Buff Flare Devs!

Hey Devs,
Can you comment on why Flare has to lose the match vs Jaina’s Counterspell?

Flare - more specific use case, like majorly, than Counterspell. Specifically designed to counter secrets.

Counterspell - Totally wide open use case, like majorly, compared to Flare. Specifically designed to counter ALL spells, including the one spell Hearthstone that is totally designed to counter secrets, such as the most played secret, Counterspell.

Here’s an example:
Zeph is in the game right?
My Mage opponent has 3 secrets up, or 5, what have you.
Zeph offers me Flare…
What’s the choice here for Rexxar devs?

Does Rex take Flare and get-it-Counterspelled?
Or dies Rex run several cheap spells, in a class that doesn’t-have non-beast, combo-preserving draw, and hope to have an unused cheap spell in hand just to trigger CS?

Like Rex can’t use Flare against Secret Mage…
Does this make sense? Is this what you want?

Flare will (the majority of the time) get Counterspelled then it’s game over. We can’t afford to run several cheap spells to counterplay Counterspell since Rexxar and 2-for-1 draw have never been friends, unless it’s beast-restricted, or Tracking which busts synergies apart for non-aggro Hunter.

  1. Flare should cost 1 mana, and/or
  2. Flare should also beat Counterspell since Flare is insanely restricted relatively.
    Either change should be patched in like yesterday.

Why is neither the case?
Can you comment on this?

In other words devs, Banana Buffoon does better vs a wall of Mage Secrets than Flare. Is this what you want Rexxar to include vs Counterspell?

Flare - 2 mana, lose to Mage-Secrets, lose to Emerald Spellstone, draw 1.
Arcanologist - 2 mana, draw your turn-3 really-good secret, develop a 2/3 in a class with a lot of burn, discover, and some-draw. Visualize the totally-gigantic gap between Arcanologist and Flare.

Devs, a Blizzcon 2019 mainstage announcement “Flare now beats Counterspell and costs 1-mana like Flare always should have!” would be the-best. If not, can’t you just add “Flare Buff” to your to-do-list for the next patch?

Flare should be iconic to Rexxar.

Thanks!

1 Like

Yep, because having a 2-cost card that makes a mage lose 6-9 mana easily is not strong enough :v

4 Likes

Because hunter doesn’t pay hefty enough of a price for ‘2-mana: draw a card’ in nearly every other matchup.

I disagree with the cost reduction, agree with the Counterspell interaction.

5 Likes

1 cost is too low for a cycle card. I wouldn’t mind an line added to flare that this card will not activate any secret. I don’t like special case cards, but seems to make sense for this.

1 Like

It used to cost one mana and got nerfed to two mana. I also agree about counterspell interaction. Sadly, I don’t think it’s going to change. Some proposals have already been made, such as turning it into a weapon, the flare-gun. I think it would be nice to have another category of cards, something like items or artifacts. Flare doesn’t fit as a spell, in my opinion.

1 Like

Flare is designed by its text to be anti-secret.
it’s not anti-secret, at all, because counterspell.
Like do you see this angle from a Rexxar player?

Mages have arcanologist
like…
Mages have research and AI, and generation.

These are all tools that rex doesn’t have, and we can’t even counter mages secrets with our targeted anti secret card, for a fair cost at that, since it’s nerfed to 2 mana from 1.

I hope you understand, if you don’t, try queing Rexxar into Mage. Then you’ll see how underpowered Flare is vs what it is designed to counter…mage secrets.

Like play Flare against any mage secrets. See how it feels.
IF Flare were 1 mana, it wouldn’t feel as bad.

Counterspell is one out of how many Secrets, across three different classes that utilize Secrets all the way back to the Classic set?

No.

That’s like saying “filling your board with aggressive minions is not a good strategy, at all, because AOE exists.

3 Likes

War - lets be honest.
Mage and counterspell IS secrets.

Like, rexxar’s secrets flare loses to since Emerald still retains it’s +2 3/3’s through a Flare. So, Flare doesn’t counter Rex secrets either.

Nobody plays Rogue secrets, and they don’t matter in Illusionist to the pt where Flare is a deciding card.

Paladin secrets sure, the fringe-deck that isn’t mage, and doesn’t warp the meta.

Mage secrets is the whole big deal, and counterspell deny’s Flare totally from working, for 2 mana at that.

I wish you could see the rexxar side of things and how
Flare should either cost 1
or
Flare should counter CS.

Saying no to both of these things…
Like specifically let me ask you.

Do you think Flare should cost 2?
If so, why?
Why would 1 cost Flare that loses to CS be OP and not-ok for the game?
We’re just talking cost-here, not winning vs CS.
Right?

counterpsell does this to all spells

but people who dont like consistency in games been complaining about this for a while

2 Likes

I am being honest. The entire argument that you’re putting forth is intellectually dishonest.

If course it does, because Emerald Spellstone is based on Secrets played, not triggered. You wanting it to work the other way doesn’t make it a shortcoming of Flare.

Which is why I didn’t mention Rogue in the three classes that use Secrets back to Classic.

If you wanna look at meta-warping, look at MechLock, not Secret Mage.

I’m looking at the whole game side of things, where I don’t make game-balancing requests based entirely on my personal preferences in a format that will not see Standard cards buffed/nerfed unless they are completely breaking Wild. Secret Mage is not what’s breaking Wild. Your preference for Hunter and dislike for Counterspell doesn’t change that fact.

Because 2 mana for such a potentially powerful effect like a full sweep of Secrets is quite acceptable.

Refer to my above answer.

I’d personally be fine if Flare beat CS, but it the way CS works makes sense in that it beats Flare. Either way, 2 mana is fine.

War,
Flare does not sweep secrets.
Counterspell IS secrets.

Like you don’t seem to understand the frequency.
I don’t think you see paladin/rexxar secrets like in any way on the level of mage, and/or ever will.

2 mana for a sweep of secrets WOULD be powerful IF that could happen, which it cannot since CS trumping it.

Like there are so many things going on here.
You have to realize Rex doesn’t have arcanologist, visions, tutor for specifically Flare. We first have to totally luck out and draw it.

Like that right there is the ‘penalty’ for having an antisecret card…it cannot be tutored period end, no tracking isn’t reliable to-tutor for it.

You didn’t answer why a 1-cost flare would be inappropriate and totally game-breaking relative to 2, you said “see my answer above” which is not outlying exactly why you are totally against a 1 mana flare and totally for a 2 mana flare, that also loses to CS btw.

I am looking at the whole game side of things as well, not just some personal satisfaction…such as…rexxar having a 1 for 1 cycle is NOT op, at all, and would be fair and balanced to open up deckbuilding.

Secret Mage does warp the meta, its not irrelevant, I wish you wouldn’t sweep secret mage as last year’s deck that cannot win often now.

My point about emerald is Flare already has a soft counter in Rexxar secrets, not that I wish Flare would delete the Emerald Buff. Geesh.

I thought you would be supportive of a game-opening change, like rex having a 1 for 1 draw, but it doesn’t seem you like the idea of not-meta rexxar’s getting any love.

Again, specifically state why 2 mana is just right but 1 mana cycle in rex is too op can’t happen. Also, state why you think CS totally should be able to beat Flare, even though one card is way more specific you know?

CS - universally good
Flare - only good vs secrets.

That’s a penalty right there, a drawback to running flare. And in its success case…a mage having secrets out…it loses. Also, rex doesn’t have draw to assemble a flare btw, so double drawback pre-flare even going off.

Like do you understand how lucky a rexxar has to be to have a flare in hand when the turn comes that a mage has secrets up?

Then to get it countered, always, always repeating, bc CS is always ran, never not will be ran?

Then, it costs 2 mana, because apparently 1 is not ok, but nobody can give a clear reason why 1 mana rex cycle hurts the game?

Yes, im very passionate / confident that flare should be 1, or beat CS.
I’ve played not the most, but a LOT of rex, and I see it as a total dev-inflicted burden on the class.

This isn’t some ‘personal benefit’ thread like you labeled me as politely, ok?
Yes, i’m frustrated that you can’t seem to see where I am coming from, as someone who doesn’t play all classes, and has invested tons of time into rex, that my opinion on rex is apparently not-good-enough.

While I agree with what you say, but with HS being the topic and all, it still ends up making this very ironic.
Not that there is no reasonable inconcistency.
Breaking rules for the objective good of all is illegal, but morally difficult to question.

This is why we cannot have an intellectually honest conversation on the matter, because you’re allowing your own opinion to override your interpretation of reality.

All minions lose Stealth. Destroy all enemy Secrets. Draw a card.

Counterspell is >A< Secret. Your “I wanna play this card and beat all Secret decks” is allowed to have one card that it doesn’t work on. You wanna beat Counterspell? Use Eater of Secrets.

Secret Paladin and Mage are far, far more common and powerful than Secret Mage in the format that Standard cards are balanced around- Standard.

Then play Eater of Secrets if its so popular and so powerful. Should be a ton of easy free wins, right?

And their tutors don’t specifically draw CS. You could also pump up your anti-Secret tech count by running EoS.

You have yet to present a case in which Hunter actually needs Flare to be buffed. So far we have “because I want to beat Secret Mage more easily in Wild” which isn’t a reason that Blizzard is going to use to change the game.

If you were, that would mean acknowledging the power of Secret Highlander Hunter and Paladin over Secret Mage.

I can certainly appreciate investing the majority of one’s time into a particular class, we l have our favorites. However, that doesn’t mean that what you’re asking for is in any way necessary, given just how much more powerful Highlander Secret Hunter/Paladin are when compared to Mage. In fact, most Mage Secrets being run in Standard (again, the format around which Blizzard balances non-Wild cards) are NOT Counterspell.

Again, are you running 2x EoS?

Protip if your start 2nd, coin exist.

Even the very interaction you are against is 2 mana vs a 3 mana card. Talking about mana efficient.

War i’m not even going to continue down this path with you.
it’s as sour as it can get, and im not willing to go line by line right now.
sure some other time ill read 2nd 3rd time what you’ve stated here and see if I can open my mind to agree.

I’m not here to be a jerk, bud. My apologies if I’m coming across gruff. Have a better day.

The interaction between flare and counterspell is right because the secret is designed to act before any spell (like flare) takes effect. They would have to add something like “can’t be countered” to change this interaction

I do tend to agree with the OP in general. Specific case argument and counter card argument. Flare says it breaks secrets, but is in fact countered by a secret. That doesn’t feel right. Also secrets are only playable by 3 classes so running a counter card that only works against 3 classes tops but one of the three, if heavily invested in secrets is absolutely going to be packing the counter to your counter (that also just happens to bust several other big plays) is a serious case of #feelsbadman.

However, a quick parsing of HSReplay matchup breakdowns for several different mage specs from r5-l (somewhat ironically, secret mage missing because of a lack of matchups), shows that almost any mage archetype is having a difficult time with almost any Hunter archetype.

So in this case, even though emotionally we may feel that flare should beat counterspell, the data we have available says that hunters do not need any more help at all vs mages.

2 Likes

George, I appreciate you understanding one of my points.
“Targeted” or “Specific Use” in your words same thing, vs “Universal”.

A targeted card fairly should beat some universal card if that targeted card’s ideal target is that universal card. However, if devs want the rulebook to let CS win, so be it. CS winning is not the big demon here going on if they have to have it this way, fairness or not. The mana cost is a big deal.

Ok so i’ll try to keep this concise, as much as id love to elaborate the significance of some of the points.

Flare sucks (seriously, it really does) in BOTH it’s “Success Case” and “Fail Case”.

Flare’s Success Case:
Beating Paladin Secrets (fair for 2 mana)
Beating Rogue Secrets (fair for 2 mana, yea nobody plays them, still)
Beating Rexxar Secrets (fair for 2 mana, since Emerald Stone retains the 2 3/3s)
Beating Mage Secrets (totally not even possible, because of Counterspell).

Does this help outline “the best case” for Flare?

Nobody plays Rogue secrets so get that out of the way, nor would Flare matter in that Big Rogue matchup or what have you.

Paladin’s secrets sure destroy them for 2, working as intended, and common enough to possibly warrant a deck slot for Flare, fringe success odds at best.

Rexxar secrets - ok now this is worthy of a counter card since Rexxar cannot draw that well at all, SO, everyone resorts to Sub 9. Yes, rex draws best for aggro via Mech and Tracking, or Call and Tracking and a deck of Beasts only, but for those trying something different it’s Sub 9 and secrets. The tradeoff is 2 3/3’s get by with Emerald, so there’s a kickback to your opponent after Flare succeeds. This is why it’s fair at 2 mana and not OP vs Rexxar’s own secrets.

Mage Secrets - not a lot has to be said, Counterspell is always ran, possibly discovered, and just dominates Flare and thus the match.

So the best case for Flare is a Rexxar, Paladin, or Rogue secret-welding opponent WHILE Flare is drawn and in hand by Rexxar. Quite a lof of ‘maybes’ have to be checked for this to even happen, especially your opponent playing secrets in one of those classes, Rex being the most common for Wild by far of those 3. Lets say you want Flare in hand early? Good luck, you’re rexxar. I mean tracking, but then your deck can’t be combo. So you’re better off highlander, secret, or aggro. See the problem here? Rexxar has no freedom, just restricted draw, and it’s one non-restricted draw Flare, is nerfed.

Flare’s “Success Case” is not great, that’s the point to illustrate. The most common secret opponent, by 1/2 marathon, is Mage, and Flare has no business defending against Jaina.

How about Flare’s “Fail Case”?
2 mana - develop nothing - draw 1.
This is the bigger of the 2 problems with the card.

Class cards should be > power than neutral of the same cost and effect right?
Novice - 2 mana - 1/1 - draw.
Flare - 2 mana - 0/0 - draw. Novice is completely better, as it’s not like Rexxar has like synergy with spell outside of Lock n Load or something off the wall that is underpowered on it’s own.

So Flare’s best case is condition-heavy - no Mage opponent (since CS trumps the match), + be facing a Rex / Uther / Valeera with secrets, and yes the unreliable condition of a secret-mage that doesn’t have CS up yet - it DOES happen, less often than CS being up obviously.

Flare’s worst case is tempo-destroying, value-weak.
It’s 2 mana do nothing draw.

Again, you have to factor in Rexxar as a class can’t pre-draw to find a flare, outside of a lucky tracking, and thus a deck not-built-for combo, to where you are better off running aggro like everyone with Rex understandably does anyway. Or, you could run Highlander, which has nothing to do with omitting Flare, it’s just that Flare is so underpowered it’s not worthy of a Highlander inclusion since value matters so much w High.

Brings me to my final point and what George said.
Should a targeted card succeed/win vs a universal card?
No, it should not, but if devs want it this way, meaning Counterspell beats Flare, don’t DOUBLE punish Flare by having it’s mana cost 2.

I think the basis for the Flare nerf was old-times HS. Surely Ice Block had something to do with it then, lack of generation, lack of draw across the board for all classes. A secret was a major investment back then compared to now, so they figured Flare was OP at 1, when it’s totally underpowered at 2.

Last but not least
Eater of Secrets vs Flare (Credit Wardrum, solid contribution earlier, thx).

Fail Case
Eater is a 2/4 for 4 - game losing right there.
Flare is 2 mana draw 1 do nothing - game losing right there.

Both fail cases are bad, i’d rather have draw 1 over a 2/4 on turn 4 (or worse, after).

So yes for specifically targeting secret mage ofc EoS is stronger.
I’m talking about Flare’s Fail Case.
Where Flare is obviously better, but yet weaker than something like a neutral (and nerfed if you recall) Novice.

Like nerfed-novice > nerfed Flare in the fail case.
Say a warlock opponent.
See how bad this is? Nerfed Novice > Nerfed Flare. Like by a 1/1 stat line, and nobody runs Novice but OTK and Shark Valeera because of how underpowered it is. Now, imagine getting denied that 1/1. Enter Flare…

So i’m going to say thanks for reading all this if anyone did, I hope you see where I am coming from.

My request would be to buff Flare to 1 mana, and let Counterspell have it’s way, and if Secret Mage is such a problem (like it is in Wild obviously and clearly RN) then yes like War has said Eater’s the way for just that matchup…

And guess what would pair nicely with a Eater-teched Rexxar?
a 1 cost, not game losing Flare to find that Eater / your 2 cost / anything since 1 mana cards are way easier to play out than 2 cost.

Flare’s fail case should be the way the card is eval’d.
2 mana draw 1 is really bad (and literally do nothing else, not even a 1/1, we don’t have flamewaker or so, etc) and should be adjusted to not be this awful card you only want to run 1 of bc of how underpowered it is at 2 mana. This is my main point.

By the way, Flare’s bonus is that it’s draw is
not combo busting
not really combo assembling, since it’s only draw 1, which is way weaker than draw 2 for 1 card, or discover like visions obviously, or discover AND discount like Glpyh.

But Flares draw is FREE. meaning open. meaning it’s not restricted to “only run beasts for Master’s Call” or “Run some mechs for Ursatron” or “don’t run combo/s for Tracking”. a 1 for 1, not restricted draw would slightly open up deckbuilding in rexxar. Does this make sense? Where as a 2 for 1 is too tempo losing to equal out.

FWIW - im also a proponent that Shiv gets back to 1 for the same reason - 1 for 1 draw isn’t op where it busts the game - it’s strong enough to want to include, but doesn’t get you so much value you win from it. In the old days sure, but now adays draw 1 for 1 isn’t game breaking. Keep in mind, Priests summon a whatever behemoth they want for like 4 or 2 mana usually…just to keep things how they really are.

Thanks

Because mages are stronger in magic than hunters. Batman cannot outfly Superman.