Hearthstone's Senior Game Designer, Dean Ayala is back on track after his wedding and answering questions this evening on Hearthstone's Wild game mode. Read on for our recap and the full context.
- There are no currently planned balance changes for Wild.
- They want to see how the first expansion of the year goes before considering changes to Wild.
- If they believed the playerbase as a whole wanted certain changes, they would act upon it.
- The goal is that Wild is the place you can go to enjoy decks you love the most for as long as you want.
- Outliers like Naga Sea Witch, SN1P-SN4P, and Barnes crossed the line.
- They don't have an issue changing cards that cross the line, though they don't have any hard rules set.
- Darkest Hour Lock, Quest Mage, Secret Mage, and Mech Paladin are the decks they've looked at.
Dean also makes a mention of "rotating formats" and asking if anyone likes any particular format for them. Would you like a new format for playing constructed Hearthstone? What would your ideal format look like?
Congrats to Dean and Molly!
Archetypes Being Watched in Wild
Quote From Dean Ayala Of all decks, I think Darkest Hour Lock, Quest Mage, Secret Mage, and Mech Paladin are the ones we look closest at. (Source)
Darkest Hour and Mech Paladin because they create the most early/mid game states that feel impossible to overcome. (Source)
Quest Mage because of vast population size and the feeling that it invalidates grindy control archetypes Wild players tend to enjoy playing. (Source)
And Quest Mage because of a strong population and power level that could drive it to be more populous over time. (Source)
In our current thoughts, none of these decks have crossed the line to the point where we feel the need to step in and adjust them, though we do certainly talk about and evaluate them as time goes by. (Source)
Dean's Tweets
Quote From Dean Ayala Dear Team 5 dev (@IksarHS @Celestalon @Chris_Attalus @Songbird_HS)please, I beg you: do something for Wild players! You are doing an amazing job with HS & BG, please don’t forget about us!
No plans for balance changes in Wild. Wild is always going to be a place where very slow control decks have a hard time with extreme power combos that utilize all cards in Hearthstone history. Quest Mage is one example of this but there are many others.
Wild balance changes are mostly reserved for extreme unfun power swings in early/mid game or an archetype that appears that is considerably more powerful than all others.
One thing that I don't understand is, why you're so strict about Blizzard's philosophy around Wild, when almost like 99% of the actual Wild players are begging you for some nerfs to make other cards more visible. Nothing against you, I love what you do, but #WildNeedsNerfs.
If we believed 99% of Wild players wanted something, we would act on it. The reality is there is nothing ever close to being that agreed upon. I think different forms of media can be echo chambers for a particular desire, but they aren't always representative of the playerbase. (Source)
Hmm, interesting, thanks for your thoughts. I just gave up a long time ago asking for changes regarding Wild, because I know I just can't do anything to prove that some interactions are really annoying and unfair - as one person on twitter. (As I know your desires for Wild bal.)
The spirit of Wild is that it's the place you can go to enjoy whatever deck you love most for as long as you want. Standard is a place where metas shift more rapidly and set rotation shakes up the cards available to force change. (Source)
I imagine there are probably Wild players out there that would enjoy meta shifts and shakeups more often as well as Standard players who wish they wouldn't have to swap decks as often to be competitive. (Source)
Our hope is that we can stay true to the spirit of each format while addressing the outliers in Wild like Sea Witch, SN1P, Barnes, etc. It's totally possible Quest Mage crosses the threshold of being one of those outliers, it's just not something we have plans for right now. (Source)
I wish I could give you some ruleset of guideline to follow of when that line will be crossed, but it's something we'll have to feel out over time. Population size, power level, and community feedback all play a role in that. (Source)
Imo I feel that others (and even my frustrations) at times come from wanting to be able to use old cards but not be as burdened by the god tier strategies that constantly destroy. I think a third format that utilizes a restricted card pool might help alleviate some frustrations.
If the goal is to be able to use old cards but not run into very powerful synergistic decks then I would agree Wild is probably not the ideal environment for that. Have you heard of any rotating format ideas you liked a lot?
hey dean, could you elaborate a bit more now that we're on this topic, esp. regarding quest mage? china has a much larger wild playerbase than the rest of the world combined, and quest mage is one of the most frequent topics on chinese hs forums
I mentioned this some other places, but I'm just referring to plans we have made for the near future. We'd like to see how the first expansion of the year shakes out before re-evaluating Wild. (Source)
I hate making black and white statements because opinions can always change. However, our stance on Wild is that it is not a place where consistent balance changes are likely to happen. (Source)
Part of the identity of Wild is that it's a place where you are generally more safe from a constantly fluctuating meta environment like Standarad can be at times. (Source)
Of all decks, I think Darkest Hour Lock, Quest Mage, Secret Mage, and Mech Paladin are the ones we look closest at. (Source)
Darkest Hour and Mech Paladin because they create the most early/mid game states that feel impossible to overcome. (Source)
Quest Mage because of vast population size and the feeling that it invalidates grindy control archetypes Wild players tend to enjoy playing. (Source)
And Quest Mage because of a strong population and power level that could drive it to be more populous over time. (Source)
In our current thoughts, none of these decks have crossed the line to the point where we feel the need to step in and adjust them, though we do certainly talk about and evaluate them as time goes by. (Source)
Comments
My 2 cents: its obvious that balancing standard is a lot easier than balancing standard and wild at the same time.
1. If the main object of Wild is being able to play your good old rotated standard deck for as long as you like than balancing is completely out of the question since you can then never change the cards in wild, since balancing is changing something because there is no balance anymore.
2. With a bigger number of cards in the pool and therefore exponentially more combinations to build decks, balancing wild is something your most advanced supercomputer will not be able to do for you, so the only way Blizzard can do something is by monitoring the community and hsreplay and reacting to that when things get "out of hand" too much, which is a completely informal and unprecise notion, and will therefore never please all players.
3. I think things would be more "balanced" if you are forced to switch decks now and then, which would reduce your chances of being queued against the same OP deck too often, since that is probably what ppl are complaining about, they face certain decks too often (and lose) and then they feel bad. Do not ban the deck, just try to find a way to not queue against the same deck all the time. But in practice that is what almost all ppl do, they react to the meta and adjust. So no need for an in-game change to the same effect.
4. All decks can be countered by another deck, just use an identical deck if all else fails, if you can't beat them, join them. So complaining about an OP deck is a little bit like eating your own tail. If you do not want to play serious, you can always try the innkeeper. He will not hit you with a secret mage deck for sure.
Yeah, you can enjoy whatever deck you love as long as you don't expect to rank up AT ALL. Maybe they should remove wild ladder then if it's not supposed to be balanced and competitive.
I still don't understand this mindset. As T5 said you are supposed to be able to enjoy playing whatever you want, with the caveat of rare exceptions. The goal has never been to basically turn wild into standard with just a larger card pool (by gutting every consistent card and deck out there).
EVERY successful card game out there has had an eternal format (a format that mostly goes untouched in terms of balance changes) so that people who actually put forth a lot of money and/or time can actually benefit from longevity and nostalgia from their cards. There are many many competitive wild decks out there. The problem lies in people being sheep and letting tier deck trackers dictate what they 'can' successfully play on wild ladder, when in reality many many tier 1 and tier 2 decks are very capable of getting to rank 5 and clear up to legend. Hell, back during the Even Shaman meta in 2019 (pre nerf) I got to legend for the first time (honestly first time breaking past rank 5) with Reno Dragon Priest. Was almost anybody playing it? Not a chance, but it took advantage of what was being played (aggressive decks).
The same thing can happen with today's wild meta, without going on some weird crusade and purge an eternal wild format of half of its cards/decks. The key lies in taking chances with decks that aren't just being copy pasta'd as the 'only' workable wild ladder decks.
EDIT: It also stands being said that yes you can enjoy any deck you want to play, but some decks are NOT designed to be competitive decks (Often because there is some inherent flaw in their win condition, if they have one, or they lack something crucial in the deck itself or the playstyle. E.g. Many competitive decks need some form of pressure, whether it be chip damage, one or more swing turns for tempo, burst damage or another form of finisher. Sometimes a deck that lacks one or more of those things will not be able to compete regardless of what other decks exist in the wild ladder.).
You don't need to be highly skilled to predict that a person using crutches will still lose most marathons against typically-bodied runners who are not olympiads. Taking the professional athletes out of the running (pun intended) will not prevent the person on crutches from facing a disadvantaged competition.
They should add another mode where they can rotate the most broken cards from wild into that mode.
I'm pretty sure there are many broken cards right now at wild that are no fun.
No fun for who?
They said if the playerbase as a whole felt something was a problem they would act. Clearly not all of us have some wild format hive mind that says we all hate aggro, or otks, or control, or midrange. It's easy to mic drop a blanket statement and say 'everyone' or 'most wild players' hate such and such, but how do you actually objectively and accurate prove that is really the case and should be nerfed or rotated into a different format?
I just really dislike priest for how annoying resurrect is.
I want a rotating format so bad. I would love to play my old cards without having to go up against the most OP decks imaginable. That's one of the things I like about rank 20-10 in wild. No one's playing busted garbage like odd paladin and quest mage, so you get to see the cards or decks you might miss, like Jade Idol and Deathstalker Rexxar.
The problem with that is regardless of what you rotate out (whether in wild or standard) the meta dust will settle eventually and optimized lists will start forming again with what cards are left. While I play for fun, and ocasionally for a good deck, some players do just play for hard consistency.
So while Timmy may want to roll with his N'Zoth Control Pally he will still have to roll against Sally's weakened wild aggro deck that will still frustrate Timmy.
When the meta has settled, it will be time for the next rotation. That's what is appealing in a rotating format, you don't need to be bored waiting for 3 more months for another card set (and still hope this given set really shakes the meta)...
Fair point, but there still will be boredom even in that type of format for the players that do get bored more easily. Some cards, when rotated back in, would warp the meta to some degree.
For example, any class that has one of the stronger KotFT DKs would most likely have their winrates skyrocket during the rare time any of those particular cards were eventually rotated back in for a season (particularly Gul'Dan and Jaina). The same can be said for a number of other cards, albeit to a lesser degree than the DKs, when they would also be rotated in.
I picture such a rotating format to be like some pseudo arena format in so much as you can more or less determine which classes will most likely be the top 3 or 4 classes based on what tools they have available in their class pool for that period. You'd just be able to actually draft your decks without the randomness of the arena draft system.
All in all a rotating system would have significantly less staleness by comparison, but the format would still have its own 'mini storm' of stale predictability. Priests have powerful midrange dragons and the tools the other classes have don't strongly repel that? Guess we're stuck with Dragon Priest for a month? Warlocks or mages have their DK while the other classes don't have theirs guess you're never winning the value game with another class for a month. While such scenarios could be reduced in length depending on how and how long rotations actually last there's not much preventing the cream of the crop for any particular playstyle or deck from dominating their own respective mini metas.
Really, the only gripe I have about wild is that it is constantly overwhelmed with Big Priest. But, that's the class. Things die, then come back... lather, rinse, repeat.
Loved Wild for the variety and creativity of the decks, but over the past year it's become staler than Standard. I usually play a game until I run into a Secret Mage/Mech Paladin and then switch formats.
It's staler because that is how eternal formats work. Changes to the wild format do happen (hence why you no longer see Christmas Tree or Secret Pally as top offenders anymore despite having no real direct nerfs and various other top wild decks from older metas), but since the card pool is much larger and power creep has to one-up itself to massive effect you see changes happen much less frequently.
In standard all you have to do to change a meta is nerf a couple cards here and there, rotate out a few cards here and there, or just release a couple unique powerhouses to change the comparatively small meta. In wild you have give control something better than Gul'Dan or Jaina, give combo something better than Rez Priest, give OTKs something better than Mecha'Thun Lock, etc to make a difference. Or wait until enough expansions provide enough powerhouses over time to create a new tier 1 or 0 deck altogether, which may take many months of new very powerful synergies.
so TL;DR "nothing"
I’ve been saying for a while now, the best option to try and balance Wild is to add a third play mode that is either 1) Wild but with bans on certain cards, or 2) a format with rotating cards sets that include a mix of Wild and Standard sets. Could rotate monthly even, or to make it easier, it could just match the set rotation in Arena. I’d actually be fine with either one.
I’ve actually been playing a lot more Wild lately. My favorite deck in the format currently is titled “Galak Gun Priest” in my decks. It’s an old fashioned Mind Blast combo priest, includes Galakrond and Awken the Makers. It’s at 17-14 playing lower ranks, currently rank 9 or 8.
Personally, I feel like if you are just playing for fun in Wild there are a lot of fun decks to play, and to play against. And when your fun deck occasionally crush people playing meta decks that don’t know what they are doing, it feels REALLY good!
Like you and several others have said, just make a constructed mode that mirrors the arena rotation. This is the simplest solution and it will allow for other strategies outside of the normal meta decks.
Then maybe make 2 new arena formats to mirror the constructed: A standard only and a all cards arena.
It's worthwhile recognising that the majority of complaints regarding balance in Wild (and Standard, for that matter) are simply folks expressing their distaste for a particular deck, rather than honest criticisms of the state-of-the-game. Three sites currently track the older format (maybe others I'm not aware of), and the three sites all rank the Wild meta-game differently, which is frankly more suggestive than the complaints which accumulate on casual gaming fan-sites like this, or the subreddit.
Folks complaining about OP decks in Wild are better off simply avoiding the format - to no one's surprise, the meta-game in eternal format CCGs is always far more degenerate than in limited formats. That's their allure. Bitching about it makes about as much sense as bitching about the lazy devs in MtG, who have never gotten around to nerfing Black Lotus and the Moxen, or Force of Will and Dual Lands. Folks that enjoy playing eternal formats enjoy playing degenerate shit. Many of the complaints that have dogged the format since it debuted honestly seem to amount to nothing other than players discovering that they don't enjoy playing degenerate shit - or, more likely, that they actually enjoy playing degenerate shit, but get upset when degenerate shit is played against them . . .
I disagree with these Comments.
1. Saying that most People complain about Decks „just because they don't like it" is a gross Simplification of what the Players think imo. Most Threads that I've seen that complain about Quest-Mage and Mechathunlock (not counting in the official Salt-Thread) say that these Decks are so frustrating to play against because there's not much you can do to interact with them.
2. The Winrates of these Decks do not (necessarily) represent how it feels to actually play against them. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Big Priest just at a 50-Something Winrate? And yet, it still managed to become one of the most despised Decks in History of Wild.
3.
So are these Players supposed to just sit there and accept the State of Wild as it is? You know that OP is short Overpowered, as in out of Control, right? Imagine pre-Nerf Barnes, Naga Sea Witch or Echo being accepted with the same attitude.
4.
I don't know where you got that Idea from, but I and probably most of the People that enjoy these kinds of Formats, play Wild because, well, that's where all the Cards are. And I can assure you that People want it to be balanced just as Standard is. I mean, the Fact that Posts, that talk about Changes in Wild, are always heavily commented on, shows that People don't like Degenerate Shit, no Matter the Format.
Can't upvote this comment up enough.
I think it's also fair to mention that many of those players complaining about a particular deck or two in wild, instead of the overall state of the game, also have blatant biases for why they target just those particular decks in the format.
Usually it comes down to wild control players not wanting to play against aggro because they sometimes lose the match-up, and say wild aggro is imbalanced, or that otks are unfair and take too long so they want otks butchered (See a reoccurring trend here?) Too many complaints don't talk about wild to make subtle tweaks to the format to round out the format's rough edges, but really would seek to warp the format into something that butchers their unfavored match-ups and unenjoyed decks.