Hearthpwn

So there where 2 main reasons for which the wild format was created.

- 1 To make the game more friendly towards new players by reducing the amount of cards they need to get

- 2 To open up design freedom, by not having to worry about too many interactions that would break the game (like what just happened with hysteria)

So by design wild is supposed to have a huge power creep because new and old decks will always have access to an increasing pool of tools that allow to optimize decks more as time passes, this is a fact. So limiting new prints in order to maintain balance in wild (Eg. The Hysteria nerf) is unacceptable for Standard players, and defeats one of the main purposes of the Wild format.

However Wild players do have a right for balance in their format. If they do not balance wild in any way the format just becomes an unplayable trashcan, and they might as well just delete cards as soon as they rotate because no one would play wild.

We just saw that for some reason they are unable to keep wild nerfs to wild only and in my opinion this is the breaking point. Because this means future prints are at risk of being hindered by wild balance. So here I propose 2 ways to maintain balance in wild while maintaining its purpose:

1. Set rotations: Keeping a well thought set rotation including only wild sets plus the newest expansion could help keeping the format's power creep at bay. However some people like this power creep and is the main reason they choose wild over Standard so I don't think this is the best solution.

2.Ban/limited lists: This is what other card games use to balance their games and  I think Blizzard should implement it to the wild format. We already have seen certain cards being banned from certain tavern Brawls or game modes (self sharpening sword in duels) So I don't understand why they wouldn't just use this for problem cards in wild. Cards that get banned don't even have to be permanently banned, they can get removed from the ban list if  they seem ok for certain metas. Also having a limited list (cards you can only have 1 copy of in your deck outside of  it's rarity) could help have a finer adjustment to balance. (Naga Sea Witch would probably be fine at 5 mana if people could only run 1 copy of it)

I want to hear other people's thoughts on this.

So if I got 2 quests will I get the 3d one? or am I gonna get screwed over?

I play standard where priest rarely seems to be viable , and the second it gets to be viable it gets nerfed.

Wait wtf. Why in fucking earth would they nerf hysteria? Its not like its broken by itself. They should have nerfed either Tiller or, you know, Deathspeaker ? The fucking card that keeps spawning unintended OTK's and will continue to become a bigger problem in the future. Priest is struggling to have any viable decks and the moment they get a descent card, it gets nerfed. Is this to avoid people from getting good deals on dust refunds? I really don't understand this decision

Maybe you are picking the wrong Heroes? Idk , maybe watch Dog playing on twitch , watching streamers is a really good way to learn the game.

I agree Blizz has messed with the lore previously and it ain't that bad. At the same time who are wee kidding here, this is Blizzard going down on its knees to give a good ol' suck to their Chinese overlords. 

TBH they should just nerf Deathspeaker , it's going to keep causing broken OTK's

Want to hear what other people think about this logic. I'm not sure if the 2k gold deal for the mini set is worth it if you hoarded enough packs. The legendaries seem really lackluster, and if you have around 20 packs you can probably get all the rares and commons for free. I know that the legendaries might become better in the future but aren't 20 packs for the next full expansion more valuable?

No one wants them to not make money. The price of the game is ludicrous compared to the competition. The barrier for new players is insane.
People are quitting HS because of the fucking huge price it has and people can't get into the game because the price for that is even higher. Just look at CoD WZ, the game probably makes more than HS will ever make and there is no P2W BS in the game. On top of that, it is a way more expensive game to make than HS.
The reason the meta gets so stale is because people only play 1 deck, and the reason for that is because people can ONLY afford 1 deck.
For the price of the pre order it should AT LEAST guarantee to get you all the cards of the set (It should probably cost less than that)
New players should probably be able to pay 60 dollars (the price of a regular game) to get all the cards in the current standard rotation. And then since the base game is affordable, then they can start selling cosmetics, and people will feel good about it because the player base is growing  instead of focusing in selling the game to whales you get a healthy amount of new people coming into the game and people quitting the game

i just want a faster exp gained .that's all i really wanted.

I still thing they should change the xp required per levels to scale the same. not getting a levels or a long periode is imo bad game design when u want to reward player

This is worst portrait in game.

For me, this change ruins solo experience and makes me want to play BGs less. Now every game there are chance i am playing with group of players who might or might not at some level create an unfair game. Boosting potential is very big in this setup. 

Why nerfing another priest card !!! if priest is tier 3 now !!!! what the fckkkkk is happening 

Quote from thebitterfig >>

Blessing of Authority at 6 mana probably kills the card entirely.  Blessing of Authority as a 5-mana +6/+6 would be better, if something happened to it.  That'd also be a backdoor nerf to Argent Braggart, who could honestly stand to be 3 mana, like Edwin VanCleef.  However, nerf Blessing of Authority enough, and Paladins probably just run Blessing of Kings.  It's not as big, but it's cheaper and goes face. 

I dunno.  Maybe Libram of Hope is just a little too big.  Getting an 8/8 Divine Shield Taunt as early as Turn 4 (I suppose maybe even 3 with the coin) can be pretty back-breaking.  But I guess that's also a High Abbess Alura problem, and increasing her mana cost might be helpful.

Eh.  This all supposes a nerf is needed.  The arguments that the class doesn't need heavy hits have some merit to them.  On the other hand, Grandmaster is really skewed.  The entire format--particularly the potential to ban lists--is a really different format than Ladder.  Pretty easy for something to be busted on Ladder, but not find a home in GM's Conquest format.

That's why the Specialist format was a great thing to test (even if it didn't really work out well).  It tried to recreate the "one deck blind queued" experience of ladder, but the games were kinda boring and it was a failure of a format.  I'm glad Bliz tried it out, and happier they moved on from it.

Sigh... late-night rambles...

I myself wouldn't touch the Libram cards (they were here last expansion, the deck was tier 3 at best), the problem lies elsewhere; High Abbess Alura's highroll potential is absolutely devastating, Devout Pupil is way too good for the cost, Goody Two-Shields is also too oppressive with 4 attack, I would look for nerfs here.

I don't like DH but I hate all OTK combos decks. So I guess I'll play DH just to counter them...also, this will mess up many control decks. Looking forward to see lots rage quits!!

Scholomance