Never a good sign when a deck's worst matchup is itself.
It makes me wonder if Team 5 didn't think people would combine the Libram package (which was already slightly too strong) with the powerful new Secret tools. Did they think the new package would actually weaken the old one? Did they think there was some reason the two wouldn't work well together? Did they simply not test the two packages in the same deck?
At 5 mana, Refreshing Spring Water is exactly the same as Arcane Intellect with one minion drawn. That's not horrible, especially considering no-minion decks run both cards anyway -- and you're always going to get full discount in that deck unless you choose to shuffle a Solarian. Draw two for 1 mana is still insanely good value.
The card is supposed to be a bit of a gamble for decks with minions. It makes sense that it would "break even" with Arcane Intellect when you draw one and one. It does not make sense that they made it cost 4 in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with the watch posts. Leave the watch posts alone.
Sure, they can be frustrating to play against in the same way Annoy-o-Tron was frustrating back in the day (less so now), but that's not a reason to nerf them. The whole point of them is to slow the game down, and that's all they do. There's no clearly oppressive archetype that absolutely depends on watch posts. Any oppressive deck that uses them will find a way to be oppressive without them.
What agries me the most, is Blizz talked a lot about cost reduction and how it's no good for the game, and then they print a lot of Libram support and a lot of spell cost reduction for Mage.
I have the theory they want Standard to be annoying to make people play Classic. It's working with me at least.
I don't think that would make a lot of sense from a business perspective. Once you've collected all the Classic cards, you'll have no reason to spend money. They always have and always will want Standard to be the main game mode played by most players. Their real goal is to make Standard slightly too hard and disappointing to play with just the Core set, so that players are incentivized to buy expansion cards.
As for the mana cost reduction that is still too present in the game, I'm as confused as you are. I, too, remember them saying mana cheating has been a big problem in the past. In Iksar's recent AMA, he acknowledged that the power level got way out of control in the Year of the Raven, and I think he has to know that mana cheating was a huge part of that.
I don't think Jaraxxus is that big of a problem, because he only really punishes Control decks that have no win condition.
A well timed Rattlegore can shut Warlock down quite easily, regardless of Jaraxxus. If you're talking about Control Priest, that's just because the deck doesn't have a real win condition (or way to get there yet).
I beg your pardon, but outlasting the opponent is a perfectly valid, very real win condition, especially for a class like Priest that doesn't get a lot of offensive tools.
The deck of lunacy mage is a RNG feast ... in my last game I got two Survival of the Fittest, which for a no minion deck is ridicolous ...
The problem is NOT that it's random. The problem is that it's not random enough. The card pools are so small at the higher mana costs that you are guaranteed to get massive draw at 6, and you can expect Nagrand Slam and Survival of the Fittest pretty consistently if you started with the right spell costs originally.
If there were more spells in the pool that were less generally useful (while still being powerful in their intended classes), Lunacy would be much less problematic.
I'm not sure a "player-made solution" is possible when two very different archetypes are so co-dominant. You can focus your hate on one or the other and farm that class pretty easily, but you're going to lose every game against the one you did not choose to target.
No matter what you pick -- no matter what players pick in aggregate -- Mage and Paladin are still going to come out on top.
If you want to talk problematic winrates talk paladin. Because Uther's the meta tyrant here, with a near-perfect match-up spread. Close to being on-par with AoO demon-hunter, yet everyone would rather go to the casino with Jaina it seems.
It was not my intent at all to talk about problematic win rates generally. I brought up win rates specifically in comparison to Lunacy Mage to illustrate that the deck everyone is talking about isn't necessarily the actual worst problem in the meta.
Paladin is an obvious problem and has been for some time now, but Iksar seems very aware of that, so I'm not worried about it. On the other hand, devs have shown very little concern about Warlock beyond Tickatus, so I wanted to point out that Tickatus might not be the only offender in that class. That card's "feels bad" effect is strong, and it tends to eclipse all of Warlock's other OP control tools in the hearts and minds of players.
If anything, both Tickatus and Jaraxxus need to be nerfed simultaneously to give control decks breathing room once Paladin and Mage are dealt with.
I definitely agree. I already assumed Tickatus would get nerfed because it was on the watch list, and I honestly can't imagine a world where they don't nerf it. My worry is that it's hard to see how much Jaraxxus contributes to the problem because of Tickatus' ability to foil every deck's game plan.
I know nostalgia has rendered the old boy sacrosanct for a while, but I believe the writing is on the wall. When will the community be willing to read it?
Consider Dr. Boom, Mad Genius. I think a lot of players would agree that he was extremely problematic -- and the devs finally agreed and nerfed him. Well, Lord Jaraxxus shares several similarities with Boom, but they are exacerbated by certain aspects of the current meta.
Infinite value hero power -- only it's far worse with Jaraxxus because the value is much higher and totally consistent.
Minimal competition from other hero cards -- only it's worse with Jaraxxus because he is the only hero card in Standard right now.
Belongs to a class with too much control to begin with -- only it's worse with Jaraxxus because other control classes lost some control tools.
I understand that Lunacy Mage is top of mind for everyone at the moment, but that deck seems a lot worse than it is, simply because it's fun to play and therefore popular. Meanwhile, Control Warlock has quietly maintained win rates that rival or exceed Lunacy Mage, and this will only get worse when the hate-of-the-week decks get nerfed.
I hope Team 5 is able to recognize this problem before they decide on the next round of nerfs, or things will be a whole lot worse than they are now.
"Evergreen" is not a spectrum; it's binary. A set is either evergreen or it isn't. The fact that they could change out literally every card next year means it isn't.
I'm glad to see the end of all the Galakronds. I guess I just don't like Hero cards. I hated all the Death Knights, and I hated all of these. I'm no fan of Jaraxxus, either, but at least he's the only one left.
I guess The Amazing Reno's not so bad once you get past the poof, but I did hate having to play around that stupid poof.
It's funny how everyone seems to love singleton decks, but eventually everyone starts to hate the payoff cards. I'm definitely tired of all the singleton legendaries.
But for me, the card that should have made this list is Khartut Defender. It doesn't matter whether I'm aggro, midrange, or control; I always hate to see this guy show up and stop the fun.
Never a good sign when a deck's worst matchup is itself.
It makes me wonder if Team 5 didn't think people would combine the Libram package (which was already slightly too strong) with the powerful new Secret tools. Did they think the new package would actually weaken the old one? Did they think there was some reason the two wouldn't work well together? Did they simply not test the two packages in the same deck?
It boggles the mind.
I made a partial prediction somewhere else, but I guess I'll do the full thing here since we now know how many and which classes.
Efficient Octo-bot --> 3 health (down from 4)
Deck of Lunacy --> ... into random spells that cost (1) more (down from (3) more, still hoping they clean up the wording)
Refreshing Spring Water --> 5 mana (up from 4) -- On par with Arcane Intellect when you draw one minion
Sword of the Fallen --> 4 mana (up from 2) -- That's how much 3 secrets and a 1/3 weapon should cost.
Pen Flinger --> 2 mana (up from 1) -- Does this kill the card completely? I doubt it, but I also don't care.
Jandice Barov --> 6 mana (up from 5) -- Still quite playable, but not universally so.
At 5 mana, Refreshing Spring Water is exactly the same as Arcane Intellect with one minion drawn. That's not horrible, especially considering no-minion decks run both cards anyway -- and you're always going to get full discount in that deck unless you choose to shuffle a Solarian. Draw two for 1 mana is still insanely good value.
The card is supposed to be a bit of a gamble for decks with minions. It makes sense that it would "break even" with Arcane Intellect when you draw one and one. It does not make sense that they made it cost 4 in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with the watch posts. Leave the watch posts alone.
Sure, they can be frustrating to play against in the same way Annoy-o-Tron was frustrating back in the day (less so now), but that's not a reason to nerf them. The whole point of them is to slow the game down, and that's all they do. There's no clearly oppressive archetype that absolutely depends on watch posts. Any oppressive deck that uses them will find a way to be oppressive without them.
But look at how ripped Bru'kan is ...
The flavor text on the card removes all doubt.
I don't think that would make a lot of sense from a business perspective. Once you've collected all the Classic cards, you'll have no reason to spend money. They always have and always will want Standard to be the main game mode played by most players. Their real goal is to make Standard slightly too hard and disappointing to play with just the Core set, so that players are incentivized to buy expansion cards.
As for the mana cost reduction that is still too present in the game, I'm as confused as you are. I, too, remember them saying mana cheating has been a big problem in the past. In Iksar's recent AMA, he acknowledged that the power level got way out of control in the Year of the Raven, and I think he has to know that mana cheating was a huge part of that.
I beg your pardon, but outlasting the opponent is a perfectly valid, very real win condition, especially for a class like Priest that doesn't get a lot of offensive tools.
The problem is NOT that it's random. The problem is that it's not random enough. The card pools are so small at the higher mana costs that you are guaranteed to get massive draw at 6, and you can expect Nagrand Slam and Survival of the Fittest pretty consistently if you started with the right spell costs originally.
If there were more spells in the pool that were less generally useful (while still being powerful in their intended classes), Lunacy would be much less problematic.
I'm not sure a "player-made solution" is possible when two very different archetypes are so co-dominant. You can focus your hate on one or the other and farm that class pretty easily, but you're going to lose every game against the one you did not choose to target.
No matter what you pick -- no matter what players pick in aggregate -- Mage and Paladin are still going to come out on top.
It was not my intent at all to talk about problematic win rates generally. I brought up win rates specifically in comparison to Lunacy Mage to illustrate that the deck everyone is talking about isn't necessarily the actual worst problem in the meta.
Paladin is an obvious problem and has been for some time now, but Iksar seems very aware of that, so I'm not worried about it. On the other hand, devs have shown very little concern about Warlock beyond Tickatus, so I wanted to point out that Tickatus might not be the only offender in that class. That card's "feels bad" effect is strong, and it tends to eclipse all of Warlock's other OP control tools in the hearts and minds of players.
I definitely agree. I already assumed Tickatus would get nerfed because it was on the watch list, and I honestly can't imagine a world where they don't nerf it. My worry is that it's hard to see how much Jaraxxus contributes to the problem because of Tickatus' ability to foil every deck's game plan.
I know nostalgia has rendered the old boy sacrosanct for a while, but I believe the writing is on the wall. When will the community be willing to read it?
Consider Dr. Boom, Mad Genius. I think a lot of players would agree that he was extremely problematic -- and the devs finally agreed and nerfed him. Well, Lord Jaraxxus shares several similarities with Boom, but they are exacerbated by certain aspects of the current meta.
I understand that Lunacy Mage is top of mind for everyone at the moment, but that deck seems a lot worse than it is, simply because it's fun to play and therefore popular. Meanwhile, Control Warlock has quietly maintained win rates that rival or exceed Lunacy Mage, and this will only get worse when the hate-of-the-week decks get nerfed.
I hope Team 5 is able to recognize this problem before they decide on the next round of nerfs, or things will be a whole lot worse than they are now.
Refreshing Spring Water --> 5 mana
Font of Power --> 2 mana
Deck of Lunacy --> Transform spells in your deck into random* ones that cost (1) more.
There's no need to change Apexis Blast. These other nerfs would fix the problem.
*The word "random" should have appeared on the original card for the sake of accuracy and consistency.
Considering all the more problematic cards in the meta, you've sure chosen a strange one to complain about.
"Evergreen" is not a spectrum; it's binary. A set is either evergreen or it isn't. The fact that they could change out literally every card next year means it isn't.
The whole point of the Core set is that it is NOT evergreen.
I'm tired of all but Flik Skyshiv. That is a fantastic card, strategic but not overbearing.
I'm glad to see the end of all the Galakronds. I guess I just don't like Hero cards. I hated all the Death Knights, and I hated all of these. I'm no fan of Jaraxxus, either, but at least he's the only one left.
I guess The Amazing Reno's not so bad once you get past the poof, but I did hate having to play around that stupid poof.
It's funny how everyone seems to love singleton decks, but eventually everyone starts to hate the payoff cards. I'm definitely tired of all the singleton legendaries.
But for me, the card that should have made this list is Khartut Defender. It doesn't matter whether I'm aggro, midrange, or control; I always hate to see this guy show up and stop the fun.