Yeah, the united in Stormwind meta was trash.
I think ignite is fine so long as mages can’t draw their whole deck too fast.
That was the biggest issue with ignite. As an inevitability just tossed in a deck with limited draw, the card is perfectly reasonable.
I hate rune of the archmage, but that just because I find the constant presence of “cast a bunch of random spells” to be pretty overdone at this point.
We basically have 8 years of that nonsense between yogg, yogg box, cyclone, and now rune of the archmage.
The point is that.
Ignite is not fine.
That cards weaks any deck that not depends on it as Win condition.
If you put it in the table to calculate…
Unless you play the same ignite atleast 4 times ON AVERAGE the card is a net negative for your deck.
3 times if you play with spell damage synergy.
You could literally run a 29 draws + ignite deck and it would still bad without spell damage or some weird combo.
The card should be buffed to 3 damage.
That’s why ignite is fine. You don’t want a card that can act as a self contained win condition to also be a card you want to put into most decks.
1 Like
Then not blame blizzard when matches get polarized.
Without that type of card players gonna never get out of that situation.
In the end of the day instead of getting upset that a possibility exists people can and should think on how often it happens.
For ignite that answer is around being worse than Quest priest even with more buildaround.
I dont mind rng but the biggest powercreep problem is mana cheat powercreep.
I feel rogues 4 mana spell cost zero card needs a nerf, even though rogue is my faveroute card this card is very unhealthy and is the kind of powercreep i dont like to see.
Manacheat powercreep is something that i dont like i feel cards that cost 0 mana are very bad for the game.
2 Likes
Yup, something like 5-mana 3/4 would be acceptable IMO. Balinda could be nerfed too, paradoxically by buffing its stats to 6/6 for example.
It’s the best card in a deck that generates a lot of complaints. I find it highly likely they would go after the mana cheating instead of the RNG cards, and Rune on turn 4 fits the bill.
Just don’t be surprised if it happens.
I think there exists no meta where rune is a relevant card and the majority of players enjoy that meta.
Enjoyment when a card like rune is played is purely one-sided (the side that plays it) the side for which it is played against can at best be not tilted, but it takes a lot of effort/discipline to prevent being tilted and self awareness to know when you are tilted. I mean the biggest complaint amongst pros with this card is how tilted they become when its repeated played against them, that should be saying something given they should take a more disciplined approach to the game than a casual player.
So from a game dev perspective if you weigh the pros and cons for allowing such cards to run rampant in a meta (being repeatedly played turn after turn in many games), you must be ignorant or just not doing due diligence if you let it be. You are just grinding down what little patience your player base has left for dealing with the BS in your game.
I don’t think they need to nerf rune. I know my portrait is mage but i dont play mage in standard atm. I think rune’s problem is that there are too many cheap spells with high tempo effects and not enough big spells that also affect the mage. The one sidedness of rune is what makes it feel so bad. Yog box wasn’t nearly as upsetting for people. I think rune will get worse with the release of more sets. If it doesn’t it will probably get nerfed to either cast fewer mana of spells or the mana cheat cards will get nerfed. I think the answer is actually more spells for mage that arent super cheap and high tempo.
1 Like
Isn’t it funny how at times like this, the desire is to actually have bad cards (AKA “filler”) designed? 
3 Likes
Do you mean lower powerlevel cards so rune of the archmage has weaker cards ?
Exactly. Similarly, we could use more bad dragons and mechs.
2 Likes
Well…
If were going to have that type of RNG back were better without it.
People get even more tilted when the chance of a event they did dislike was low but happens anyway.
They get on that “why me?” situation.
Again…
Blizzard should incentivize people on getting over it.
Not make they even more dependant.
Of course. Randomness, to a point, along with many variables helps to make matches feel unique. This allows for more decision making, as well as making educated guesses as to what opponents are likely to draw and generate. We need some RNG. Extreme randomness, as in the case of Rune of the Archmage, can feel bad, though, because such cards can disregard decision making (both before and after the spell is played).
On the other side of the extreme is a deck like Quest Warrior, wherein the gameplay is so linear and predictable that this is no fun, either. We need a balance of randomness and determinism.
4 Likes
It wasn’t a extreme for people when it was release.
What changed?
If i would guess it isn’t even the card. Is just it’s cumulating with people salty about the deck using it as argument rather than believe it.
In other words. A lie.
I think the rune is fine the problem is mancheat in rogue and mage and druid atm thats what i think.
Rune can feel bad same with jacpot i agree that rng leads to unique games but there needs to be a limit i gues or make manacheat less idk.
It’s a fine statement but how we change this without you know…
Breaking the classes.
Lets wait for new cards see how the meta changes 
2 Likes
What’s changed is the spell pool. The pool is better overall than it was at the release of Rune.
1 Like
