Like, I get that when a game after x years 'finally' gets a new, 10th class you want it to be a succesful one. And yes, giving it some overtuned cards to make up for its small collection in order to successfully compete with the other classes I can understand too.
But after nerfing the same deck of that class three times and to still have it be the best deck in standard (source) truly boggles my mind.
Quest rogue was considered a cockroach after it had to be nerfed twice (and that deck didn't practically dominate the meta for months on end by itself).
Why then, does everyone seem more okay with this deck? I see very little complaints this time around, unless I'm looking in the wrong places.
I hope the next expansion is a lot better balance-wise because if you ask me, this expansion was one of the worst in that regard. I still had fun, mind you, but the balance was extremely lacking.
Apologies for the salty flavored thread. I'm just genuinely curious if my perception is off, or if people really do tolerate the dominance of this deck more than they did with past 'oppressive' decks.
How is this any more difficult or "frustrating/unfun/unfair" to play around than "add a random last breath or elite unit to your hand"? (The only two "add random to your hand" cards I could come up with off the top of my head.)
If you play a Shadow Isles deck with a single The Ruination and your opponent (who doesn't run Shadow Isles) nabs one or more cards, you absolutely should play around it, within reason.
Also why has no one ever complained about Chempunk Pickpocket, which has seen play, mind you, when it does the exact same thing?
People talk about synergies, yet they dont understand nab is the synergy.
If deny said "Deny any spell or ally from entering play, put that card into hand, you may cast it for 1 less. Plunder, draw a card from your opponents deck and you may also play that" people would freak out and want it banned.
Yet for 2 you can do pretty much that. Deck disruption and card advantage is the synergy. Its a broken mechanic and it needs to go away. Changing it to the bottom is mostly meaningless.
Its crazy that a card game with so few cards, and so few mechanics would actually foster this type of play style. Its beyond me, and has completely turned me off from the game.
That's got to be the worst analogy/comparison/whatever you wanna call it I've seen in a while. "Imagine this one card that is now an extremely exaggerated effect of another card, yeah that'd be broken wouldn't it?"
Deck disruption, especially now that it's drawn from the bottom of your deck, isn't a thing. Very little, if any, games go to fatigue (unless you're talking about deep, for which Nab only compliments its gameplan) so you never would've been able to play that exact card during that exact game anyway.
With that out of the way, the opponent basically just gets a random card at a potential mana discount. Except you can play around it far better than an actual random card, because it's one from your deck.
I really don't get the excessive amount of hate towards Nab when it really isn't unbalanced. It feels bad, sure. But from a logical card-game perspective it's just another mechanic.
Because prankster comes out two turns earlier, which is pretty big for a token deck?
Also good job on completely destroying collector. That card will see no play whatsoever with that change. I don't even know where to start explaining how bad that nerf is... "Slight nerf", yeah right.
I... actually played big shaman yesterday. I, along with many others, am an avid big priest hater so of course I felt horrible but given its strenght and popularity I wanted to give it a quick try.
I then proceeded to go 0-5, as I deserved. Mostly due to poor draws plus my final game, the one time I did have one of my cheat cards on curve, I was met with a Kazakus on turn 4, into coin + Dragoncaster into a 10 mana polymorph potion on turn 5. Followed by both reno cards the two turns thereafter and topped off with a Tortollan Pilgrim into Luna's Pocket Galaxy into Stargazer Luna plus a full board the next turn.
Needless to say I wasn't even mad anymore at that point and deleting my deck felt pretty good.
Nothing. I have never, and probably will never, play it. The fact that they spent development time on this rather than on features people wanted (I don't recall anyone asking for battlegrounds, and why would they when, in my opinion, better alternatives already exist in the form of TFT and Overlords) never sat well with me.
Besides the fact that the entire autobattler concept has never appealed to me due to it being even more RNG reliant card games.
Nothing against you if you enjoy BG, you do you. I just strongly dislike it.
Not a Good Indicator of my skill level, but currently Silver I 50-ish LP with a 45-11 record. (I don't play much, like 3 games a day). I heard I am on course for Master Tier with that winrate, but I take it with a grain of salt as it's my friends stuck in plat saying this. Not sure if any master players can confirm this or not, but I am slowly climbing.
Not to kick you down or anything but a winrate at lower levels never really translates one on one to higher levels. Players at bronze and silver are a lot more prone to make mistakes and often don't play the best meta decks (because they're either unaware of what's good or don't have the cards for it).
So yes, your winrate right now is more than fine but expect it to drop by quite a bit as you climb higher.
I seriously don't understand the deal with all these new posters coming here just to complain. Is this the same person making new accounts every day or something?
Either way, go look up the definition of "pay to win" and "net decking" and compare those two before coming up with such a half-assed complaint. Thanks.
I honestly don't think I've seen such immediate and laughable power creep in any game, ever.
I believe that "Scout" is just an awful mechanic. I already have no trouble killing my opponent in 3-5 turns without Scout or Rally. Adding in Rally, I can consistently do it in 3/4. Scout, though? Oh boy, especially with Miss Fortune and her other support cards. There's really no earlygame counterplay to it. Not only is Scout on top of Rally just a bad design, it's unfun for anyone playing against it.
Being able to take cards from your opponents deck. This is another really bad interaction in the game because it takes anything good(because if your deck is well-made, everything is good) out of your deck, thins your deck, and allows your opponents to use it. Thinning your deck is normally a good thing, but not when your opponent gains control of them.
Especially with the new "Toss" mechanic. Being able to shred your opponents deck and draw from it, denying them the ability to even play their deck is ridiculous. You'd think that alternative win strategies would be harder to combo or set up, but it isn't because there are just some cards that can instantly put your opponent on a 4 turn clock and you just stall to win.
The "Deep" mechanic is way too good and too easy to achieve. This one needs little explanation, as I'm sure everyone know why. +3/+3 just for playing your deck for 3-5 turns on mid-to-lategame cards is the most confusing thing I've ever seen. Why make big creatures bigger when they already cost so much with such good affects? Feels like they just wanted to stuff mechanics/keywords into the game
That's enough of the rant, now for a list of cards that are "broken" and some suggested changes that could help fix them.
Too strong on offense to be a 3/3 for 3 with her abilities, should be more susceptible to removal. Suggested fix, Miss Fortune Level 1, [3/2], I've seen you attack 5 times, rest is the same. Miss Fortune Level 2, [4/3], Overwhelm, When allies attack, deal 1 to battling enemies and the enemy Nexus. Attack: deal 1 to battling enemies and the enemy Nexus. This change makes her a little more susceptible to early removal as an offensive card and takes away some of her overpowered ability with Scouts and Rally to deal 6+ to everything every turn. Also gives you the ability to deal with scouts without just barely trying to survive them. Makes her less oppressive, but keeps her ability to have her effect proc plenty of times.
This ability is ridiculous, not much explanation needed, puts you on a 4-turn counter, not including other cards that easily lessen the counter. Suggested fix, Maokai Level 2, Regeneration, Round Start: Toss 4 cards from your opponents deck, Whenever cards are "Tossed," summon a Sapling.
Allows you to thin your opponents board, making it harder to go wider AND higher. Ridiculous. Suggested change 1: Grant an ally "I can't die." This allows you to still go over with Overwhelm if they slap it on stupid big creatures. Suggested change 2: Grant an ally "I can't take damage." The card may still be destroyed by destroy effects, but immune to damage. Suggested change 3: Grant an ally Indestructible. A new keyword that makes something immune to being outright destroyed. Suggested change 4: Grant an ally "Round Start: I gain a Barrier."
Insanely powerful, glad they nerfed him, but he could use a bit more work. Suggested fix, increase cost to 10. This change would make sure they wouldn't be able to do anything else other than play him. His effect is too good at closing out games and if you hold 3 spell mana, there are some 4-cost spells you can abuse in the same turn.
Really has no reason for Fearsome and becomes a little too big for no real reason. Suggested fix, Nautilus Level 1, [2/8] and the same, minus Fearsome. Nautilus Level 2, [10/10] the same. This at least lets him deal some damage before "Deep", helping mitigate your opponent just go wider than you and drops fearsome because it's unnecessary, especially with Tough. Being able to drop Sea Monsters on the field is already enough power to be able to close out a game.
Bad interaction, unfun. When you create a copy of an enemy card, reduce its cost by 1, Plunder: create a copy of a non-champion card from the enemy deck and add it to your hand.
Pilfred Goods
Bad interaction, unfun. Suggested fix, create a copy of a random non-champion card in the enemy deck, Plunder: do it again, rest is the same.
Too situational, not good enough to even want to keep alive. Harder to use than he is to play around. Suggested fix, Once per turn, stop all enemy spells and skills targeting me and give me "Elusive" this round.
Edit: Some clarification.
Half of the cards you mentioned as nerf suggestions see 0 competitive play.
Maokai and deep are tier 2 at best, as are scout-heavy decks. I really wonder how many times you encounter cards like Sleight of Hand, Sheriff Lariette Rose and Shellshocker to come up with these suggestions. Let alone what the top decks use and how they will only get stronger with your suggestions.
Wow Flux just casually ignored GOTY contender Bugsnax...
All jokes aside, while I really enjoyed Horizon: Zero Dawn (bought and played it a few months ago) the sequel does indeed look like just 'more of the same'. Which isn't bad per se, but probably not something I'll be picking up the second it gets released.
That new Ratchet and Clank game though... I absolutely loved the series, back when I was a kid, and just as much now that I'm older. Definitely one of the games on top of my priority list to get once I eventually fork over and buy a PS5.
Yeah I'm with most people here that I kind of prefer getting random champions than wildcards, just because it gives you an idea of what deck to go for. Especially in this meta where almost everything is viable, it really feels like you're kind of overwhelmed by the amount of decks you can play. Which is, of course, a fantastic thing.
In regards to which champ: Fizz is the more fun card (unless you're on the receiving end) and a champion you can actually build a deck around. Whereas Miss Fortune is the better card but not one you play to level. You really just slot her into tempo decks because she's good as a 3 mana 3/3 with upside.
So, if you want fun, pick Fizz. If you want the most competitive card, pick Miss Fortune.
You're pretending and explaining an archetype that's been in the game since its inception basically is somehow some new hip top tier deck.
You again try to claim Freljord is (one of) the best region(s) in the game to try and get reactions from people, just like you did in your previous thread.
You act like deck thinning somehow matters in an aggro deck.
Your tone, despite numerous people calling you out for it last time, hasn't changed at all.
This is pretty much the optimized burn deck; some cards are potential side-grades but it's practically impossible to make anything more aggressive. Part of your problem is this deck was extremely popular last month so everyone knows how to mulligan and play against it--and you're essentially running an inferior version of it.
If you DO want to homebrew, try some champions with the potential to generate more value e.g. Swain, Miss Fortune, Kalista. Jinx isn't a very strong champion ATM so I'd avoid her, but if you do insist then I'd recommend netdecking a Draven + Jinx deck with heavy discard syngeries.
But, that's not the optimized burn list... At least not anymore, anyway. Legion Rearguard is absolute trash and needs to be replaced. This is the current go-to burn list.
If OP doesn't have that demon (Teemo) yet then some additional burn will suffice at lower ranks. Get Excited!, Blade's Edge or, if you want a fun card, try Jinx.
If anyone could help me out with HS #12 that'd be much appreciated. I found the weapon it's referring to (that can be wielded by those three classes) but the cake isn't there. Am I supposed to look at an upgraded/altered version of it? I've checked all cards that give you an indirect version of that weapon, but alas, no luck...
Like, I get that when a game after x years 'finally' gets a new, 10th class you want it to be a succesful one. And yes, giving it some overtuned cards to make up for its small collection in order to successfully compete with the other classes I can understand too.
But after nerfing the same deck of that class three times and to still have it be the best deck in standard (source) truly boggles my mind.
Quest rogue was considered a cockroach after it had to be nerfed twice (and that deck didn't practically dominate the meta for months on end by itself).
Why then, does everyone seem more okay with this deck? I see very little complaints this time around, unless I'm looking in the wrong places.
I hope the next expansion is a lot better balance-wise because if you ask me, this expansion was one of the worst in that regard. I still had fun, mind you, but the balance was extremely lacking.
Apologies for the salty flavored thread. I'm just genuinely curious if my perception is off, or if people really do tolerate the dominance of this deck more than they did with past 'oppressive' decks.
How is this any more difficult or "frustrating/unfun/unfair" to play around than "add a random last breath or elite unit to your hand"? (The only two "add random to your hand" cards I could come up with off the top of my head.)
If you play a Shadow Isles deck with a single The Ruination and your opponent (who doesn't run Shadow Isles) nabs one or more cards, you absolutely should play around it, within reason.
Also why has no one ever complained about Chempunk Pickpocket, which has seen play, mind you, when it does the exact same thing?
That's got to be the worst analogy/comparison/whatever you wanna call it I've seen in a while. "Imagine this one card that is now an extremely exaggerated effect of another card, yeah that'd be broken wouldn't it?"
Deck disruption, especially now that it's drawn from the bottom of your deck, isn't a thing. Very little, if any, games go to fatigue (unless you're talking about deep, for which Nab only compliments its gameplan) so you never would've been able to play that exact card during that exact game anyway.
With that out of the way, the opponent basically just gets a random card at a potential mana discount. Except you can play around it far better than an actual random card, because it's one from your deck.
I really don't get the excessive amount of hate towards Nab when it really isn't unbalanced. It feels bad, sure. But from a logical card-game perspective it's just another mechanic.
I really like the buffs and most of the changes.
Surprised they haven't touched Sejuani or Heimer/Vi but perhaps the meta will be able to counter them adequately.
Because prankster comes out two turns earlier, which is pretty big for a token deck?
Also good job on completely destroying collector. That card will see no play whatsoever with that change. I don't even know where to start explaining how bad that nerf is... "Slight nerf", yeah right.
Confirmation bias with no actual statistics whatsoever.
It doesn't need a rework at all.
A welcome change since aggro demon hunter is still one of the strongest and most played decks, even after two(!) rounds of nerfs.
This might be a buff to odd demon hunter in wild though.
I... actually played big shaman yesterday. I, along with many others, am an avid big priest hater so of course I felt horrible but given its strenght and popularity I wanted to give it a quick try.
I then proceeded to go 0-5, as I deserved. Mostly due to poor draws plus my final game, the one time I did have one of my cheat cards on curve, I was met with a Kazakus on turn 4, into coin + Dragoncaster into a 10 mana polymorph potion on turn 5. Followed by both reno cards the two turns thereafter and topped off with a Tortollan Pilgrim into Luna's Pocket Galaxy into Stargazer Luna plus a full board the next turn.
Needless to say I wasn't even mad anymore at that point and deleting my deck felt pretty good.
Nothing. I have never, and probably will never, play it. The fact that they spent development time on this rather than on features people wanted (I don't recall anyone asking for battlegrounds, and why would they when, in my opinion, better alternatives already exist in the form of TFT and Overlords) never sat well with me.
Besides the fact that the entire autobattler concept has never appealed to me due to it being even more RNG reliant card games.
Nothing against you if you enjoy BG, you do you. I just strongly dislike it.
Not to kick you down or anything but a winrate at lower levels never really translates one on one to higher levels. Players at bronze and silver are a lot more prone to make mistakes and often don't play the best meta decks (because they're either unaware of what's good or don't have the cards for it).
So yes, your winrate right now is more than fine but expect it to drop by quite a bit as you climb higher.
I seriously don't understand the deal with all these new posters coming here just to complain. Is this the same person making new accounts every day or something?
Either way, go look up the definition of "pay to win" and "net decking" and compare those two before coming up with such a half-assed complaint. Thanks.
Half of the cards you mentioned as nerf suggestions see 0 competitive play.
Maokai and deep are tier 2 at best, as are scout-heavy decks. I really wonder how many times you encounter cards like Sleight of Hand, Sheriff Lariette Rose and Shellshocker to come up with these suggestions. Let alone what the top decks use and how they will only get stronger with your suggestions.
Wow Flux just casually ignored GOTY contender Bugsnax...
All jokes aside, while I really enjoyed Horizon: Zero Dawn (bought and played it a few months ago) the sequel does indeed look like just 'more of the same'. Which isn't bad per se, but probably not something I'll be picking up the second it gets released.
That new Ratchet and Clank game though... I absolutely loved the series, back when I was a kid, and just as much now that I'm older. Definitely one of the games on top of my priority list to get once I eventually fork over and buy a PS5.
Yeah I'm with most people here that I kind of prefer getting random champions than wildcards, just because it gives you an idea of what deck to go for. Especially in this meta where almost everything is viable, it really feels like you're kind of overwhelmed by the amount of decks you can play. Which is, of course, a fantastic thing.
In regards to which champ: Fizz is the more fun card (unless you're on the receiving end) and a champion you can actually build a deck around. Whereas Miss Fortune is the better card but not one you play to level. You really just slot her into tempo decks because she's good as a 3 mana 3/3 with upside.
So, if you want fun, pick Fizz. If you want the most competitive card, pick Miss Fortune.
You're pretending and explaining an archetype that's been in the game since its inception basically is somehow some new hip top tier deck.
You again try to claim Freljord is (one of) the best region(s) in the game to try and get reactions from people, just like you did in your previous thread.
You act like deck thinning somehow matters in an aggro deck.
Your tone, despite numerous people calling you out for it last time, hasn't changed at all.
Yeah, this is still bait.
Really weak bait. Try harder next time.
Also you're like 2 months late.
But, that's not the optimized burn list... At least not anymore, anyway. Legion Rearguard is absolute trash and needs to be replaced. This is the current go-to burn list.
If OP doesn't have that demon (Teemo) yet then some additional burn will suffice at lower ranks. Get Excited!, Blade's Edge or, if you want a fun card, try Jinx.
I can't believe it's not Light's Justice... It literally ticks all the boxes.
Either way, I finally got it. Thank you.
Quality first post.
Do we have a salt thread for Runeterra yet, or does the original one apply to all games?
If anyone could help me out with HS #12 that'd be much appreciated.
I found the weapon it's referring to (that can be wielded by those three classes) but the cake isn't there.
Am I supposed to look at an upgraded/altered version of it? I've checked all cards that give you an indirect version of that weapon, but alas, no luck...