Back when Fractured in Alterac Valley released, Hearthstone Game Designer Chadd "Celestalon" Nervig stated that Team 5 would implement changes if Alterac Valley's new cards weren't able to make enough of an impact in the meta due to the oppression of the so called "solitaire" decks from the previous expansions (United in Stormwind above all).
While the situation looked exactly like the one initially described by Celestalon, a few days ago we received the bittersweet news that no balance changes were going to come this week. While it was very likely that this decision was made in order not to mess up players competing in Hearthstone Worlds (which will take place on December 18th and 19th), part of the community was left a bit disappointed, as there are some rather annoying decks swarming ladder right now. Let's be clear: we've seen way worse metas, but this expansion launch could've been better.
However, here we are with yet another plot twist! Celestalon himself has updated his previous statements and announced that we will receive some balance changes. It is possible that said changes will take place next week, before Team 5 goes on their yearly holiday vacation, but we are yet to receive any other information about any upcoming changes.
Quote From Celestalon Yep, here we are. Balance changes will come, as promised. Many of those decks will be getting hit.
For the sake of completion, the tweet you see above was written under a spreadsheet showing the archetypes distribution among all the players participating in the World Championship.
As you can see, there will be an overabundance of OTK decks, with Garrote Rogue, Celestial Alignment Druid, Il'gynoth OTK Demon Hunter and the relatively new Humongous Owl Warlock appearing in almost every line up. These are the only non-combo decks you'll see at Worlds:
- Libram Paladin (2).
- Face Hunter (3).
- Pirate Warrior (2).
Card Buffs Too?
Luckily, nerfs are not our only future as we're also going to be seeing some card buffs coming to Hearthstone in a future patch, so some strategies that didn't pan out quite the way Blizzard wanted should be getting a nice boost. No further details were provided, though Celestalon did talk about why they don't do buffs often.
Quote From Celestalon instead of erring to over-tuning then nerf, under-tune then buff. Instead of taking decks away, it adds decks through a meta. Just a thought. Still love the game. #Hearthstone
It's definitely something we consider. And you will see some buffs soon. In general though, buffs are much more difficult to get the desired result, than nerfs. Let me explain…
With nerfs, we have a good idea of how powerful something is now, and know that it'll go down. That knowledge lets us be much more accurate with the nerf. And if we undershoot, well at least it's better than before. If we overshoot, that deck just stops seeing play entirely.
With buffs, it's trying to increase the power level of something we have very little data on how powerful it is. It's below the margin of seeing play, but by how much? Hard to say.
If we undershoot, it was a waste, nothing happens. If we overshoot, we created a new problem deck.
Buffs absolutely can work out great, and we have a few coming that we hope do work out great. But I hope that at least explains why we tend to do nerfs more often than buffs.
What cards do you think will be nerfed? What cards would you want to see buffed? Let us know your opinions in the comments below!
Comments
This ^
Ugh.
No, no, no.
If you nerf something and you overshoot, the deck stops seeing "play" because people want "#90% winrate deck PogChamp Kappa TwitchEmoteVomit"
People seem to think that if a deck is somewhere between 49-51% winrate it's "bad". It has to be some egregious winrate for people to want to play it in the first place. And this line of thinking is further exacerbated by a majority of streamers who make clickbait videos/streams.
1) Those streamers can pilot decks at a way higher efficacy level than the average gamer. So when those streamers get 60+ winrates, it's because they understand niche decisions that can snowball the deck to higher winrates
2) The streamers over-inflate how good or bad a deck is because being realistic doesn't get views. Bloviating and making hyperbolic and extravagant comments gets them more viewers.
Lastly, no-one cares when a tempo midrange decks gets a small nerf. Because the tempo mid-range can either continue on, or it swaps out the nerfed card for maybe something better. The only decks that "die out" due to overnerfing are OTK decks. (See Ilgynoth prevalance prior to his buff/nerf, see the vast majority of Demon Hunter decks during entire last year of hearthstone)
I'm sorry, but Team5 is acting dumb. They print all these mana cheating wombo combo cards. Then for some inexplicable reason they get surprised when the community finds stupid OTK/non-interactive decks.
Edit: Sorry if this comes off as ranty or crass. I think this meta is "ok" but barely tolerable than stormwind. We just swapped out one evil for another. It's just very monotonous.
I don't always agree with your opinions, but when I do, I really, really do. This is one of those times. <3
LOL. We don't always have to agree, but when we do agree... that's a scary moment. 'Cause it's gotta be something REALLY bad for us to agree on it...
From the perspective of Wild, I'd say things that need to get hit:
- either Celestial Alignment or Anakondra (so that she can't reduce below 1)
- Hunter quest (1-2 more spells to complete)
- Warrior quest (you just can't let a hyper-aggressive deck have inevitability; nerf how long it takes to get to the reward or nerf the reward severely)
- Snowfall guardian (just another variety of solitaire for anyone trying to run a board-based deck)
- don't think this will happen right now but maybe with the new Core Set: FINALLY nerf Sorcerer's Apprentice to not discount below 1 mana so that Mages don't get to play like 5 varieties of solitaire anymore around that damn card. Considering the hit that Aviana Kun took because of how many stupid combos they enabled, I'm surprised Sorcerer's Apprentice has not been touched since release.
Granted, even if all this would happen we would go back to another variety of solitaire (Raza Priests), but at least that's solitaire with a longer-term gameplan and some room for disruption.
There is no reason to make it apply just to Sorcerer's Apprentice, make it so that you you can't reduce anything to 0 mana cost. If it didn't start at 0 mana then the lowest a card is allowed to go is 1. Maybe there are certain cards or interactions that could be exceptions to this, but I think the vast majority of things should hit a floor at 1 mana.
IMO the biggest problem with warrior quest is that it tutors out ancharr if you have bad mulligan. it also draws, and board clears/goes face.
I'm fine with aggro having damage, but it shouldnt also have 100% perfect draw via tutoring. honestly i'd like to see the quest rewards draw pirates and not weapons. or give a random weapon. but ensuring you get ancharr for consistent curve value is insane.
I don't really think that's the problem. From my experience playing the deck, playing the Ancharr is a last resort. It's a tempo loss if you didn't have the 2/2 discounters, it develops very little on the board and puts on very little pressure, and given the critical mass of 1-2 mana pirates in Wild, you can reliably and quickly complete the quest without the Ancharr card draw pretty much every game regardless. When your deck is like 22 1-2 mana pirates, you're completing by turn 5-6 even if you played Cannon on 2.
The fact that right around the time the old Pirate Warrior used to run out of steam, you get a 5 mana 7/7 with infinite value and damage stapled onto it is what makes it broken. It either needs to come out later so there's a window where the deck runs out of steam for a moment, or it needs to do less so that you're not in a scramble to survive from turn 2 until turn 10.
It seems Freeze Shaman is getting a free pass. Wild says thank you
It is the closest thing to Control we have had in a while.
Edit: Other than Highlander decks. But, TBH I dislike generic Highlander decks.
Vol'jin buff.
Shadow Hunter Vol'jin?
Yeah
May I ask why you'd like Team 5 to buff that card? And how would you like to buff it?
From 5 mana to 4 mana.
It was a missed opportunity not to put Dirty Rat in the Core Set.
We need good disruption cards so that Questlines and OTK decks that rely on specific minions don't feel too bad to play against. It still won't be a surefire way to win but at least it would give players hope. People rely too much on Mutanus but it's too slow to be consistent.
It also buffs Big archetypes.
It can also disrupt Paladin.
What OTK is assembled before turn 5 that its necessary to make voljin available a turn earlier? Mutanus is actually doing wonders now, and at 7 mana its acceptable without being too tilting to go up against.
Most big decks would want to play vanndar instead, so that buff to 4 wouldn't make voljin playable in those decks.
My point is essentially this. In a meta plagued with OTK decks and a drought of Control decks, what's the harm in making a disruption tool a little bit more viable? In Wild, Control decks can thrive because players have access to all the disruption cards Hearthstone has to offer.
If the goal is to slow the meta down to allow the slower Hero Cards to shine in their expansion, then doesn't it make sense to buff disruption cards like Vol'jin?
Also, I don't understand this. The OTK doesn't need to be assembled by turn 5 before you are allowed to disrupt it. Otherwise, cards like dirty rat, parrley, Savory Deviate Delight, Demonic Project, etc.. wouldn't exist.
The significant part of my argument is that mutanus is already performing that feat, and since voljin is 2 mana less one would think that it'll be the preferred disruption option compared to that 7 mana murloc. But in reality, we see mutanus being in many decks and yet voljin is not.
And that's largely because voljin requires a minion on board to work and that's precisely what most OTK decks would play around, especially if voljin is meta. So moving its mana cost wouldn't really accomplish much in terms of disruption; its being beaten in terms of viability by a card that's 2 cost bigger as I write this.
Nerfs and buffs are applied with a goal in mind. In my opinion, buffing voljin to 4 or 3 even would neither slow the meta down, nor will it make control decks viable. Even big decks wouldn't play voljin because of the interaction with vanndar, and the fact that most big decks don't play small minions so there's no target for it to work.
I love control decks, I always try to find viable control decks. Vol'jin is run in Control Priest (see Zetalot's list). Owl was so prevalent that it was run as a 2nd win condition.
Of course it won't. Not by itself. Nerfs are clearly more effective in changing the meta, even the devs said that.
I never said it would slow the meta by itself, but a buff would be the most welcome change.
Just a guess: It would not be OP at 4 mana, but I don't know how much of an impact that would actually make in the face of these combos.