I know nostalgia has rendered the old boy sacrosanct for a while, but I believe the writing is on the wall. When will the community be willing to read it?
Consider Dr. Boom, Mad Genius. I think a lot of players would agree that he was extremely problematic -- and the devs finally agreed and nerfed him. Well, Lord Jaraxxus shares several similarities with Boom, but they are exacerbated by certain aspects of the current meta.
I understand that Lunacy Mage is top of mind for everyone at the moment, but that deck seems a lot worse than it is, simply because it's fun to play and therefore popular. Meanwhile, Control Warlock has quietly maintained win rates that rival or exceed Lunacy Mage, and this will only get worse when the hate-of-the-week decks get nerfed.
I hope Team 5 is able to recognize this problem before they decide on the next round of nerfs, or things will be a whole lot worse than they are now.
Lunacy mage's winrate isn't the deck's biggest problem though? The problem is that it has a Keleseth-esque winrate card, is nothing but RNG and ridiculously overplayed for some reason. So much so that about a third of ladder consists of that deck.
If you want to talk problematic winrates talk paladin. Because Uther's the meta tyrant here, with a near-perfect match-up spread. Close to being on-par with AoO demon-hunter, yet everyone would rather go to the casino with Jaina it seems.
Back to your control warlock claim. Just a quick look at the deck's match-ups on hsreplay shows that it loses to basically anything aggressive with some over the top damage (several demon hunter archetypes, several hunter archetypes, aggro shaman, weapon rogue (these last few are really abysmal) and it looks like it can't handle clown druid's value either).
So no, warlock really isn't all that oppressive when looking at the data. Even after we get our first wave of nerfs. (Assuming they'll mostly target paladin and mage)
Oh and lastly, Iksar has already said control warlocks other, if not actual, win condition Tickatus is still on their mind. Since control warlock hasn't changed much since the rotation and they're not a big fan of those type of archetypes.
Jaraxxus may be a problem only further on after rotation. Jaraxxus does nothing to help with aggro matchups and for Control ones, it just accelerated the rate at which the game ends because Tickatus would singlehandedly destroy any slow/control plan which is why I hate the card with a burning passion.
If anything, both Tickatus and Jaraxxus need to be nerfed simultaneously to give control decks breathing room once Paladin and Mage are dealt with.
This ain't no place for a hero
Quote From PopeNeiaIf anything, both Tickatus and Jaraxxus need to be nerfed simultaneously to give control decks breathing room once Paladin and Mage are dealt with.
I definitely agree. I already assumed Tickatus would get nerfed because it was on the watch list, and I honestly can't imagine a world where they don't nerf it. My worry is that it's hard to see how much Jaraxxus contributes to the problem because of Tickatus' ability to foil every deck's game plan.
Quote From iWatchUSleepIf you want to talk problematic winrates talk paladin. Because Uther's the meta tyrant here, with a near-perfect match-up spread. Close to being on-par with AoO demon-hunter, yet everyone would rather go to the casino with Jaina it seems.
It was not my intent at all to talk about problematic win rates generally. I brought up win rates specifically in comparison to Lunacy Mage to illustrate that the deck everyone is talking about isn't necessarily the actual worst problem in the meta.
Paladin is an obvious problem and has been for some time now, but Iksar seems very aware of that, so I'm not worried about it. On the other hand, devs have shown very little concern about Warlock beyond Tickatus, so I wanted to point out that Tickatus might not be the only offender in that class. That card's "feels bad" effect is strong, and it tends to eclipse all of Warlock's other OP control tools in the hearts and minds of players.
I don't think Jaraxxus is that big of a problem, because he only really punishes Control decks that have no win condition.
A well timed Rattlegore can shut Warlock down quite easily, regardless of Jaraxxus. If you're talking about Control Priest, that's just because the deck doesn't have a real win condition (or way to get there yet).
Personally I think that JAraxxus is way overhyped. Realistically, he is unchanged from his previous iteration in pure control matchups because there the health total didn't really matter anyways.
Honestly, i think an overlooked problem in Control Warlock (and other decks in general) is Strongman because that card completely negates the "slow tax" that you would have to pay for really nutty cards like Jaraxxus and Survival of the Fittest.
Either way, getting rid of Tickatus (or just making the cost of playing Tickatus much greater by either turning it into a symmetrical effect or just increasing the mana cost to make corrupting it much harder) is the most important step just because he invalidates other control decks and keeps contributing to the false impression that Warlock is always op when they have healing (they're not, it just so happens that everytime they get proper healing cards they also get an unbeatable win condition shoved up their ass)
I tried having fun once.
It was awful.
Agree, Tickatus would be fine, if uncorrupted mills the player, corrupted mills the player and also his opponent.
Would still be playable in no deck Warlock archetype Blizzard is pushing.
Everything that the OP says is true - Lord Jaraxxus offers infinite value, there's not really any competition for his card slot in Control Warlock, and Warlock is already very strong at control. Despite all that, I don't think we can reasonably say that Lord Jaraxxus is a problem. The major advantages of the new Jaraxxus over the old one is that he can safely be played before you drop below 15 life without risking a major blowout loss, and he can be healed back up to 30 so that even if you're at low life when you play him, you can recover. The first advantage there is critical to making him playable. He was outclassed for a long time because Warlock often had anti-synergies with him in their control decks (e.g. Skull of the Man'ari), and you often had to delay until you had low life to play him. At the point that you're below 15 life and doing little else on that turn you play him, you're probably behind on board and being burst down the next turn.The second advantage - that he can heal up to 30 - is really a symptom of the real problem in Warlock today; namely, that Warlock has way too much healing. The Soul Fragment package has gotten stronger over time with Luckysoul Hoarder, and Warlock has picked up a ton of lifesteal and an upgraded Siphon Soul with the core set and rotation.
With all that in mind, I think nerfing a bit of the key healing tools of Warlock would go a long way to weakening the Control Warlock deck enough to prevent Lord Jaraxxus's infinite value becoming a problem.
Quote From YourPrivateNightmareI don't think Jaraxxus is that big of a problem, because he only really punishes Control decks that have no win condition.A well timed Rattlegore can shut Warlock down quite easily, regardless of Jaraxxus. If you're talking about Control Priest, that's just because the deck doesn't have a real win condition (or way to get there yet).
I beg your pardon, but outlasting the opponent is a perfectly valid, very real win condition, especially for a class like Priest that doesn't get a lot of offensive tools.
I agree with the OP, Lord Jaraxxus is gonna be a real problem in the future. Warlock has some pretty good control tools already to help them survive against aggro like Drain Soul, School Spirits, Hysteria, and Cascading Disaster. Against other archetypes, they have two absolute control-killers in Lord Jaraxxus and Tickatus, and a great value-generating card in Tamsin Roame. They'll only be susceptible to burn decks. Warlock might be annoying to face once the current meta tyrants are nerfed.
I expect Lord Jaraxxus to be changed if Control Warlock becomes too oppressive, it's just way too overtuned now that it's a simple hero card. The downside of having only 15 health in exchange for a ridiculous 3/8 weapon and infinite 6/6 infernals for 2 mana is gone, so it might simply be too powerful if the meta slows down.
I'm of the same opinion as OP an Tesuo. Bunnyhoppor already made it to Legend #1 with a Control Warlock list and the nerfs haven't even arrived yet. If I was a Control player, I'd play the hell out of this.
I notice I am confused. Something I believe isn't true. How do I know what I think I know?Harry James Potter-Evans-Verres, hpmor.com
Jaraxxus aint the issue. Also comparing a top player like bunnyhoppor to the rest of us is a mistake. He could pilot a bad deck into top 10
Considering the majority of the hearthstone population are complaining about Tickatus, Jaraxxus will remain untouched for a very long time.
Highly unlikely there will ever be a meta where he's top dog.
TREMBLE before.... the most legendary dragon that ever existed!
The reason its overplayed is because it's RNG, which some players find to be fun.
The complaints about control warlock are so dumb right now. The truth is priest is the only class getting punished by jaraxxus or tikatus and it's good for the game, you know why? Because without control warlock, priest runs away with absolute greed and becomes the de facto control class again.
How is any other control deck supposed to deal with priests raw card generation? It's not uncommon for a priest to play 10 or more randomly generated cards in a match, essentially giving them 40+ card decks. But I'm supposed to believe that is fine and feel bad for a deck designed to punish you? Give me a break.
At least control warrior can beat a warlock with rattle gore, Priest just steals it with a generated soul mirror and makes the warrior never want to play again. So boohoo, you know what it feels like to concede in helplessness for a change priest mains.
You must be signed in to leave a comment. Sign in here.