I don't see any Face Hunter or Secret Paladin or Keleseth Rogue or whatever old deck in current Wild meta.
Hell I don't even see Even Shaman or Jade Druid anymore.
Wild is not a nostalgia place, except for very few (lucky) decks. It cannot be ofc, so why trying to tell us this BS?
We don't even ask for a dynamic meta btw. We just ask for a NON-OPPRESSIVE one with few nearly flawless t1 decks that live in a powerlevel of their own.
I'm also sad they consider new player experience secondary in development because of their population: maybe this is exactly the CAUSE why new players are a minority in the game?!?
Card sounds powerful but it's actually not worth a deck slot. Just compare with Gnomeferatu: same cost but unconditional, with full body, burns the card without any replacement at all (and as a battlecry it can also be repeated with proper synergy).
But yeah, like in Mario Kart or Crash Team Racing, who's ahead can't get the best weapons, just the most trollish ones.
From Wild POV, we have a buff to any kind of Aggro/Tempo Rogue, a possible buff to Odd Warrior (an attempt at a Tempo build?!?), and a buff to Darkglare Warlock (which, however, might be the trigger for a nerf of Standard cards). Oh and a possible buff to Shudderwock Shaman as well.
Not sure it's gonna help the meta to shift away from the current situation tho.
What is certain now is that Ancient Mysteries, Arcane Flakmage and Cloud Prince were designed and never nerfed mainly with Wild purposes (since Secret Mage will not be a serious thing in the meta for the time being, and those cards were never really impactful in Standard, especially Flakmage, while being obviously OP): with all due respect for professionals, a kid would've done a better job there.
Experience on D5+ is full of Secret Mage, Big Priest, Reno Priest, Odd Paladin. Similar to report.
Teching is overstimated. You can easily lose against Secret Mage despite playing Flare and Reno, since they simply vomit absurd amounts of Tempo while denying yours. You need equally absurd amounts of denyal to survive, and even racing them with Aggro is far from obvious.
Finally, even if you optimize against Secret Mage, your deck is still probably unfavoured against Big Priest and Reno Priest, with few exceptions.
Reno Priest itself is not far from being just as powerful (that is, a nearly flawless matchup spread) it's just less evident, and it's gonna be painful if they ever just nerf Secret Mage without touching Priest.
I'm not playing ladder again until next season or nerf.
Wait, I thought there's going to be a Classic set overhaul together with next Rotation? I was pretty sure they announced it as part of the Year of the Phoenix calendar?
All in all, besides my own homebrews, the first deck I can remember I sticked on for a while was Jade Even Shaman. From there, I realized I like Tempo style the most.
A good contender is Oil Rogue, but I am not very good at decks based on swing turns... Even when I can do it, I feel some sort of fatigue I don't have when playing more straightforward Tempo stuff.
At the moment I must say I am in love with Wild ETC Warrior (trying to refine a Galakrond version), and Standard Control Priest (I wish it was portable to Wild but it just pales against Raza Priest).
In particular, the Birb should stay as it is and Raza Priest should be nerfed instead.
Other Reno decks are ok (considered the general meta balance of power) and don't need any bullying: just give OTK decks a slightly better margin (by nerfing Raza Priest) and all will settle.
Btw, A Reno Priest back to Dragon or N'zoth package could still easily run Illucia for combo disruption... The fact current Raza Priest don't even bother with such a card is telling of the distorted state of things atm.
And the Birb is not the correct solution.
I'm also not sure of full Galakrond unnerf. Maybe one card for Shaman, but all of them, no thanks. (And I am a fan of Galakrond Warrior and Tempo in general, but the powercreep would be just too much).
Some toxicly retarded stuff like Big Priest, Big Shaman and secondarily Odd Paladin will still be there, but hopefully in a contained population.
The above would arguably fix both Wild and Standard for the time being.
Raza isnt the issue at all, never ever has been. the issue is a Anduin and imo aslo Reno + their isane removal/aoe package that makes them stay alive so ealsy with out of jail card(reno) and beat control ith combo.
I actually agree.
But I wonder how long till they release a new flawed Hero Power... But yeah, if that was out of doubt, it's true that Raza per se is not an issue - repeatable Hero Power is.
True that they have insane survival package, but that's fairly normal for a Control deck.
Issue atm is that Reno Priest is at the same time a top tier Control AND Combo deck.
Since the Control part can't be easily nerfed, the Combo part must be heavily impaired.
The above would arguably fix both Wild and Standard for the time being.
Lightning bloom and voracious reader I can sort of understand, but nerf risky skipper, palm reading, and aldrachi warblades?
Man you really must hate those cards a great deal. Especially Palm Reading, of which in your proposed nerf might as well just erase it from existence.
Palm Reading is effectively a Ramp card in Priest. Add it to a class with Big archetype available and you're in for idiotic matches. And it's bound to grow worse in Wild (where it is already a staple for all Priest meta archetypes).
Aldrachi Warblades nerf is quite obvious tbh. Leeching Poison nerf already happened for similar reasons. You can't have durable lifesteal on highly buffable weapons. Especially in an already more than solid class. Even more so if you decide to design a card like Il'gynoth.
Risky Skipper is admittedly daring, but I really don't know what to touch in Warrior. Skipper is one of the great staples.
I only hate less than half of the cards I suggested for nerfs, but either way I do have fairly good reasons.
Especially if you do not play Wild, why do you even care?
Do you ever see Wild players suggesting to Standard that they should just tech up eg with Platebreaker and Acidic Swamp Ooze and stop asking for nerfs?
Or maybe we can agree that too much is too much in whatever mode?
As a gold saver and hoarder, I don't see too much the problem of being unable to buy some packs: I buy all I can afford upon release and leave some 4-5k for the future.
But I see what you mean. I also bought regular packs when my collection was poor.
Imo, as I wrote in a previous post, I think they should first of all fix the damn xp curve, make it slower to progress in the first 20-25 levels, and slightly faster afterwards: right now the feeling of a wall is depressing. Progress should feel slow, but progress nonetheless.
Then they should absolutely think of a deeper reward system, where gold is the most basic income, NOT the ultimate reward.
When you quest with a character, you get xp AND gold: levels up should unlock game perks (ie stuff, cards, heroes in BG and Duels, instead of binding them to silly paywalls), maybe gold too, but there should be a way to earn small amounts of gold bound to quests.
Dust could also be a level up currency.
Wild cards too!
Oh and make weekly quest bigger: more average time required, as well as more xp rewarded.
Imo xp track is a great way to involve people to regular gametime, but right now they are wasting the chance to make it work properly for some short-sighted corporate policy.
Imo the real problem with the xp track is that the curve accelerates too fast.
It's going to be a real pain to feel any real progression beyond level 30, because level requirements rise exponentially, with a too high exponent imo.
Everyone's talking of gold, which is important, but progression is everything in any xp system: if you feel none despite quite some investment, and if all you get is a dull bunch of gold (in character-based games slow progression is compensated by new perks that change the way you play or its quality), interest will drop soon into the same flatness as the old system - or worse because of exhaustion.
Updated the deck to what I think is its final version, with more Freeze synergy and Polkelt.
I also added some more tips in the guide.
Yeah I also went further with incanter's flow, and also trying with Research Project. I think 1x Research is good, 2x might be too much.
I said non-oppressive, not equal chances for everyone.
Non-oppressive is when t1 decks have clear flaws in their matchup spread, and that can be achieved by nerfing overtuned cards.
That's the difference. "There will always be a t1" is not an argument because complaints are not against the abstract cathegory of t1.
I don't see any Face Hunter or Secret Paladin or Keleseth Rogue or whatever old deck in current Wild meta.
Hell I don't even see Even Shaman or Jade Druid anymore.
Wild is not a nostalgia place, except for very few (lucky) decks. It cannot be ofc, so why trying to tell us this BS?
We don't even ask for a dynamic meta btw. We just ask for a NON-OPPRESSIVE one with few nearly flawless t1 decks that live in a powerlevel of their own.
I'm also sad they consider new player experience secondary in development because of their population: maybe this is exactly the CAUSE why new players are a minority in the game?!?
Card sounds powerful but it's actually not worth a deck slot. Just compare with Gnomeferatu: same cost but unconditional, with full body, burns the card without any replacement at all (and as a battlecry it can also be repeated with proper synergy).
But yeah, like in Mario Kart or Crash Team Racing, who's ahead can't get the best weapons, just the most trollish ones.
From Wild POV, we have a buff to any kind of Aggro/Tempo Rogue, a possible buff to Odd Warrior (an attempt at a Tempo build?!?), and a buff to Darkglare Warlock (which, however, might be the trigger for a nerf of Standard cards). Oh and a possible buff to Shudderwock Shaman as well.
Not sure it's gonna help the meta to shift away from the current situation tho.
What is certain now is that Ancient Mysteries, Arcane Flakmage and Cloud Prince were designed and never nerfed mainly with Wild purposes (since Secret Mage will not be a serious thing in the meta for the time being, and those cards were never really impactful in Standard, especially Flakmage, while being obviously OP): with all due respect for professionals, a kid would've done a better job there.
Stats from report say otherwise. Look at the matchup spread.
Even assuming the report is somehow distorted, Secret Mage is not really as unfavoured against the decks you mentioned.
Experience on D5+ is full of Secret Mage, Big Priest, Reno Priest, Odd Paladin. Similar to report.
Teching is overstimated. You can easily lose against Secret Mage despite playing Flare and Reno, since they simply vomit absurd amounts of Tempo while denying yours. You need equally absurd amounts of denyal to survive, and even racing them with Aggro is far from obvious.
Finally, even if you optimize against Secret Mage, your deck is still probably unfavoured against Big Priest and Reno Priest, with few exceptions.
Reno Priest itself is not far from being just as powerful (that is, a nearly flawless matchup spread) it's just less evident, and it's gonna be painful if they ever just nerf Secret Mage without touching Priest.
I'm not playing ladder again until next season or nerf.
I admire those with the guts to still try and innovate in current Wild.
Room for innovation is severly limited or non-existant and you feel like an idiot after losing to the stupidest plays of your Priest or Mage opponent.
After losing to Secret Mage despite playing Flare and Reno, I am now playing Secret Mage myself.
Now I'm winning, but I still feel like an idiot.
I agree with most suggestions.
If they actually nerfed Palm Reading, I'd even be ok with keeping board clears as they are now.
The card can easily be compared with Wild Growth - except Priest is not already overnerfed because they don't normally have ramp.
Wait, I thought there's going to be a Classic set overhaul together with next Rotation? I was pretty sure they announced it as part of the Year of the Phoenix calendar?
Was it just a dream of mine?
All in all, besides my own homebrews, the first deck I can remember I sticked on for a while was Jade Even Shaman. From there, I realized I like Tempo style the most.
A good contender is Oil Rogue, but I am not very good at decks based on swing turns... Even when I can do it, I feel some sort of fatigue I don't have when playing more straightforward Tempo stuff.
At the moment I must say I am in love with Wild ETC Warrior (trying to refine a Galakrond version), and Standard Control Priest (I wish it was portable to Wild but it just pales against Raza Priest).
Tbh I'd just unnerf Alex.
We don't need any of the other cards unnerfed.
In particular, the Birb should stay as it is and Raza Priest should be nerfed instead.
Other Reno decks are ok (considered the general meta balance of power) and don't need any bullying: just give OTK decks a slightly better margin (by nerfing Raza Priest) and all will settle.
Btw, A Reno Priest back to Dragon or N'zoth package could still easily run Illucia for combo disruption... The fact current Raza Priest don't even bother with such a card is telling of the distorted state of things atm.
And the Birb is not the correct solution.
I'm also not sure of full Galakrond unnerf. Maybe one card for Shaman, but all of them, no thanks. (And I am a fan of Galakrond Warrior and Tempo in general, but the powercreep would be just too much).
Some toxicly retarded stuff like Big Priest, Big Shaman and secondarily Odd Paladin will still be there, but hopefully in a contained population.
I actually agree.
But I wonder how long till they release a new flawed Hero Power... But yeah, if that was out of doubt, it's true that Raza per se is not an issue - repeatable Hero Power is.
True that they have insane survival package, but that's fairly normal for a Control deck.
Issue atm is that Reno Priest is at the same time a top tier Control AND Combo deck.
Since the Control part can't be easily nerfed, the Combo part must be heavily impaired.
Palm Reading is effectively a Ramp card in Priest. Add it to a class with Big archetype available and you're in for idiotic matches. And it's bound to grow worse in Wild (where it is already a staple for all Priest meta archetypes).
Aldrachi Warblades nerf is quite obvious tbh. Leeching Poison nerf already happened for similar reasons. You can't have durable lifesteal on highly buffable weapons. Especially in an already more than solid class. Even more so if you decide to design a card like Il'gynoth.
Risky Skipper is admittedly daring, but I really don't know what to touch in Warrior. Skipper is one of the great staples.
I only hate less than half of the cards I suggested for nerfs, but either way I do have fairly good reasons.
Why?
Because Wild is supposed to be Wild?
Especially if you do not play Wild, why do you even care?
Do you ever see Wild players suggesting to Standard that they should just tech up eg with Platebreaker and Acidic Swamp Ooze and stop asking for nerfs?
Or maybe we can agree that too much is too much in whatever mode?
Aldrachi Warblades: lifesteal on equip turn only.
Voracious Reader: either (3) or 2hp
Risky Skipper: either (2) or 2hp
Palm Reading: discount 1 spell only
Lightning Bloom: refresh spent mana (no temporary Ramp)
Raza the Chained: HP costs (1)
The above would arguably fix both Wild and Standard for the time being.
Thing is, the concept of xp track is VERY good, virtuous for both players and stakeholders.
However, the current implementation of it is barely decent. Definitely not as good as it could and should be.
The community is crying out of hysteria, and that is of no help, but Blizz is not delivering correctly.
Also, it's taking too long for them for a proper reaction.
As a gold saver and hoarder, I don't see too much the problem of being unable to buy some packs: I buy all I can afford upon release and leave some 4-5k for the future.
But I see what you mean. I also bought regular packs when my collection was poor.
Imo, as I wrote in a previous post, I think they should first of all fix the damn xp curve, make it slower to progress in the first 20-25 levels, and slightly faster afterwards: right now the feeling of a wall is depressing. Progress should feel slow, but progress nonetheless.
Then they should absolutely think of a deeper reward system, where gold is the most basic income, NOT the ultimate reward.
When you quest with a character, you get xp AND gold: levels up should unlock game perks (ie stuff, cards, heroes in BG and Duels, instead of binding them to silly paywalls), maybe gold too, but there should be a way to earn small amounts of gold bound to quests.
Dust could also be a level up currency.
Wild cards too!
Oh and make weekly quest bigger: more average time required, as well as more xp rewarded.
Imo xp track is a great way to involve people to regular gametime, but right now they are wasting the chance to make it work properly for some short-sighted corporate policy.
Imo the real problem with the xp track is that the curve accelerates too fast.
It's going to be a real pain to feel any real progression beyond level 30, because level requirements rise exponentially, with a too high exponent imo.
Everyone's talking of gold, which is important, but progression is everything in any xp system: if you feel none despite quite some investment, and if all you get is a dull bunch of gold (in character-based games slow progression is compensated by new perks that change the way you play or its quality), interest will drop soon into the same flatness as the old system - or worse because of exhaustion.