Anyone else think expeditions feel worse with Bilgewater?

The addition of Toss and Deep make a lot of sea monster decks feel unusually powerful thanks to the lower deck sizes in Expeditions, and the addition of "draw from your opponent's deck" cards can hit you twice, first by stealing your resources, then by decking you (again because the deck sizes are smaller in Expeditions).

In MTG, it's very rare to see any kind of mill type strategies be powerful in limited because they typically only work with a large combination of mill effects. Many of the Runeterra self-mill and enemy-mill cards are fairly efficient on their own, leading to what I think is a worse drafting experience.

It's obviously too early to call for a nerf to any cards (especially because I actually think a lot of these cards/interactions are fun in normal play), but I wouldn't be shocked if rebalancing the draft pool was one of the first things to come out of Bilgewater.

Yeah, it doesn’t really feel fair for them to get sea monsters out and buffed so early. Maybe Deep should only give +2|+2 in expeditions?

I was thinking about something like that - redefining the keyword or changing some of the cards slightly. They've done that with Purrsuit of Perfection being converted to Accelerated Purrsuit, but honestly I don't love that. It seems really confusing to have slightly different cards and/or slightly different fundamental rules between formats.

From a balance perspective, I don't think Deep is that much of a problem considering that most of the sea monsters are pretty mediocre most of the game, and other archetypes have bombs to counter it most of the time. But yeah, it still feels bad especially when the high roll. I think a good solution would be to reduce the frequency of sea monsters, since the main problem comes when they barf up 3 huge guys in one turn. 

Quote From meisterz39

They've done that with Purrsuit of Perfection being converted to Accelerated Purrsuit

Personally, I like the idea of changes like this to accommodate the Expedition format.

But I've always been stumped as to why they did this to Purrsuit of Perfection in particular. I think it's an unnecessary change - the card works exactly the same (and with the same efficiency) in constructed and limited. Deck size has nothing to do with it. Perhaps Riot figured that drafting buckets made creating a deck filled with 1-ofs too difficult? If anything, I'd advocate reducing the threshold to 15 cards for constructed, as well (In most matchups with my Catastrophe deck, I get nowhere near the required 20).

On the flipside, the Deep mechanic obviously benefits quite massively from the lower deck size. I would like to see a change to the mechanic for Expeditions only, like triggering at 10 or less cards in the deck; possibly even 5, but that might be a bit too punishing as players would have a maximum of 5 turns to benefit from their buffed units.

I think the idea that Riot believes it's too hard to get to 20 in Expeditions is right - as you've pointed out, it's already pretty hard to get to 20 in a constructed format where you can easily plan around the card. I think the power level of the effect is probably why they haven't decreased it's threshold - they want you to be able to play it, but they also want you to plan around other win conditions.

I think the problem with changing keywords between formats is that the change is way too subtle. A lot of players will be confused by the changes, and will have a harder time playing around cards because their knowledge of one format won't necessarily map onto any other formats. It's one thing to replace a card - the different name helps make it clear that players should expect different behavior. You could imagine a case where all Deep cards are replaced with slightly different named cards that have slightly different behaviors/keywords, but after a lot of that I think you have the same problem where folks will be confused switching back and forth between formats.

Honestly, the choice Riot made to have Rising Tides Champion archetypes show up 2x as often may be the whole problem here. Because there are so many Bilgewater champions in that set of archetype picks, there are lots more Deep plays than seem reasonable. Maybe when odds return to normal, there will simply be fewer Deep decks and the whole thing will feel better.

While I do think Deep needs to be tuned for expeditions specifically (something like +2/2 instead of +3/3 as it is for constructed)...

I also think Deep is a bit of a double edged sword.

Literally just won versus a guy with a Nautilus/Twisted Fate deck and a ton of sea monsters.  I ended up winning cause I had enough tokens (thank god I drafted 3 house spiders) to block his guys and smartly managed to stay alive while he drew and tossed his deck.  Long story short,  first time I ever won an expedition to fatigue on my opponent's deck. :D

Also, word of advice Brash Gambler and Pool Shark can screw you over, so unless your deck curve is VERY low, I would advice against using these wantonly.  Also Veteran Investigator also seems like a bad expedition card.  You never want to give your opponent extra card draw.

Quote From meisterz39

Maybe when odds return to normal, there will simply be fewer Deep decks and the whole thing will feel better.

I also have to disagree here. If an expedition archetype is badly balanced, its prevalence in the game mode doesn't affect its power level. The only difference is that you'll be annoyed by it less often, but the core problem persists. Getting your Deep bonus 10 cards earlier means you'll often be able to trigger it 2-3 rounds earlier than in constructed, which is quite a massive difference.

Quote From Sykomyke

Also Veteran Investigator also seems like a bad expedition card.  You never want to give your opponent extra card draw.

I've never understood the logic behind this, myself. Of course, letting your opponent draw cards is generally disadvantageous. However, if I get to draw one at the same time, it pretty much cancels out, doesn't it? Only point I could see against this is if the opponent is running some sort of combo deck, which naturally benefits more from having a bigger hand than other decks.

Quote From BlueSpark

Quote From meisterz39

It's one thing to replace a card - the different name helps make it clear that players should expect different behavior.

I'm inclined to disagree on this particular point - I pretty much never read card names during a match. The card image is the single most recognizable element to me, and the only one I need. Because they didn't change the image for Accelerated Purrsuit, I wasn't even aware it was a different card until I saw somebody pointing it out on the forums.

Quote From meisterz39

Maybe when odds return to normal, there will simply be fewer Deep decks and the whole thing will feel better.

I also have to disagree here. If an expedition archetype is badly balanced, its prevalence in the game mode doesn't affect its power level. The only difference is that you'll be annoyed by it less often, but the core problem persists. Getting your Deep bonus 10 cards earlier means you'll often be able to trigger it 2-3 rounds earlier than in constructed, which is quite a massive difference.

Quote From Sykomyke

Also Veteran Investigator also seems like a bad expedition card.  You never want to give your opponent extra card draw.

I've never understood the logic behind this, myself. Of course, letting your opponent draw cards is generally disadvantageous. However, if I get to draw one at the same time, it pretty much cancels out, doesn't it? Only point I could see against this is if the opponent is running some sort of combo deck, which naturally benefits more from having a bigger hand than other decks.

You're right about the art - it's a major part of the "recogniziability" of any card, and they should probably have changed it for the Purrsuit. But imagine if they left the name and the art the same and just changed the text - you'd be left wondering if they had rebalanced the constructed version without you noticing, etc., and it would be even worse if they changed the definition/helptext of a keyword. That would be very hard to notice, and very confusing for anyone not intimately familiar with patch notes, etc.

It's true that a less frequent broken thing is still a broken thing, but my point here is that when the Rising Tides champions show up less often, it will be harder to get some of the crazy combos like Nautilus/Maokai in Expeditions. That decrease in the likelihood of highly synergistic Champions impacts which archetypes you're shown and how your overall draft goes, so it's possible that specifically in this case, it will balance the problem out.

Finally, with respect to Veteran Investigator, you're right that in constructed, the reason to play a symmetric card draw effect would be that you're playing a deck for which drawing a card is somehow more valuable that the average deck (maybe it's a combo deck that just needs more draw, maybe it's a Twisted Fate deck that wants to upgrade him, etc.). But the original point is scoped to Expeditions, where you're unlikely to be able to build a deck where your draws are more valuable. I'm not sure Sykomyke is right that it's bad - it's a decent size for a 2-drop and it replaces itself in hand - but there are certainly much better 2-drops, and your opponent is getting a free card without having to play an "okay, but not great" 2-drop.

Of course, the other side of this is that you draft in packs of 3, and get random trades, so you may end up with him even if you're not excited to play him. I don't think I'd ever trade for Veteran Investigator, but I wouldn't auto-skip a 3 card pack simply because he's in it.

Quote From Sykomyke

Also Veteran Investigator also seems like a bad expedition card.  You never want to give your opponent extra card draw.

I've never understood the logic behind this, myself. Of course, letting your opponent draw cards is generally disadvantageous. However, if I get to draw one at the same time, it pretty much cancels out, doesn't it? Only point I could see against this is if the opponent is running some sort of combo deck, which naturally benefits more from having a bigger hand than other decks.

True, but one in expeditions you don't have perfect decks.  The other downside is that mirror card draw in "arena" type formats is bad because YOU are paying the up front mana cost for the card draw.  Sure it could lead to finding a better card or better play, but chances are you're giving your opponent more options...and they don't even have to pay the 2 mana cost for it.

Long story short:  Is it an auto-pass? Probably not.  But it's definitely not an auto-pick either.  If playing on curve it's not horrible, but you are giving your opponent the advantage to play the card with full mana.  The only time mirror draws every saw the light of day in hearthstone were "mill" decks, and you saw how Blizzard handled that. (nerfed)

Some very good points there, meisterz. I can definitely see your argument regarding the Nautilus plus Maokai combination, and also that Investigator would be less valuable in expeditions. Regarding that card, however:

Quote From Sykomyke

The other downside is that mirror card draw in "arena" type formats is bad because YOU are paying the up front mana cost for the card draw.  Sure it could lead to finding a better card or better play, but chances are you're giving your opponent more options...and they don't even have to pay the 2 mana cost for it.

I still don't see it. Yes, your opponent gets a 'free' draw, but so do you: You paid 2 mana for a 3/2 body on the field, which is alright (Let's say slightly sub-par) mana-cost-wise. So the 'free' draw applies to both players.

Quote From Sykomyke 

The only time mirror draws every saw the light of day in hearthstone were "mill" decks, and you saw how Blizzard handled that. (nerfed)

While its true it was mostly played in mill decks, Oracle also saw play at least in another 4 situations:
1- Tempo Rogue; (open beta)
2- OTK decks: Exodia Mage and Lerroy Rogue;
3- Fatigue decks: Warrior/Priest;
4- Included as a tech card to mill combo pieces of Exodia Mage, Aviana Druid, Handlock and Dead Man's Hand Warrior.

Quote From BlueSpark

Quote From Sykomyke

Also Veteran Investigator also seems like a bad expedition card.  You never want to give your opponent extra card draw.

I've never understood the logic behind this, myself. Of course, letting your opponent draw cards is generally disadvantageous. However, if I get to draw one at the same time, it pretty much cancels out, doesn't it? Only point I could see against this is if the opponent is running some sort of combo deck, which naturally benefits more from having a bigger hand than other decks.

I had lots of fun with it when I was on a teemo deck. Enemy's nexus was at 2 HP, he summoned an overwhelm unit that would destroy mine, and then I summoned the Veteran Investigator. Plop, 2 mushrooms, victory!