I primarily play Wild so this might not be the case for Standard. But honestly, facing Priests or Rogues is about the most tedious and frustrating experience you can have in this game.
It's not even a balancing issue, but rather the fact that these two classes simply aren't fun to play against most of the time. Many Rogues are infamous for roping every single turn, wasting both players time by infinite bouncing and making plays that most other classes could've done in half that time.
Meanwhile, almost every single Priest you face base their strategy on fatigue, usually by an endless spam of Convincing Infiltrators to clear the board while making very few offensive plays themselves in order to lengthen the game for as long as possible. Add to that the incredibly creativePurified Shard that's essentially an I.W.I.N-button, no matter how much health or armor their opponent has.
In both cases you probably could've finished 2 games by the time you're done with one of these two classes. Oftentimes it's almost best to just concede at the start of the game in order to not waste your time, even if you'd end up winning the match-up.
Implementing a feature where you could ban at least 1 class when queueing would alleviate a big part of this issue, I think. This would be similar to the Battleground-bans that WoW had up until relatively recently.
I have a feeling some people are going to say "oh, but that just means that everyone would ban this particular class and lengthen their queue times", and that is quite possible. However, that in itself should be a pretty clear sign that something needs to be done to make these classes less tedious to face.
Again, this might not be the case in Standard and I understand that Wild is supposed to allow for some crazy decks. But like I said, this isn't a balancing issue but rather that it's simply not fun for a lot of people.
My English isn't the best but I hope it's somewhat clear what I mean.
This is not going to work. There are a lot of decks that are very strong but have one weakness. If you can eliminate that weakness you have decks with winrates up to 70%
let's just have a turn limit of 10 turns. Personally i like long games, actually using the resources in my deck and stabalzing at 5 or less and making a come back rather than just depending on mulligans and the top 3rd of my deck. I also don't like the idea of 5 minute cues because my play preference isn't smorc.
Edit: with some ropers if you rope them back they'll stop but I'm more than willing to waste over an hour with both players roping each turn (2.5 minutes per 1 turn cycle, 24 turns for an hour match)
Ban system is good in a format like a tournament of best of 3 or 5
We just have to face it that sometimes you'd get a bad matchup. Every deck is beatable to some extent, even though your chances are slim in some cases. The only solution I see in Wild is to ban certain cards that are just too powerful and are not suitable in this format.
They already did that with warlocks; they can with other classes too. Aggro is beatable, so is combo and control but decks like big priests that cheat out big minions way too early, or mages that you don't interact at all with since they don't give you a turn are the problematic ones. And I think those are easy to fix. You just need to do give them the same treatment as you did the warlock. Illuminate and Gray Sage Parrot are the problematic ones
Quest Priest is actually one of the worst decks I've seen in my life. Big Priest on the other hand can high roll a Neptulon (or Blood of G'huun + Neptulon) on turns 2-3, which is an actual problem they need to fix. Seek Guidance is so uncommon in Wild and I'm sort of baffled that your deck has no way to disrupt it.
This is not going to work. There are a lot of decks that are very strong but have one weakness. If you can eliminate that weakness you have decks with winrates up to 70%
I primarily play Wild so this might not be the case for Standard. But honestly, facing Priests or Rogues is about the most tedious and frustrating experience you can have in this game.
It's not even a balancing issue, but rather the fact that these two classes simply aren't fun to play against most of the time. Many Rogues are infamous for roping every single turn, wasting both players time by infinite bouncing and making plays that most other classes could've done in half that time.
Meanwhile, almost every single Priest you face base their strategy on fatigue, usually by an endless spam of Convincing Infiltrators to clear the board while making very few offensive plays themselves in order to lengthen the game for as long as possible. Add to that the incredibly creativePurified Shard that's essentially an I.W.I.N-button, no matter how much health or armor their opponent has.
In both cases you probably could've finished 2 games by the time you're done with one of these two classes. Oftentimes it's almost best to just concede at the start of the game in order to not waste your time, even if you'd end up winning the match-up.
Implementing a feature where you could ban at least 1 class when queueing would alleviate a big part of this issue, I think. This would be similar to the Battleground-bans that WoW had up until relatively recently.
I have a feeling some people are going to say "oh, but that just means that everyone would ban this particular class and lengthen their queue times", and that is quite possible. However, that in itself should be a pretty clear sign that something needs to be done to make these classes less tedious to face.
Again, this might not be the case in Standard and I understand that Wild is supposed to allow for some crazy decks. But like I said, this isn't a balancing issue but rather that it's simply not fun for a lot of people.
My English isn't the best but I hope it's somewhat clear what I mean.
Actually people with your thinking should be banned from talking
You allready posted a more suitable solution for you "Problem" which is just bottom-righting angainst any Class or Deck you have no fun playing angainst. This way you can even "Ban" multiple classes or Decks. You dont really waste that much time either, ist Just one cue time plus Mulligan. You even get the adventage of beeing able to Tech your Deck differntly,knowing you wont play a specific Class. Now of cource that luxury Domes with a price, and that ist, your Overall winrate or abbilty to climb goes down a bit, but IMO its a fair price to pay, nothing comes for free, you have to make a call If this ist worth for you personally. Actually hard-banning a Class will Not fix your Problem either by the way. The Meta will adjust quickly and before you know it there ist a new Deck/Class that you find tidious to Play against, and dont worry, If you Ban that Class next Game, you will surly face the First one exactly next Game, the world ist unfair :D
I primarily play Wild so this might not be the case for Standard. But honestly, facing Priests or Rogues is about the most tedious and frustrating experience you can have in this game.
It's not even a balancing issue, but rather the fact that these two classes simply aren't fun to play against most of the time. Many Rogues are infamous for roping every single turn, wasting both players time by infinite bouncing and making plays that most other classes could've done in half that time.
Meanwhile, almost every single Priest you face base their strategy on fatigue, usually by an endless spam of Convincing Infiltrators to clear the board while making very few offensive plays themselves in order to lengthen the game for as long as possible. Add to that the incredibly creativePurified Shard that's essentially an I.W.I.N-button, no matter how much health or armor their opponent has.
In both cases you probably could've finished 2 games by the time you're done with one of these two classes. Oftentimes it's almost best to just concede at the start of the game in order to not waste your time, even if you'd end up winning the match-up.
Implementing a feature where you could ban at least 1 class when queueing would alleviate a big part of this issue, I think. This would be similar to the Battleground-bans that WoW had up until relatively recently.
I have a feeling some people are going to say "oh, but that just means that everyone would ban this particular class and lengthen their queue times", and that is quite possible. However, that in itself should be a pretty clear sign that something needs to be done to make these classes less tedious to face.
Again, this might not be the case in Standard and I understand that Wild is supposed to allow for some crazy decks. But like I said, this isn't a balancing issue but rather that it's simply not fun for a lot of people.
My English isn't the best but I hope it's somewhat clear what I mean.
May i ask what kind of class you're planning in Wild?
Coronius, as a lifelong (essentially) English speaker I would say that your English is fine. I was intrigued by your suggestion and think that it might have merit in any form of the game.
Imagine that a given deck begins to become oppressive. Those wishing to use it may continue to do so, but will have to face dealing with more than the expected share of mirror matches or contests against hard counters, as the oppressive class becomes banned by an ever larger fraction of the player base.
I could see this as a relatively simple alternative to nerfing. The question of "How hard to nerf and what are the unintended consequences?" is sidestepped. At the very least it would be an interesting experiment.
Now people ask for one ban, next they'll ask for two, then three. It's not a solution, you can't just choose to not play against everything you dislike for whatever reason. If a deck is universally frustrating then that's something that should be solved by the rebalancing or redesigning the deck.
Consider taking a break from the game and come back for the next expansion when the meta shifts.
It would actually be interesting and could somewhat cater to the Players asking for class Ban, If Blizzard implemented some kind of in Game Tournament Option. E.g. you have to pre select 4 classes and the cue into one opponent. You both get to ban one Class and the First who wins with all 3 remaining Decks wins the whole Match. (Like it is often the Format in Tournaments, but Others Formats could Work aswell or Change every new season.) They could even make it cost a small amount of gold/Money (Not as much as Arena, Just Like 50 gold at Most,to make it more interesting. you get something back at the end, a bit of dust, golden Card, and/or gold refund, depending in how many games between 0 and 3 you had won with.)
Now of course If they did that for all 3 modes,that would be 3 more sub-modes, possibly further Splitting the Playerbase, but I have no Idea about any intern Numbers so i dont know If it would be a Problem...
Many people have asked for the Option to create Tournament settings ingame, this would be a First step in that direction and and could be fun for people Like OP, who want to ban classes as well as many Others who would Like to Part Take in Kind of Tournament settings, but dont want the hassle of playing a whole Open Cup where you have to sign in on some Website and be ready at the right time etc.
I agree about the ban system, and I am talking about standard. Even if it is not a tournament on tournaments there are ban system so on ranked there should be too. It is annoying to play the same matchup over and over again, or to ban the weak point, in pro matches they can ban their weak point class.
They have BO5 system? Ok then why can not be on ranked like this? Instead of playing constantly BO1 to climb the ladder there should be a BO5 type of match, picking 4-4 decks with different classes and each player can ban from the opposite side, and the elo calculations can be about the match score.
I primarily play Wild so this might not be the case for Standard. But honestly, facing Priests or Rogues is about the most tedious and frustrating experience you can have in this game.
It's not even a balancing issue, but rather the fact that these two classes simply aren't fun to play against most of the time. Many Rogues are infamous for roping every single turn, wasting both players time by infinite bouncing and making plays that most other classes could've done in half that time.
Meanwhile, almost every single Priest you face base their strategy on fatigue, usually by an endless spam of Convincing Infiltrators to clear the board while making very few offensive plays themselves in order to lengthen the game for as long as possible. Add to that the incredibly creative Purified Shard that's essentially an I.W.I.N-button, no matter how much health or armor their opponent has.
In both cases you probably could've finished 2 games by the time you're done with one of these two classes. Oftentimes it's almost best to just concede at the start of the game in order to not waste your time, even if you'd end up winning the match-up.
Implementing a feature where you could ban at least 1 class when queueing would alleviate a big part of this issue, I think. This would be similar to the Battleground-bans that WoW had up until relatively recently.
I have a feeling some people are going to say "oh, but that just means that everyone would ban this particular class and lengthen their queue times", and that is quite possible. However, that in itself should be a pretty clear sign that something needs to be done to make these classes less tedious to face.
Again, this might not be the case in Standard and I understand that Wild is supposed to allow for some crazy decks. But like I said, this isn't a balancing issue but rather that it's simply not fun for a lot of people.
My English isn't the best but I hope it's somewhat clear what I mean.
Wild player doing broken stuff complaing about other classes broken stuff. Hilarious!
Please read the original post before responding.
This is not going to work. There are a lot of decks that are very strong but have one weakness. If you can eliminate that weakness you have decks with winrates up to 70%
let's just have a turn limit of 10 turns. Personally i like long games, actually using the resources in my deck and stabalzing at 5 or less and making a come back rather than just depending on mulligans and the top 3rd of my deck. I also don't like the idea of 5 minute cues because my play preference isn't smorc.
Edit: with some ropers if you rope them back they'll stop but I'm more than willing to waste over an hour with both players roping each turn (2.5 minutes per 1 turn cycle, 24 turns for an hour match)
Yeah, this is not a good idea in my opinion.
Ban system is good in a format like a tournament of best of 3 or 5
We just have to face it that sometimes you'd get a bad matchup. Every deck is beatable to some extent, even though your chances are slim in some cases. The only solution I see in Wild is to ban certain cards that are just too powerful and are not suitable in this format.
They already did that with warlocks; they can with other classes too. Aggro is beatable, so is combo and control but decks like big priests that cheat out big minions way too early, or mages that you don't interact at all with since they don't give you a turn are the problematic ones. And I think those are easy to fix. You just need to do give them the same treatment as you did the warlock. Illuminate and Gray Sage Parrot are the problematic ones
Quest Priest is actually one of the worst decks I've seen in my life. Big Priest on the other hand can high roll a Neptulon (or Blood of G'huun + Neptulon) on turns 2-3, which is an actual problem they need to fix. Seek Guidance is so uncommon in Wild and I'm sort of baffled that your deck has no way to disrupt it.
Ranked isn't a Best of 3 / Best of 5 Format, this only makes sense in Tournament format.
^ This.
Hearthstone is for different players and different styles, adapt or quit.
Actually people with your thinking should be banned from talking
You allready posted a more suitable solution for you "Problem" which is just bottom-righting angainst any Class or Deck you have no fun playing angainst. This way you can even "Ban" multiple classes or Decks. You dont really waste that much time either, ist Just one cue time plus Mulligan. You even get the adventage of beeing able to Tech your Deck differntly,knowing you wont play a specific Class. Now of cource that luxury Domes with a price, and that ist, your Overall winrate or abbilty to climb goes down a bit, but IMO its a fair price to pay, nothing comes for free, you have to make a call If this ist worth for you personally. Actually hard-banning a Class will Not fix your Problem either by the way. The Meta will adjust quickly and before you know it there ist a new Deck/Class that you find tidious to Play against, and dont worry, If you Ban that Class next Game, you will surly face the First one exactly next Game, the world ist unfair :D
May i ask what kind of class you're planning in Wild?
Coronius, as a lifelong (essentially) English speaker I would say that your English is fine. I was intrigued by your suggestion and think that it might have merit in any form of the game.
Imagine that a given deck begins to become oppressive. Those wishing to use it may continue to do so, but will have to face dealing with more than the expected share of mirror matches or contests against hard counters, as the oppressive class becomes banned by an ever larger fraction of the player base.
I could see this as a relatively simple alternative to nerfing. The question of "How hard to nerf and what are the unintended consequences?" is sidestepped. At the very least it would be an interesting experiment.
Now people ask for one ban, next they'll ask for two, then three. It's not a solution, you can't just choose to not play against everything you dislike for whatever reason. If a deck is universally frustrating then that's something that should be solved by the rebalancing or redesigning the deck.
Consider taking a break from the game and come back for the next expansion when the meta shifts.
Prestor Druid says hi. Most busted deck of this season
It would actually be interesting and could somewhat cater to the Players asking for class Ban, If Blizzard implemented some kind of in Game Tournament Option. E.g. you have to pre select 4 classes and the cue into one opponent. You both get to ban one Class and the First who wins with all 3 remaining Decks wins the whole Match. (Like it is often the Format in Tournaments, but Others Formats could Work aswell or Change every new season.) They could even make it cost a small amount of gold/Money (Not as much as Arena, Just Like 50 gold at Most,to make it more interesting. you get something back at the end, a bit of dust, golden Card, and/or gold refund, depending in how many games between 0 and 3 you had won with.)
Now of course If they did that for all 3 modes,that would be 3 more sub-modes, possibly further Splitting the Playerbase, but I have no Idea about any intern Numbers so i dont know If it would be a Problem...
Many people have asked for the Option to create Tournament settings ingame, this would be a First step in that direction and and could be fun for people Like OP, who want to ban classes as well as many Others who would Like to Part Take in Kind of Tournament settings, but dont want the hassle of playing a whole Open Cup where you have to sign in on some Website and be ready at the right time etc.
I agree about the ban system, and I am talking about standard. Even if it is not a tournament on tournaments there are ban system so on ranked there should be too. It is annoying to play the same matchup over and over again, or to ban the weak point, in pro matches they can ban their weak point class.
They have BO5 system? Ok then why can not be on ranked like this? Instead of playing constantly BO1 to climb the ladder there should be a BO5 type of match, picking 4-4 decks with different classes and each player can ban from the opposite side, and the elo calculations can be about the match score.
Just delete priest, problem solved.
Wild ranked DO NOT NEED class ban system.
Class ban system in Wild would be INTERESTING TEMPORARY EVENT.
EU 11/2015+ , f2p 03/2021+: DK 63 / DH 205 /Dr 277 / Hu 733 / Ma 6666 / Pa 1072 / Pr 1165 / Ro 1791 / Sh 1303 / Wl 707 / Wr 664