Anivia still isn't good. Many braum anivia decks were cutting her towards the end because they figured out the deck was just getting hard carried by the 1/5 braum rather than anivia.
Karma ezreal absolutely rolls braum anivia, and every other control deck for that matter, it's not even close. Control decks stand 0 chance against a hard combo deck.
But I do agree that karma is probably a problematic card. She's not oppressive now (karma ezreal is insanely hard to play well and got turned down a notch with the latest nerfs) and there's no other deck that can properly use her now. She is extremely design-space limiting in regards to basically any spell, as the devs always need to be wary of it being cast multiple times in a single turn. Which is why I do think she will eventually be reworked.
Well, if you give him enough time to do that, than yes. I think it is more like Cubelock. It doesn't even have those N'Zoth and Bloodreaver's big comebacks, so if you consider Cubelock fair, then Big Shaman is fair too.
Because if big priest isn't given time they still pull big minions out of their behind? Both decks cheat out their minions around turns 4-6 and then resurrect them over and over. Either by having them die first and then using resurrect spells, or having them resurrect themselves as soon as they die.
And the rest of the deck is just filled with all the best removal and healing cards.
The decks play the exact same, are both equally """""fun""""" to play against and both don't require much thought at all. Stall with removal, cheat out big card, abuse mechanics to have big card win you the game.
The reason why you don't see more of it is because it's basically big priest 2.0. Extremely one-dimensional, unfun to play against and very draw reliant.
The reason why big priest players haven't switched to shaman yet is because they either stopped playing due to the deck being near-useless at this point (and rightfully so), or because they're extremely slow on the uptake and haven't gotten wind of this new deck yet.
With the difference that Big Priest can do sth. Shaman isn't good at: "Rise again, my heroes!" *multiple Rags and statues comes out of the ashes.
This seems so much worse than priest, yes you got more ways to cheat stuff, but you got worse survival tools and inconsistent minion cheating, there's also hagatha's scheme as a bad result, dunno I can see it working but it seems more fun.
It's surprisingly good actually. ViciousSyndicate put it at tier 1 and Wild side also rated it in high tier 2 if I remember correctly.
It's just inconsistent, like priest always was, because you need to get those early cheat cards.
The reason why you don't see more of it is because it's basically big priest 2.0. Extremely one-dimensional, unfun to play against and very draw reliant.
The reason why big priest players haven't switched to shaman yet is because they either stopped playing due to the deck being near-useless at this point (and rightfully so), or because they're extremely slow on the uptake and haven't gotten wind of this new deck yet.
Taking a break from Hearthstone only to get 200 years'd in League? Man you sure picked a great destination for your vacation, huh?
Like others said, you didn't miss much. Standard has been Illidan all around despite multiple nerf waves (with another one inbound this week) and no new real interesting decks popped up either.
Just some Battlegrounds and PvE stuff if you're interested in that.
Never said that there are no other archetypes... face hunter and Dragon hunter probably will be farming some people at least in the early meta after nerfs...
You're the one who insinuated that highlander hunter is the only viable hunter deck since that's the only one you mentioned in response to my post, but whatever.
This has to be the nail in the coffin for demon hunter, right? Surely it won't survive another wave of nerfs, right??
Most of these make sense to me. Slight nerf to druid and warrior to keep them in check and fixing the excessive 0 mana creep cards. Although I do wonder why they didn't just change Dragoncaster to "The next spell you cast costs 1 mana" instead of nerfing the card's mana cost. Doesn't seem very consistent with their other nerfs...
Then you'd play the format for one season, get the card back and (most likely) never return. That doesn't seem very effective.
The idea I support most, if Blizzard truly wanted to have more people play wild, is to give separate ladder rewards for the wild ladder. Perhaps even in the form of wild-only cards and packs. This would make people play wild ladder more consistently.
This is what happens with most card games. In order to keep you buying packs, they'll just powercreep the cards into oblivion. It's happened with Yu-Gi-Oh, it's more than likely happened to MtG, and now it's happened to Hearthstone. It's a sad cycle: you either die a fun card game, or live long enough to become an FTK fiesta.
I haven't played Yu-Gi-Oh in forever because link summoning took things a step too far for me. But now that your post made me look back on it, and comparing it with the cardgames I play now (HS and LoR), its speed really was absurd.
Games are often decided on turn two because both players will have played half their deck and their entire hand at that point.
Crazy stuff, that was.
For what it's worth Heartstone's mana mechanic and the yearly rotation most likely will never make it devolve into such a state so I feel like them powercreeping cards isn't always necessary. Then again I don't know much about sales, let alone Blizzard's numbers, so it's all assumptions on my part.
But to pretty much answer your entire post, there will always be one or two classes/decks on top no matter what, and you will always feel salty about them. It has to be Demon Hunter this expansion cycle for PR purposes and to "justify" their effort into the class for the lay person. I expect more nerfs coming to Demon Hunter during the next expansion to bring it even more in line if not remove it from the meta entirely for an expansion cycle.
If I'm coming off as an ass I apologize, people can't put someone's personality and mannerisms to text but I'm speaking from an objective point of view.
Yeah I understand that they make certain archetypes slightly overtuned if they want to promote it being played or to increase sales or whatever.
While I personally don't agree with it from a moral standpoint, I can understand that Blizzard would use it if it proves effective.
What bothers me most is that their approach to nerfing demon hunter seems largely ineffective.
I get that there's always a meta top dog who is the strongest and considered the 'deck-to-beat'. But when they tried to (re)balance aggro/tempo demon hunter three times and still don't have it in line with the other decks, I start to worry about their balance team's capabilities.
Oh and your post didn't come off as you being an ass at all, don't worry. I appreciate the discussion and your opinion.
Casually ignores the fact that leveled up Jinx also draws you an additional card each turn and that all three cards serve completely different purposes.
These buff threads you keep making are so flawed and shallow that it's akin to trolling at this point.
Besides the fact that you reply to barely any posts, if at all, which further validates my suspicion.
Yeah I'm not a fan of this lab either. I'll just get 4 wins asap and hope there's no more missions that require me to play it.
Anivia still isn't good. Many braum anivia decks were cutting her towards the end because they figured out the deck was just getting hard carried by the 1/5 braum rather than anivia.
Karma ezreal absolutely rolls braum anivia, and every other control deck for that matter, it's not even close. Control decks stand 0 chance against a hard combo deck.
But I do agree that karma is probably a problematic card. She's not oppressive now (karma ezreal is insanely hard to play well and got turned down a notch with the latest nerfs) and there's no other deck that can properly use her now. She is extremely design-space limiting in regards to basically any spell, as the devs always need to be wary of it being cast multiple times in a single turn. Which is why I do think she will eventually be reworked.
Ah cool so first this will break standard and Blizzard will nerf it to 5 mana.
And then it will break wild in odd demon hunter.
I cannot wait.
I wonder how this interacts with armor? Is that also considered "Health"?
Because if big priest isn't given time they still pull big minions out of their behind? Both decks cheat out their minions around turns 4-6 and then resurrect them over and over. Either by having them die first and then using resurrect spells, or having them resurrect themselves as soon as they die.
And the rest of the deck is just filled with all the best removal and healing cards.
The decks play the exact same, are both equally """""fun""""" to play against and both don't require much thought at all. Stall with removal, cheat out big card, abuse mechanics to have big card win you the game.
Too bad, OP.
Except shaman can do basically the same thanks to Vivid Spores and Ancestral Spirit
It's surprisingly good actually. ViciousSyndicate put it at tier 1 and Wild side also rated it in high tier 2 if I remember correctly.
It's just inconsistent, like priest always was, because you need to get those early cheat cards.
The reason why you don't see more of it is because it's basically big priest 2.0. Extremely one-dimensional, unfun to play against and very draw reliant.
The reason why big priest players haven't switched to shaman yet is because they either stopped playing due to the deck being near-useless at this point (and rightfully so), or because they're extremely slow on the uptake and haven't gotten wind of this new deck yet.
Why do you have an issue with Ashe when Tryndamere and Braum wear even fewer clothes?
Taking a break from Hearthstone only to get 200 years'd in League? Man you sure picked a great destination for your vacation, huh?
Like others said, you didn't miss much. Standard has been Illidan all around despite multiple nerf waves (with another one inbound this week) and no new real interesting decks popped up either.
Just some Battlegrounds and PvE stuff if you're interested in that.
The deck's tier 4 in both formats, if even that.
I'm all for completely getting rid of the archetype if it ever does resurface but for now... why kick a horse when it's already down?
You're the one who insinuated that highlander hunter is the only viable hunter deck since that's the only one you mentioned in response to my post, but whatever.
Hunter doesn't rely on Dragonqueen Alexstrasza much, especially when compared to the other decks that saw their relevant cards get nerfed.
Besides, hunter has more than one viable archetype.
Laughs in hunter
This has to be the nail in the coffin for demon hunter, right? Surely it won't survive another wave of nerfs, right??
Most of these make sense to me. Slight nerf to druid and warrior to keep them in check and fixing the excessive 0 mana creep cards. Although I do wonder why they didn't just change Dragoncaster to "The next spell you cast costs 1 mana" instead of nerfing the card's mana cost. Doesn't seem very consistent with their other nerfs...
It already is the aggro deck of choice though
Then you'd play the format for one season, get the card back and (most likely) never return. That doesn't seem very effective.
The idea I support most, if Blizzard truly wanted to have more people play wild, is to give separate ladder rewards for the wild ladder. Perhaps even in the form of wild-only cards and packs. This would make people play wild ladder more consistently.
...why do you ask a question and then answer it yourself?
What is the point of this thread?
I haven't played Yu-Gi-Oh in forever because link summoning took things a step too far for me. But now that your post made me look back on it, and comparing it with the cardgames I play now (HS and LoR), its speed really was absurd.
Games are often decided on turn two because both players will have played half their deck and their entire hand at that point.
Crazy stuff, that was.
For what it's worth Heartstone's mana mechanic and the yearly rotation most likely will never make it devolve into such a state so I feel like them powercreeping cards isn't always necessary. Then again I don't know much about sales, let alone Blizzard's numbers, so it's all assumptions on my part.
Yeah I understand that they make certain archetypes slightly overtuned if they want to promote it being played or to increase sales or whatever.
While I personally don't agree with it from a moral standpoint, I can understand that Blizzard would use it if it proves effective.
What bothers me most is that their approach to nerfing demon hunter seems largely ineffective.
I get that there's always a meta top dog who is the strongest and considered the 'deck-to-beat'. But when they tried to (re)balance aggro/tempo demon hunter three times and still don't have it in line with the other decks, I start to worry about their balance team's capabilities.
Oh and your post didn't come off as you being an ass at all, don't worry. I appreciate the discussion and your opinion.
Casually ignores the fact that leveled up Jinx also draws you an additional card each turn and that all three cards serve completely different purposes.
These buff threads you keep making are so flawed and shallow that it's akin to trolling at this point.
Besides the fact that you reply to barely any posts, if at all, which further validates my suspicion.