powerful card and a really cheap way of boosting the winrate of a deck they want to be meta viable.
This has obviously triggered something off with you, I’m not sure what or why but maybe try taking a few deep breaths.
You can debate the power level of Auctioneer or Apprentice all you like, I’m not arguing whether they are or are not overpowered. They aren’t really relevant to the problems with RSW.
I stated exactly where you're being knowingly inaccurate, and I did it while breathing just fine.
Your exact quote is "If we’re at a point where a card that draws 2 cards for absolutely nothing (no mana, cards, or tempo) isn’t overpowered then I believe something has went tragically wrong."
You were correct regarding tempo and mana. You were incorrect in including "cards" in that list. It is not a 2 for 0, it is a 2 for 1 card.
Not sure where the miscommunication was, as all of this was my original reply.
Also, in your subsequent comment you put "lying" in quotes as if I used that term. Perhaps you are the one who needs to take a deep breath. I don't know or care about your motives, but you DID make an inaccurate statement, and I assume you're aware of the fact that it's a 2 for 1, not a 2 for none, so I went as far as using the term "knowingly".
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
Auctioneer is a bad card since years. Way too slow. Spring water is much better, it would even be better if it refreshed no mana. At least in wild, auctioneer is unplayable in everything but meme decks, while spring water broke an already okish deck. you cannot pay 6 mana for a card that has no impact and needs many other cards to work, unless it kills your opponent instantly, which auctioneer doesn’t.
In wild, it’s pretty ambitious to play a 6 mana card in general, unless it is insane tempo / value on turn 6 (auctioneer isn’t)
for the big auctioneer turn, you need enough mana, and Most Games are over by this point.
I cannot recall a single meta deck in wild using auctioneer for years (maybe mexhathun druid, but yeah that’s not a real deck). The card is bad now because the game changed.
Not sure if you're replying to me or someone else, but if you are talking to me, I would appreciate not continuing the trend of misquoting me here. I didn't say anything about "broken" combos and I wouldn't use the term "better" to describe one card vs another unless it's a direct 1 to 1 comparison like Silverback Patriarch vs Stonehill Defender.
What I did say and what was correct is that Auctioneer has the potential to be infinitely more impactful than drawing two cards for free, and it can be so for all classes. Under the right circumstances, RSW can be very powerful, but as I've written already, I believe there are better targets for nerf considerations if indeed any nerf is necessary.
To answer the spirit of your question, I hope to finish in top 100 Wild legend this season primarily using a Celestial Alignment Druid that is fueled by Auctioneer. Wouldn't make any claims as to the deck being broken, but it has a commanding record against spell mage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
To answer the spirit of your question, I hope to finish in top 100 Wild legend this season primarily using a Celestial Alignment Druid that is fueled by Auctioneer. Wouldn't make any claims as to the deck being broken, but it has a commanding record against spell mage.
Do you have a list? I've been wanting to have a Celestial Alignment deck on hand since I made Golden ones, and if you're in Legend with it it must be pretty decent.
To answer the spirit of your question, I hope to finish in top 100 Wild legend this season primarily using a Celestial Alignment Druid that is fueled by Auctioneer. Wouldn't make any claims as to the deck being broken, but it has a commanding record against spell mage.
Do you have a list? I've been wanting to have a Celestial Alignment deck on hand since I made Golden ones, and if you're in Legend with it it must be pretty decent.
Two different win conditions, one with tog and one with malygos. Had alot of fun with them and had a good WR within legend as well later in the season.
Where is the hyperbole? How am I being ‘knowingly inaccurate’? Why are you accusing me of lying?
I’ve stated what the card does IN SPELL MAGE (actually try reading the posts you’re arguing against before throwing fallacies about) and tried to give a layman's explanation or two of why the card is an issue in that archetype. It’s a very powerful card and a really cheap way of boosting the winrate of a deck they want to be meta viable.
This has obviously triggered something off with you, I’m not sure what or why but maybe try taking a few deep breaths.
You can debate the power level of Auctioneer or Apprentice all you like, I’m not arguing whether they are or are not overpowered. They aren’t really relevant to the problems with RSW.
I stated exactly where you're being knowingly inaccurate, and I did it while breathing just fine.
Your exact quote is "If we’re at a point where a card that draws 2 cards for absolutely nothing (no mana, cards, or tempo) isn’t overpowered then I believe something has went tragically wrong."
You were correct regarding tempo and mana. You were incorrect in including "cards" in that list. It is not a 2 for 0, it is a 2 for 1 card.
Not sure where the miscommunication was, as all of this was my original reply.
Also, in your subsequent comment you put "lying" in quotes as if I used that term. Perhaps you are the one who needs to take a deep breath. I don't know or care about your motives, but you DID make an inaccurate statement, and I assume you're aware of the fact that it's a 2 for 1, not a 2 for none, so I went as far as using the term "knowingly".
Well no I just made a mistake lol, you could have just said “I believe you mean it draws 1 for free” without the unnecessary accusations. That’s generally how a debate goes, I can then realise the error I have made in my post, I can rectify it and we can move on from there. The card essentially thins your deck by 1 and draws 1 card on top of that, due to it being playable for 0-mana.
And yeah, if I’m knowingly being inaccurate then that would mean I was lying. If someone accused me of lying (sorry, being knowingly inaccurate) and arguing unfaithfully (as you did on the last page, telling me I don’t believe the card is OP, it’s just that I don’t like it) I believe it’s my responsibility to tell them that their accusations are completely incorrect.
I mean if you want to explain to all of us common folk how the card is balanced then you are welcome? Because that’s something you haven’t actually done by the way?
I think that there are two main problems when considering whether RSW is too powerful or not.
The first is that its power level in Wild is always going to be far different to its power level in Standard. With the wealth of cards and poptions available in Wild, it makes sense that this would amplify the power of RSW considerably because you can build around it more easily. However, this does not necessarily translate to Standard so succinctly, and I would imagine (and there is certainly historical precedent set to confirm this) that Blizzard would look to make sure that Standard is given the greater consideration in terms of balance than Wild is. That is not to say that Wild is ignored completely - and there have been plenty of times that Blizzard has addressed cards with Wild effect in mind. But more that in Standard the card certainly does not command the same regard of power level than that of Wild.
The second problem is in the requirements surrounding the card - namely in this case, the fact that a deck really requires at least a heavy amount of spells to minions (if not spells-only). Because without this restriction, the card becomes a lot weaker, and in some cases a worse Arcane Intellect (if the draw is poor). And it is this tempering of the build requirements that brings the power level of the card down into a much more balanced perspective. Again, this is also based heavily on the value of the other cards in the deck, rather than this one in particular.
It is an enabler card, not a power card. Without the means to actually challenge the opponent (essentially the power of the other cards in the deck), it becomes more and more benign.
Ok John, I just assume when people write things, they have a reason for doing so. I'll be happy to back off the "knowingly" part, but not sure why it took stating the same thing twice for you to confront the mistake, especially while you're chastising me to "actually read" posts.
As for explaining why something is balanced, that's like asking me to explain why a client is innocent. It's just not my responsibility to go over why each card is balanced. The burden of proof is on the other side.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If we’re at a point where a card that draws 2 cards for absolutely nothing (no mana, cards, or tempo) isn’t overpowered then I believe something has went tragically wrong.
I think that there should be more taxation effects in Hearthstone. Not like, loads more - but a few more neutral cards to let tax decks develop in classes that can use them. Watch Posts are a really cool addition to the game, and I hope they inspire more similar things from the devs. If we get more taxation cards, in theory that might balance out the insane tempo and freebie stuff that so many decks are capable of. Ultimately it would depend on what new cards are made, and for whom they are made.
Mage is an issue - it's so easy to break it in half with new cards each expansion. It's been a long standing problem, and the devs refusal to do balance changes for Wild exacerbates the issue. It's not like it's impossible to climb or play with other decks in Wild, of course. But if most of the ladder is dominated by Mages, it just isn't fun. And games are supposed to be fun.
please don't bully my son
"jUsT rUn Hecklebot/Dirty Rat..."
so, a few problems with this..
for starters you have to actually draw these cards, second.. you still have to have something in your hand to immediately neutralize the flamewaker, else all you did was save the mage 3 mana on their next turn and third... chances are they just play their -2nd- flamewaker and OTK you anyway
a few suggestions would be to have flamewaker not trigger on 0 cost spells
another I've seen would make it so that sorcerer's apprentice can't bring spells below 1
Well, first of all it is a card to draw two cards. Not sure why you included that, but you definitely went overboard with that point.
Secondly, there are creatures in the decks we're talking about, so "no mana" is frequently inaccurate.
I'm not missing your point, but it's unnecessary to fill these threads with knowingly inaccurate hyperbole.
@3nnui
I know, you can't manage to read ten lines without getting a headache, so I'll inform you I was talking about neither Blizzard nor mods. Just pointing out idiocy as usual.
At least you didn't try to defend the clearly incorrect original reply again, so kudos there. Real progress.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
Where is the hyperbole? How am I being ‘knowingly inaccurate’? Why are you accusing me of lying?
I’ve stated what the card does IN SPELL MAGE (actually try reading the posts you’re arguing against before throwing fallacies about) and tried to give a layman's explanation or two of why the card is an issue in that archetype. It’s a very powerful card and a really cheap way of boosting the winrate of a deck they want to be meta viable.
This has obviously triggered something off with you, I’m not sure what or why but maybe try taking a few deep breaths.
You can debate the power level of Auctioneer or Apprentice all you like, I’m not arguing whether they are or are not overpowered. They aren’t really relevant to the problems with RSW.
Personally, I feel like Refreshing Spring Water is a dumb and too strong card. You could say that it's only as powerful as it is in Spell Mage, and it's more unreliable in Mage decks that run Minions, but the problem I see here is that Arcane Intellect is a card that exists. So if you want to play a Mage deck with Minions you can just not run Refreshing Spring Water and run Arcane Intellect instead. And if you play a Spell Mage, you get a direct upgrade, and not a small one at that.
Also, Mozaki, Master Duelist and Flamewaker OTK Mage run Minions as well as Spells, that's true. But they run so few minions that it almost never happens you draw two Minions from your Refreshing Spring Water, so it's almost always better than Arcane Intellect.
But let's be fair, Refreshing Spring Water may be a strong card, but it's not the card that makes or breaks the OTK decks. Sorcerer's Apprentice and Incanter's Flow are the problematic cards and should be nerfed to not be able to make Spells cost less than (1).
Fuhgeddaboudit
To add to this:
It seems clear that you don’t regard any card as OP unless it’s breaking the game in an obvious and obnoxious way. That’s fair enough, but that comes from a different view of card design.
I’m not ‘lying’, I don’t have ulterior motives, I just believe cards should be designed with restraint, and to loosely abide by a set of rules which ‘tries’ to enable card viability across the board. The playerbase is then tasked with trying to break the rules and create powerful decks.
What Blizzard do is they decide X archetype is going to be in the meta, they then give them cheap/free card draw and/or some absurdly overstatted minion/spell that is only viable if the deck it is played in abides by a set of rules. Instead of the effect and stats of the cards themselves being restricted, it’s the deck itself which is restricted, which means the card can be as powerful and broken as necessary. If the archetype doesn’t have a ridiculous winrate then it’s ‘balanced’. Again I just find it a cheap and uninteresting way to balance the game. Nothing is OP if everything is OP and aslong as your opponent has a 50% chance to draw their broken stuff first everything is golden.
Auctioneer is a bad card since years. Way too slow. Spring water is much better, it would even be better if it refreshed no mana. At least in wild, auctioneer is unplayable in everything but meme decks, while spring water broke an already okish deck.
you cannot pay 6 mana for a card that has no impact and needs many other cards to work, unless it kills your opponent instantly, which auctioneer doesn’t.
In wild, it’s pretty ambitious to play a 6 mana card in general, unless it is insane tempo / value on turn 6 (auctioneer isn’t)
for the big auctioneer turn, you need enough mana, and Most Games are over by this point.
I cannot recall a single meta deck in wild using auctioneer for years (maybe mexhathun druid, but yeah that’s not a real deck). The card is bad now because the game changed.
After reading more of the post: please tell me what broken auctioneer combos there are in wild? I play nothing but wild and get to legend every month and I haven’t seen a single auctioneer in years outside of roffle streams.
gadgetzan was good years ago. Right now it’s just bad
I would play 4 mana draw 2 before playing auctioneer
Guys I play wild and managed to hit legend this month. Like most of you, I hated APM mages as the climb to legend (and legend itself) is infested with them. So, I spent most of my dust on a Odd Warrior deck...been farming mages ever since. Just gain enough armor so they cant kill you.
(There was, however, one game where a Mage managed to hit a perfect draw and burst me down from 60 HP using only 1 flamewaker...so blizzard DO need to fix that deck ASAP)
That's not how it works, a good matchup doesn't mean you should always win. As you said they had perfect draw and you have been farming mages otherwise and managed to get legend with a deck that is usually pretty weak in Wild. You're living proof that APM mage isn't broken, just needs counterplay... like any Wild deck.
Trust me APM mages hated your Odd warrior too. Anything that can build a huge board or gain armor (or both) is a huge pain for APM mage, people just need to pick their counter and deal with it.
In my opinion, APM mage is like Rez priest, a very polarized deck, but overall not that strong and very slow to set up the win condition, do literally nothing in the early game, it preys on meme decks, fatigue decks (Blizzard hates fatigue) and people who are unwilling to counter meta. They are the Wild "borders", decks like these prevent the format from descending into pure greed and chaos.
It doesn't punish greed it punish everything that can't kill it by turn 5. I played the deck, and while it's not that simple to pilot, it's just too strong. Win against aggro, midrange and control, it's breaking the meta. Having tech cards for a specific deck doesn't automatically give a bad matchup, it just gives a chance to decks that otherwise will lose inevitably. Even armor decks like jade/hadronox druids and control warrior can be steamrolled by atm mage. They have a 50/50 not a favorable matchup. A good hand is a instawin and that is not acceptable for a otk deck. Otk decks make a meta healthy by killing things like big priest or other greedy/ i do nothing until turn 5-8 decks, not everything on the ladder unless the draw rocks for five turns in a row
I stated exactly where you're being knowingly inaccurate, and I did it while breathing just fine.
Your exact quote is "If we’re at a point where a card that draws 2 cards for absolutely nothing (no mana, cards, or tempo) isn’t overpowered then I believe something has went tragically wrong."
You were correct regarding tempo and mana. You were incorrect in including "cards" in that list. It is not a 2 for 0, it is a 2 for 1 card.
Not sure where the miscommunication was, as all of this was my original reply.
Also, in your subsequent comment you put "lying" in quotes as if I used that term. Perhaps you are the one who needs to take a deep breath. I don't know or care about your motives, but you DID make an inaccurate statement, and I assume you're aware of the fact that it's a 2 for 1, not a 2 for none, so I went as far as using the term "knowingly".
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
Not sure if you're replying to me or someone else, but if you are talking to me, I would appreciate not continuing the trend of misquoting me here. I didn't say anything about "broken" combos and I wouldn't use the term "better" to describe one card vs another unless it's a direct 1 to 1 comparison like Silverback Patriarch vs Stonehill Defender.
What I did say and what was correct is that Auctioneer has the potential to be infinitely more impactful than drawing two cards for free, and it can be so for all classes. Under the right circumstances, RSW can be very powerful, but as I've written already, I believe there are better targets for nerf considerations if indeed any nerf is necessary.
To answer the spirit of your question, I hope to finish in top 100 Wild legend this season primarily using a Celestial Alignment Druid that is fueled by Auctioneer. Wouldn't make any claims as to the deck being broken, but it has a commanding record against spell mage.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
Do you have a list? I've been wanting to have a Celestial Alignment deck on hand since I made Golden ones, and if you're in Legend with it it must be pretty decent.
please don't bully my son
https://www.hearthpwn.com/decks/1385154-wild-double-malygeese-druid-62-wr
https://www.hearthpwn.com/decks/1384821-wild-togwaggle-druid-65-wr
Two different win conditions, one with tog and one with malygos. Had alot of fun with them and had a good WR within legend as well later in the season.
Well no I just made a mistake lol, you could have just said “I believe you mean it draws 1 for free” without the unnecessary accusations. That’s generally how a debate goes, I can then realise the error I have made in my post, I can rectify it and we can move on from there. The card essentially thins your deck by 1 and draws 1 card on top of that, due to it being playable for 0-mana.
And yeah, if I’m knowingly being inaccurate then that would mean I was lying. If someone accused me of lying (sorry, being knowingly inaccurate) and arguing unfaithfully (as you did on the last page, telling me I don’t believe the card is OP, it’s just that I don’t like it) I believe it’s my responsibility to tell them that their accusations are completely incorrect.
I mean if you want to explain to all of us common folk how the card is balanced then you are welcome? Because that’s something you haven’t actually done by the way?
I think that there are two main problems when considering whether RSW is too powerful or not.
The first is that its power level in Wild is always going to be far different to its power level in Standard. With the wealth of cards and poptions available in Wild, it makes sense that this would amplify the power of RSW considerably because you can build around it more easily. However, this does not necessarily translate to Standard so succinctly, and I would imagine (and there is certainly historical precedent set to confirm this) that Blizzard would look to make sure that Standard is given the greater consideration in terms of balance than Wild is. That is not to say that Wild is ignored completely - and there have been plenty of times that Blizzard has addressed cards with Wild effect in mind. But more that in Standard the card certainly does not command the same regard of power level than that of Wild.
The second problem is in the requirements surrounding the card - namely in this case, the fact that a deck really requires at least a heavy amount of spells to minions (if not spells-only). Because without this restriction, the card becomes a lot weaker, and in some cases a worse Arcane Intellect (if the draw is poor). And it is this tempering of the build requirements that brings the power level of the card down into a much more balanced perspective. Again, this is also based heavily on the value of the other cards in the deck, rather than this one in particular.
It is an enabler card, not a power card. Without the means to actually challenge the opponent (essentially the power of the other cards in the deck), it becomes more and more benign.
Ok John, I just assume when people write things, they have a reason for doing so. I'll be happy to back off the "knowingly" part, but not sure why it took stating the same thing twice for you to confront the mistake, especially while you're chastising me to "actually read" posts.
As for explaining why something is balanced, that's like asking me to explain why a client is innocent. It's just not my responsibility to go over why each card is balanced. The burden of proof is on the other side.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.