Hearthstone’s Forgotten Format: What Will it Take to Make Wild Popular?

Introduced with Whispers of the Old Gods, the Year of the Kraken created a split within Hearthstone’s Play Mode. Now, players had two options when queuing up games in both Ranked and Casual: Standard or Wild.

Standard was quickly identified as the game’s main competitive format, with nearly all Blizzard-sanctioned tournaments played in Standard. The format touted a fresh way to experience the game with only the most recent two years of expansions available for play.

Wild, on the other hand, became Hearthstone’s legacy format. Unlike Standard, it is not subject to card rotations, meaning players can build and play decks with any card in their collection.

Wild: Hearthstone’s Forgotten Format

While it was never expected to have the same audience as Standard, Wild seems to be trailing far behind every other Hearthstone format in terms of popularity. As the main competitive outlet, Standard will always be in the forefront, but even Arena seems to have a larger following than Wild. This lack of Wild representation is abundantly clear when reviewing websites that collect and publish Hearthstone data. Sample sizes for Wild decks pale in comparison to their Standard counterparts, making analysis within the format difficult.

Why is it that Wild takes a backseat to all these other game modes, though? This topic has been discussed within the Wild community fairly often and there are several theories (and complaints) as to why that is. Likely, it’s some combination of player perception and limited support for Wild from Blizzard. Rather than dwell on the problems in Wild, however, the purpose of this article is to offer solutions to Wild’s apparent popularity problem.

Repairing Player Misconceptions

First and foremost, there are several misconceptions about Wild that need to be repaired before we can expect Wild to grow. Due to their lack of exposure to the format, many players make inaccurate assumptions about the format.

Game Balance

Wild is often viewed as a format riddled with degenerate cards and broken interactions leading to overwhelming imbalance within the format. While this is not entirely untrue, it’s often greatly exaggerated by those unfamiliar with Wild. Sure, the deeper card pool offers some stronger synergies and undoubtedly more potent decks than Standard but, aside from a few exceptions, Wild isn’t a format riddled with debauchery.

In reality, every class in Wild has at least one competitively viable archetype. Many classes, in fact, have one or more options available to them. There will always be a top deck in both formats, but the dominance of a single (or subset) or archetypes in Wild is never much different than that found in Standard. After all, when everything is broken, nothing is broken (except pre-nerf Naga Sea Witch and Call to Arms; those cards were busted).

Cost

The cost of Wild is often cited as the format’s biggest hurdle. Observers see the larger card pool and assume that playing in Wild is impossible without a massive collection. The mistake these players make, however, is assuming all Wild cards are needed. This miscalculation is not exclusive to Wild. Too often players put a heavy emphasis on a full collection instead of focusing on assembling one (or a few) powerful deck(s). The latter option makes it easier for players to accumulate wins and, in turn, bolster their collection.

Aside from a few outliers, the crafting cost of most Wild decks are about on-par with those featured in Standard meta reports. The benefit to Wild, however, is the eternal nature of the format. Rather than having to keep up with set rotations, Wild’s evergreen nature allows players to build a deck and rest assured that it will be available to play in the format for the foreseeable future, even after a prolonged break from Hearthstone.

Contrary to Standard where a set rotating can render a deck unplayable in the format, once a Wild deck is assembled minimal maintenance is usually required. This allows players to take extended breaks from Hearthstone and return to playing their same reliable deck(s).

Similarly, future expansions are less taxing on the wallets of Wild players. Because of the deep card pool, each new expansions introduces far less disruption in Wild than Standard. As such, the amount of gold, dust, or money allocated to an expansion release is typically much less for Wild enthusiasts.

Access to Wild Cards

While, in the long run, Wild will always be less expensive for the average Hearthstone player than keeping up with Standard rotations, the cost of entry for new players often feels insurmountable.

Veteran players have the benefit of accumulating cards over time, including the ability to have bought cost-effective Adventures with gold. Now, however, players seeking these mini-expansions are required to purchase them in-full from the Blizzard store with real money. Likewise, Wild card packs are not available for purchase from the in-game Store, preventing players with a gold surplus from cracking open a few packs from an old expansion.

The issue this creates is that newer Hearthstone players who are interested in Wild must dedicate a fair amount of Arcane Dust crafting format staples or drop a significant amount of cash to bolster their legacy collection.

Making Wild cards more accessible will go far in making the format seem less intimidating. Simply adding packs and Adventures back to the in-game store would be a massive change for helping those who weren’t around for the sets’ releases to accumulate some rotated cards.

Going even further, offering discounts on Wild packs or reducing the crafting cost of Wild-exclusive cards would allow new players to freely explore all Wild has to offer. After all, the inability to play rotated sets in Standard reduces the cards’ inherent value. It would make sense to offer them at a lower cost.

Either way, something needs to be done to increase the accessibility of cards that have rotated out of Standard for Wild to be successful.

Wild Events

Seasonal events, such as Wildfest earlier this year, give Hearthstone players a reason to test the Wild waters. One of the format’s biggest issues is an apparent lack of incentive for playing. During these events, even the most dedicated Standard gamers may find themselves queuing up games in Wild to earn rewards or just to experience Hearthstone differently.

Within the Wild Hearthstone community, there are frequent reports of players falling in love with the format after exploring it during an event. Including frequent events for Hearthstone’s evergreen format can quickly create additional Wild diehards.

Rewarding players for playing Wild is a great way to introduce players into the format. By offering Wild-exclusive awards for taking part in such events (like the aforementioned difficult-to-attain Wild card packs, for instance) will create a tie-in with the gameplay. In doing so, Blizzards can create a more lasting impression with players as they experience the Wild format.

No matter how they’re implemented, Wild events serve as a reminder to Hearthstone players that Wild exists. Happily, Blizzard has shown a growing willingness to introduce format-specific events. However, increasing the number of events per year even further is requisite in increasing the popularity of the format.

Wild Tournaments

While not everyone plays Hearthstone for the competitive aspect of the game, increasing the number of Wild tournaments is a fundamental consideration in increasing the format’s popularity. Last year, the Wild Open, if only for a season, filled the Wild ladder with excitement like it’s never seen before. Like every Standard season, numerous Legend players were jockeying for a precious Top 64 finish to qualify for Wild’s lone Blizzard-run tournament. Disappointingly, this year’s Open removed the ladder qualification portion of the tournament, but still drove fresh faces to the Wild scene.

Unfortunately, it seems Blizzard is content with a single Wild tournament per year. For Wild to flourish, however, this is simply not enough. Certainly, competitive Wild gameplay will never match that of Standard. This has been clear since the inception of the format and is not necessarily a problem. However, there is an audience for competitive Wild play and increasing the number of tournaments is only stands to increase the Wild player base, both competitive and casual alike.

Rather than a single tournament, quarterly Opens culminating in an end of year championship would do wonders for Wild. This structure, mirroring the HCT system (albeit on a much smaller scale), would provide a more consistent stream of interest in Wild instead of the solitary month each calendar year.

Wild Visibility

One of the biggest problems Wild faces is a lack of visibility. Unlike Standard and Arena, there are few dedicated resources created for Wild Hearthstone. Likewise, very few prominent Hearthstone influencers and content creators have taken to the Wild format, leaving it far behind in terms of audience.

The mere-exposure effect tells us that people tend to prefer things that they see frequently and become familiar with. With so few prominent personalities playing Wild, it’s easy for the community as a whole to continue ignoring it.

On the rare occasion that popular streamers do take up the format, a noticeable uptick in Wild is readily apparent. Recently, we’ve seen a handful of big names explore the format, including impressive win streaks from both Dog and Thijs. In preparation for the History of Hearthstone tournament, Zalae not only climbed to Legend but maintained top Legend ranks for some time. Hearthstone superstar Kripparian has, on multiple occasions, made waves within Wild simply by playing the format in front of thousands of viewers. Decks piloted by these Hearthstone celebrities quickly find themselves among the most popular on the Wild ladder.

Unfortunately, this last means of increasing Wild’s popularity is reliant on other factors. As of now, there is little incentive for big names to create Wild content. The audience for Wild Hearthstone is so small that it likely hurts streamers and content creators to allocate time to satisfy such a small segment of the Hearthstone population.

The result is a problem that is somewhat circular. Unless there is demand for Wild it is unlikely that many content creators will take to the format to drive demand for Wild. As such, many of the means of generating interest in Wild mentioned above must come first, placing the ball largely in Blizzard’s court.

Here’s hoping for some positive change and increased interest in the Wild format.

Do you have any ideas that would help make Wild more popular? Share your thoughts in the comments below!