I’m just so sick and tired of easy mode decks being op. Can’t take playing vs pally anymore.
Ehhhh they could make some basic efforts. Also, it’s not like they have to worry about most Wild nerfs hitting Standard.
We honestly don’t get that many T4/T5 kills as it is. 25% of games at best in my experience. I can deal with Incanter’s to 3. I can deal with Flamewaker not going face, too.
However, I can see a world where both of those nerfs take APM out of the meta completely, which would feel bad - especially if Secret Mage gets no nerfs, since it still is the preferred Legend deck (and Iksar plays it, which is all kind of conflict-of-interesty).
They’re going to kill mage but leave pally. Because crab won’t do anything to buff pally. Horrible bs. Mage is a tier 3 deck, yet buff pally is a TIER ZERO deck.
1 Like
I honestly think they deliberately try to keep Wild as unfun as possible for people who just want to play regular games of Hearthstone (ie non-griefers, basically). Look at the decks they support in the format, not a whole lot of dynamic decision making or interaction going on there and most are simply built to consistently deliver the same game every time regardless of what your opponent is doing, often in the most frustrating way possible (ice block, fast mana, infinite reanimation strategies, Aggro/OTK slot machines etc).
Wizards of the Coast have done a lot of focus testing around this stuff and know the kind of gameplay people typically find fun in CCGs. Their studies have shown very conclusively that games where players fight for control of the battlefield with a lot of creature (ie minion) combat are consistently rated as the most fun experiences and modern sets all take this research into account. The latest MTG set is actually a spell set based on a school of mages, for example, and they built an entire mechanic/card economy around having lots of options to summon tokens using spells because they know two people sitting across from each other looking at an empty battlefield and waiting for the game to end is not fun. Mark Rosewater, Magic’s longtime lead designer, has written about these topics extensively in his “making magic” column - I would highly recommend.
Anyway, Blizzard knows this yet they have let the same toxic net-decks run amok for years and actually keep printing more cards for them while refusing to balance Wild at all. How were they ok with resurrection priest for all those years? That deck was toxic in standard the entire time until key cards rotated out, then it didn’t get dethroned in Wild until they really stopped trying earlier this year and it was replaced by decks that are even more degenerate. Did they really not anticipate Conjure Mana Biscuit, Refreshing Spring Water and Incanter’s Flow being a problem in a deck that can easily stall a game for 4+ turns regardless of boardstate and life totals? And don’t even get me started on secret mage, which has been a problem literally as long as Wild has existed and they just keep powering it up… When was the last time a midrange deck had a chance, for example? Or even just a straight up control deck? Cubelock was probably the closest thing, but even that relied on a bunch of degenerate combos rather than just solid control decision making/deckbuilding…
So, to answer your question: I honestly think they care only so far as they can say “see? these purchases are worthwhile because you can use your cards FOREVER” while keeping the actual wild game mode as unappealing as possible. Wild players don’t buy as many packs because they would rather just craft the 2 or 3 cards that are good enough, meanwhile standard by definition involves constantly buying packs to stay competitive. So, players being turned off by wild and going to standard = $$$ for Activision, as a result Wild becomes a place for people to watch TV while grinding out games of solitaire all day.
That being said, it does sound like they’ve been taking recent criticisms to heart and maybe the company is moving toward a better place… Impeccable balance to support fun asymmetric gameplay used to be Blizzard’s specialty before Activision got involved 
They don’t “support” any deck in Wild. Every card is allowed to be played.
smh.
The fact that standard players earn Blizz money is probably true. In wild, we need very few new cards each expac. For barrens for example, 40 packs got me all the cards I wanted, including a few crafts. Even got a few which I don’t want.
1 Like
Let’s look at Constructed Magic because you’re painting WAY too rosy of a picture here:
Standard has been dominated by Eldraine (about to rotate) and to a lesser degree Ikoria (after eratta nerf to companions). While Stryx is a fun set (although I’ve heard Limited is a bit boring due to importance of lessons) it is, by far, the lowest power of any set in Standard right now outside of, maybe, M21. Stryx gave a lot of good answer spells (Verse, Test of Talents, etc.) but has barely added to the meta. The only deck it brought into existence (rally back) is a relatively straight forward deck in Winota.
Historic: Historic is worse off than it was imo with Mystical Archives from Stryxhaven. The format gained a relatively consistent 2-card win combo that can go off turn-2 (really turn 3 in non-Christmas land) and even when it doesn’t if you don’t counterspell (and not get re-counterspelled) the opponent wins on the spot with what amounts to a boring combo deck.
This has essentially forced Historic (it is mainly what I play which is why I’m typing more here) to go to a VERY aggro or tempo heavy style as Control is having issues with that combo deck (as Control normally will) and Midrange simply can’t find a home anywhere in the format as Jund Food has become too slow (but Jund CoCo is still doing fine). I didn’t even touch the best deck in the format, Orzhov Auras, which is just a deck that WotCs needs to remove Kor Spiritdancer before they build more towards Pioneer on Arena because the deck will become tier-god if they don’t remove Kor before bringing in some of the missing enchantments from a top Pioneer deck
Pioneer is in a relatively healthy spot though =)
My point being here is that WotC is FAR from getting this very right. They do MUCH better on their older formats (Modern, Pioneer, Legacy, etc.) but Standard has barely changed at all since, what?, rotation basically?
1 Like
How much do we want Wild constantly moving?
Wild has a lot more cards to try and counteract decks when they get overrepresented. Whether through direct teching or meta shifting to attack a deck. As such, unless a broken interaction is found the format should receive less nerfs and buffs than Standard because we, the players, have more cards and strategies to test and try to naturally evolve the meta.
The data is literally showing this happening to APM Mage. Secret Mage can be targeted quite easily, and maybe Handbuff Paladin can be as well. I know personally I don’t despise seeing it as Control Warlock and I haven’t even tweaked my deck at all for them.
Edit:
If anything my biggest concern about Wild remains, in the long-term, Reno decks form anything wanting to play a long-game. Luckily, I suppose, Warlock can compete with a non-Reno deck but anything else Control, outside of the off-meta Odd Warrior, is pretty much running Reno based builds (Shaman, Priest, Mage, and Warlock) but that is going to likely remain an issue forever so ./shrug.
1 Like
Eternal format players don’t make CCG companies nine figures a year, we can put it that way. 
Haha, oh absolutely and I totally thought of that while I was writing but it kinda misses the point… magic has been around for so long and has so many cards it’s amazing they can still make stuff that’s new tbh, let alone maintain healthy constructed environments lol. And they don’t even have the option to change cards!
Either way I was referencing the research they did way back when with the 2010 core set rules and format updates - huge game changer that was pretty clearly a second or third renaissance for the game. Right around the time they started making planeswalkers, another way to invest in the board and make the game more interesting/fun in accordance with the findings from their focus testing.
Anyway, my point was just that they know the decks that are popular aren’t fun but have a vested interest in keeping it that way so it’s a classic artistic vs financial clash of values. If this was like a month ago before the CEO announcements I would have said Blizzard is dead and they’ll just let Wild continue to deteriorate because that’s what Activision would do… but who knows, I get a genuine sense these days that change is in the air in more ways than one so we’ll see
Edit: totally forgot about Reno! Add him to the list lol
I hope so. If Diablo 4 can succeed in being a great game I’d be ecstatic.
For sure! And I think it starts with the D2 remake because their downward spiral really started with warcraft reforged, either the initial announcement (which was same blizzcon as diablo immortals I believe) or the actual release lol.
Anyway, I saw them denerfing those cards as the first step towards actually caring about wild for once - going back to square one before figuring out how to bring that format back to better gameplay loops. It’s too bad that the standard set they released at the same time totally mangled the meta but if they’re willing to reverse years-old nerfs then anything is possible I guess
Reno/zephrys are the most played cards in wild based on HSreplay.