6
What? You guys haven't played wild yet... It's super fun!!
2
Naga incredibly limits design space, if blizzard cares at all about wild, and its just a broken card that offers to much highroll potential. Having all your cards cost exactly five was way more balanced
2
I just finished a back-to-back wild legend run yesterday. Nagalock was at least 1/3 of the push from rank 4. I'd guess various aggro paladin builds were close to 40%, with another solid group of Barnes priests. I made the run with an even shaman, starting out with something close to Jackiechan's list but dropping cards like Piloted Shredder because they were way too slow for the Naga. You absolutely must kill them on turn 5, 6 at the latest, or it's over. Nevermind the defiles and hellfires on the way.
The deck completely warps the meta because if you even think about a control deck you need to answer that turn 5. But the limited tools that can do it (Lightbomb, etc.) are too unlikely to be drawn, compared to the Warlock drawing an additional 4 cards by then to find the Naga. So everyone plays a deck designed to win by turn 5. Worse, the deck sucks to play. I don't understand what the holdup is on changing the Naga's text to set cards to 5 mana like it was originally designed to do.
2
I think the wording should be "Your cards ALWAYS cost 5" to be consistant with other similar cards who do not interact with buffs and debuffs, like Lightspawn.
I actually play that deck... it CAN lose, even to control decks like big priest, but it is mainly weak to hardcore face aggro mage, hunter and paladin.
I feel like I am exploiting a bug when spamming those giants on turn 5...
4
The following arguments against 'fixing' Naga Sea Witch do not have merit:
1. I crafted all those cards to make the deck. That's nice, but that means no card should ever be nerfed because there are times players craft cards for a deck all the time. Raza Priest got nerfed and many people crafted cards just for that deck. It's a weak argument that basically says, please don't nerf the deck that I made.
2. It's fine as it is, as there are counters to the deck. Even if there are counters to the deck, that does not mean it should still be allowed to exist in the game as is. You have to take under consideration, how do these Giant NSW decks warp the meta and regardless if there are counters, sometimes you can't draw your counters on turn 4 or 5 when it matters. Also, some counters cost too much mana. It's the age old story...I have a rat problem. Get a cat. The cat has outstayed its welcome. Buy a dog. and so forth. Instead of creating cards to deal with problem cards, just kill the rat (or the problem card in the first place) with a broom.
3. There are other crazy decks in wild, so it's no big deal. 2 wrongs don't make a right. Just because someone else is committing crimes, doesnt mean its ok for you to start doing them just because they are getting away with it. All decks and cards that are causing an oppressive or un fun Wild meta should be looked at carefully. Losing on turn 4 or 5 because a card is not working as intended or broken is not a fun or even interactive experience.
4. It doesn't have a good win or play rate, so it's ok. I don't care if the deck has a 2% win rate and only 3 people play the deck. The card going forward will always cause problems with future design if they ever wanted to print other giants or other cost reducing cards. The card is not working as intended. Win rates do not matter to a card being broken.
Basically, the NSW and Giants issue comes down to the following valid arguments as to why it should be 'nerfed' or reverted to its old self:
a. The card is not acting or interacting with other cards with it's intended effect. The implied effect was to have all your cards cost 5. Cost reduction should not come into the equation.
b. It's un fun and un interactive for the other player. I try to kill you before turn 4 or 5. if I fail, you get to spam the board with giants and win on the following turn. In fact, by attacking you, I have enabled one of your giants to be cheaper too. There are very few counters that can clear a board on turn 4 or 5 and that means you lose.
c. Cards that affect or warp a meta game, should be monitored and fixed, despite win rates and play rates. It doesn't matter how many times a deck wins, the card itself is still not fair. Let's suppose a card read "10 mana minion - Battlecry: If your deck has no cards in it, you win the game." It's 10 mana, so no big deal right? Wrong. Such a card would be un fun and have no interaction from the opponent. You simply fill your deck with board clears and card draw. If you are druid, you can put in ramp too and win before it matters. You might say, but it's very hard to pull this win condition off. Yep, it is. Still not fun and your opponent has no chance to disrupt it.
Another example, which should be a simple thing, is to fix or change keywords from the past. Why, because it keeps the game consistent.
Fix cards that dont have the intended effect. Update cards to reflect their ability.
Unstable Evolution should have Echo.
Warsong Commander should read Rush minions instead now to make it playable as it's clear Charge is too hard to balance.
And there are many other examples as well.
6
...when you can enjoy _it_ in abundance at rank 23?
2
The logic behind the coding change was pretty arbitrary. They decided that a card's own aura modifying its cost should applied after a universal aura modifying its cost. They said that that was how auras modifying Attack and Defense worked, so cost-modifying auras should be treated the same way. They said it was "more consistent", and thus easier to understand.
Reasoning behind change to Sea Witch
Unfortunately that doesn't make it better game design, since card cost and minion stats have very different implications on the game. It also changes the implicit design philosophy of the card Naga Sea Witch, which was designed for you to cheat out high-cost minions for steep price in flexibility.
2
Either nerf her to cost 8 mana OR revert the change by changing the card text to: cards cost ALWAYS 5 mana. I think the revert would be the best change, but nerfing her to 8 mana would be good enough too.
1
Quote from jeepers1704 >>If you nerf Naga, all lot of people are sitting with Clockworks Giants and Malganis in their collection that they might never play again.
2
Naga Sea Witch's issue is not its win rate, but the awfulness of playing against it almost like it was Quest Rogue pre-nerf. It's an OTK by turn 5 that has very few and specific counter for only some Classes while other have nothing at all. They should have never "buffed" it and reverting it back is one of the best thing Team 5 should do for Wild.
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
5
Ouch... those nerfs to Imprisoned Antaen and Skull of Gul'dan are like a kick in the nuts to Odd Demon Hunter.
1
Jesus Christ, you're taking the leaves out of the WOTC balancing book. And Magic the Gathering is fucking terrible at balancing cards, even for Standard. This screams hurr durr I want to play brainless Face Hunter and Pirate Warrior again hurr durr.
The only reasonable nerf I see is to Eye Beam. The other nerf ideas are absolute ass.
I was around for Shamanstone, so I can tell you right now that Battlefiend idea you have is a huge mistake, since it will be a Small Time Buccaneer with a permanent buff. 1 mana 1/1 is way more reasonable.
Skull of Guldan is more than likely going to get a nerf to 6 mana.
The Aldrachi Warblades are fine as is, since there are plenty of other 3 cost 2/3 weapons or 3 cost 3/2 weapons.
1
So many things wrong with this post.
Demon Hunter's Lifesteal abilities are average at best, heavily reliant on weapon buffs or Soul Cleave for sustained lifegain.
They have nowhere near the best board clears or card draw by a country mile. In terms of Wild, Priest, Warlock and Mage outclass them by a country mile, and Druids have insane card draw even after a few nerfs.
They might have exceptional face damage, but that by and far is their most critical weakness - Demon Hunter is HEAVILY reliant on weapon/face buffs. Anyone who has played the class or played against them would have picked this up by now.
1
I see that someone has never played Hearthstone before. The basic structure of the game is Aggro, Control and Combo. Aggro is countered by Control, Control is countered by Combo, Combo is countered by Aggro. It's the essential foundation blocks to the game.
And don't give me a bullshit excuse of a deck being strong that you only play the deck or a counter to it. If that wasn't the case, Skulking Geist would have been a long-forgotten memory instead of the Swiss Army Knife it is in Wild to feed on the salt of Druids. The key point is, instead of bellyaching about how X is overpowered or Y has no chance against it, you find a way to keep everything in check. THAT'S THE FUCKING POINT OF THE GAME. You figure something out that slows the deck down to a snail's pace, then you wail on them.
Let's take Demon Hunter, for instance. The three themes that class has is minion swarms, smacking people in the face with weapons, and big threats later on in the game. Demon Hunter has an EXTREMELY limited amount of healing at this point in time (only three cards with Lifesteal), HEAVILY reliant on weapons or smacking people in the face, and they are heavily reliant on combo pieces. I have been playing Odd Demon Hunter in Wild, and it runs into a brick wall against Reno Priest, Reno Mage and Renolock. Hell, I had my ass beaten in by this weird Warlock deck that was deliberately damaging itself to summon minion swarms with that Buzzard they have. Such counters for Demon Hunters exist.
1
Bullshit. I know of two examples of Tier S decks in Wild, those being the Galakrond Shaman and the Snip-Snap Warlock in Wild. I have been around long enough to see actual toxic decks like Giantslock, Togwaggle/Star Aligner Druid and Kingsbane Mill Rogue. Next time, actually research before making an inaccurate statement. Compared to those, Demon Hunter in general PALES in comparison.
3
I'm so sorry, would you like some cheese with your whine?
Demon Hunter has it's weaknesses - very weak to early board clears, not to mention that you can easily get around the bigger minions with targeted removal. I feel like the people who are whining are Aggro players who now see why people playing a mindless face deck pisses off other players.
2
Demon Hunter: Slips this card into their deck and uses odd cards.
Other face decks in Wild: *chuckle* I'm in danger now!
5
I don't fucking know, maybe it has something to do with the fact that EVERYONE IS PLAYING DEMON HUNTER?!?!
1
What an entitled manchild. What, having a better dust payout over time is not worth losing your rank? You do know there will be a rank floor set so that experienced players won't clog the bottom ranks, right? And the payouts are a lot more generous than they have been.
Grow the fuck up.
3
Points for something original, but this is a very weird card to introduce to the game. With Mech Paladin being as prevalent as it is now, it's not crazy to say that this is going to be terminated with extreme prejudice when it makes it's way on the board.