This card will be polarizing because people will only remember when it blows them up. Really needs rush to be playable, since it's usually going to be a crappy 7 drop with no impact. Will be funny to get off of random effects, though, I suppose.
Interesting conjecture, but I dont believe the data supports it. The winrates for a turn 1/2 DoL were very high, and moving it to a later turn (and requiring all or part of that turn) helps tone it down.
I think the issue was that, despite the core refresh and new expansion release, it continued to be one of the most played cards in Standard. Factor in the unrivaled abuse of (as you mentioned) libram decks, and the card was due for a change. I think most players will agree that the design is interesting and the effect is fun, but something had to give at this point.
It's also quite unusual for a very low-cost neutral card to drive deck construction as strongly as PF did, which I have to think partially influenced the decision to nerf.
Thief Rogue (or Priest) decks can be a LOT of fun, but that's because the randomness is bounded. You have a core suite of tools that you need to end up integrating with your randomly generated ones. Even Lunacy Mage isn't entirely random, with the culling of the spell pool you've got a good idea of the cards you'll generate.
Your deck is shuffled, these games all have some randomness. Different strokes, I guess.
No, the reference was obvious. "Hey man, just play as highlander paladin" was obviously not his suggestion given "finley + wizard" is a well-known tech combination.
The effect is so interesting that this will definitely be experimented with thoroughly. The "obvious" best-fit would be value-oriented control decks that want to go the distance, but I don't really see how this helps fill in the weaknesses of those decks (since Tickatus already helps you win fatigue matches). This might be the type of Legendary with a cool effect that don't mind discovering and tempo-ing, but might not include in your deck.
For "oh crap I ran myself out of cards" zoo decks, this probably takes up a slot you'd be happier to have go to a lower-curve card, but I could see trying to make it fit into zoo with some success.
The spell damage double-dip gives this card some pretty big upside when overloaded, but I'm unsure what decks this will see play in (besides the obvious hard-control archtypes). The card itself seems strong, but there might not be room for most shaman. That said, it might be the type of card you're delighted to discover (say, via Fireheart) situationally.
Given the cost is easy to reduce, you're quite likely to corrupt it when you drop your second Attendant or Lady Liadrin (but you're right that in most current deck lists there are only so many cards expensive enough to Corrupt it). Given the potential power, it's not crazy to assume that some deck lists will move towards a slightly higher curve to make corruption easier. We'll see if the cost / deck modification make it as strong as it can be or if it's a bit too slow to be consistent.
I'm concerned the Knuckles nerf won't quite be enough. It almost feels as though the change was made as if the meta where lots and lots of decks are running double Sticky Fingers is... healthy? In a world where it isn't be hard-teched against, Attack -> 3 + Mana -> 6 seem appropriate. I have to admit I'm a little surprised this the extent of the change, but I'll take what I can get.
EVC has been a long time coming, and their reasoning is sound. The rare "turn 2 win" that can be generated by huge EVC's wasn't a sustainable state of affairs.
Generally that's how "games" work, yes. Blizzard has struggled immensely with tuning Priests (basically forever), and community feedback of "hey, that class sucks to play and sucks to play against" is generally good to give. They've signalled a willingness to make changes based on "wow, that's straight misery" in the past, why should now be any different?
Furthermore, I don't agree that Priests are "easily the worst class" right now. I'd say based on some meta snapshots (such as here), they're in a better place than Mages/Druids with some competitive archetypes. Cards can be changed without a class being DH-at-release levels of broken, you realize?
Priests have a lot of "feels bad, man" interactions right now, which is really hard to balance because something can be terribly designed but not overpowered.
Paladin need a few changes, but it's hard to nail down exactly what needs to change. I think First Day of School moving to 1 mana would be a good change so that "buff target generation" is a little more difficult (especially given the hero power throws off an easy target). Paladin's problems stem from excellent synergy with some other cards that are good, but not inherently broken (Pen Flinger, for example). Perhaps increasing Goody Two Shields to 4 mana (or the body to 3/2) given the spellburst is so easy to trigger? I'll admit Paladin is the hardest puzzle because so much strength is driven by the Librams, which is a design I really like.
I was surprised to not see any Priest cards mentioned -- Palm Reading seems like an easy callout (4 mana? Leave at 3 but cap the number of spells affected?). I am very surprised that Blood of G'huun was released "as is", especially in light of the recent Tortollan Mage change -- the design seems to be moving away from "copy from deck" and moving towards a "pull from deck" (Dimensional Ripper, I suppose, violates that, but it doesn't see a lot of play). The interaction with Reborn makes Priest boards almost impossibly sticky (Revolve / Plague of Death notwithstanding). Priests have a lot of "feels bad, man" interactions right now, which is really hard to balance because something can be terribly designed but not overpowered.
This card will be polarizing because people will only remember when it blows them up. Really needs rush to be playable, since it's usually going to be a crappy 7 drop with no impact. Will be funny to get off of random effects, though, I suppose.
These puzzles were terrible! The only Q I want A'd is "what is wrong with you?"
Interesting conjecture, but I dont believe the data supports it. The winrates for a turn 1/2 DoL were very high, and moving it to a later turn (and requiring all or part of that turn) helps tone it down.
I think the issue was that, despite the core refresh and new expansion release, it continued to be one of the most played cards in Standard. Factor in the unrivaled abuse of (as you mentioned) libram decks, and the card was due for a change. I think most players will agree that the design is interesting and the effect is fun, but something had to give at this point.
It's also quite unusual for a very low-cost neutral card to drive deck construction as strongly as PF did, which I have to think partially influenced the decision to nerf.
Thief Rogue (or Priest) decks can be a LOT of fun, but that's because the randomness is bounded. You have a core suite of tools that you need to end up integrating with your randomly generated ones. Even Lunacy Mage isn't entirely random, with the culling of the spell pool you've got a good idea of the cards you'll generate.
Your deck is shuffled, these games all have some randomness. Different strokes, I guess.
Paladin secrets are Holy spells, so this card might see play if Secret archetypes are effective
the wording definitely seems to account for secret passage. interesting.
No, the reference was obvious. "Hey man, just play as highlander paladin" was obviously not his suggestion given "finley + wizard" is a well-known tech combination.
Awesome tech! Probably terrible!
The effect is so interesting that this will definitely be experimented with thoroughly. The "obvious" best-fit would be value-oriented control decks that want to go the distance, but I don't really see how this helps fill in the weaknesses of those decks (since Tickatus already helps you win fatigue matches). This might be the type of Legendary with a cool effect that don't mind discovering and tempo-ing, but might not include in your deck.
For "oh crap I ran myself out of cards" zoo decks, this probably takes up a slot you'd be happier to have go to a lower-curve card, but I could see trying to make it fit into zoo with some success.
The spell damage double-dip gives this card some pretty big upside when overloaded, but I'm unsure what decks this will see play in (besides the obvious hard-control archtypes). The card itself seems strong, but there might not be room for most shaman. That said, it might be the type of card you're delighted to discover (say, via Fireheart) situationally.
Given the cost is easy to reduce, you're quite likely to corrupt it when you drop your second Attendant or Lady Liadrin (but you're right that in most current deck lists there are only so many cards expensive enough to Corrupt it). Given the potential power, it's not crazy to assume that some deck lists will move towards a slightly higher curve to make corruption easier. We'll see if the cost / deck modification make it as strong as it can be or if it's a bit too slow to be consistent.
I'm concerned the Knuckles nerf won't quite be enough. It almost feels as though the change was made as if the meta where lots and lots of decks are running double Sticky Fingers is... healthy? In a world where it isn't be hard-teched against, Attack -> 3 + Mana -> 6 seem appropriate. I have to admit I'm a little surprised this the extent of the change, but I'll take what I can get.
EVC has been a long time coming, and their reasoning is sound. The rare "turn 2 win" that can be generated by huge EVC's wasn't a sustainable state of affairs.
Generally that's how "games" work, yes. Blizzard has struggled immensely with tuning Priests (basically forever), and community feedback of "hey, that class sucks to play and sucks to play against" is generally good to give. They've signalled a willingness to make changes based on "wow, that's straight misery" in the past, why should now be any different?
Furthermore, I don't agree that Priests are "easily the worst class" right now. I'd say based on some meta snapshots (such as here), they're in a better place than Mages/Druids with some competitive archetypes. Cards can be changed without a class being DH-at-release levels of broken, you realize?
I guess I'll just quote myself?
Paladin need a few changes, but it's hard to nail down exactly what needs to change. I think First Day of School moving to 1 mana would be a good change so that "buff target generation" is a little more difficult (especially given the hero power throws off an easy target). Paladin's problems stem from excellent synergy with some other cards that are good, but not inherently broken (Pen Flinger, for example). Perhaps increasing Goody Two Shields to 4 mana (or the body to 3/2) given the spellburst is so easy to trigger? I'll admit Paladin is the hardest puzzle because so much strength is driven by the Librams, which is a design I really like.
I was surprised to not see any Priest cards mentioned -- Palm Reading seems like an easy callout (4 mana? Leave at 3 but cap the number of spells affected?). I am very surprised that Blood of G'huun was released "as is", especially in light of the recent Tortollan Mage change -- the design seems to be moving away from "copy from deck" and moving towards a "pull from deck" (Dimensional Ripper, I suppose, violates that, but it doesn't see a lot of play). The interaction with Reborn makes Priest boards almost impossibly sticky (Revolve / Plague of Death notwithstanding). Priests have a lot of "feels bad, man" interactions right now, which is really hard to balance because something can be terribly designed but not overpowered.