Caldyrvan

Upcoming Balance Changes, they are joking :D

Sign in to follow this  

16 posts in this topic

The upcoming balance changes, see here: Source, are so laughable.

They never change the way they handle the game.

  1. Bonemare up to 8 mana, not a big deal for me we saw enough of them but again a boring mana cost adjustment.
  2. Corridor Creeper: No surprise it got nerfed but really? they simply increased the number of useless epics.
  3. Raza the Chained & Patches the Pirate seriously? I mean I'm glad they nerfed them but six months too late.

At least this means we will see a lot more Jade Druids again (so happy -.-) and ofc more warlocks

No idea what they have in their brains, doing necessary changes too late, change things badly and or without any creativity. 

Edited by Caldyrvan
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why make this changing after so many sets, at 1 set from the rotation. K&C meta will stay only for some months, near april, then it will be only a wild problem.

Reno Priest is king of Wild meta, ok. But there is also Cube Lock, Aggro Paladin, and lots of differents deck. Tempo Rogue is strong, but it's more Keleseth then Patches, Patches was a problem back when Pirate Warrior was the strongest deck, and now it isn't.

Meh. I don't like this changes.

 

In facts, I don't like most nerfs I saw. Killing Quest Rogue back before KotFT made jade druid overpowered. Nerfing jade druid made Highlander Priest king of the meta. Now, will Cubelock be the next? Maybe aggro paladin?

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Synesthesy said:

Maybe aggro paladin

Without Patches and Creeper? Not likely. Gonna be cubelock and jade druid possibly.Maybe aggro mage too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bonemare was an ok nerf.

Creeper still has value in beast decks, particularly aggro druid (wild)

Patch should've been Battle Cry: Charge

Raza should NOT have been nerfed.   The logic behind nerfing him was that Shadow Reaper was too strong...well nerf Shadow Reaper then, dummies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Shadowreaper Aduin just pointed very good at it, making something zero (0) cost hast often proven to be problematic.

That's why cards which had a zero cost originally, like Soulfire had their mana cost increased to one.

Edited by Caldyrvan
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Marcawesome said:

Raza should NOT have been nerfed.   The logic behind nerfing him was that Shadow Reaper was too strong...well nerf Shadow Reaper then, dummies.

Logic behind Raza nerf is that he will stay in wild forever, and there, Reno Priest is too strong. 

DK is strong too, but not broken by itself, it can still see play as some late game board clear and threat, but thats it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

14 minutes ago, FanOfValeera said:

Logic behind Raza nerf is that he will stay in wild forever, and there, Reno Priest is too strong. 

DK is strong too, but not broken by itself, it can still see play as some late game board clear and threat, but thats it.

I thought I saw the reason from the developers was the DK?

 

 

Edited by Marcawesome
mess up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Marcawesome said:

 I thought I saw the reason from the developers was the DK?

The DK alone is strong but not problematic.

Sadly, even if they tell us something of explain why they do things they are never really transparent. So don't try to fathom their reasons or you might get lost in an ever changing maze of uncertainty.

Edited by Caldyrvan
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, FanOfValeera said:

Logic behind Raza nerf is that he will stay in wild forever, and there, Reno Priest is too strong. 

DK is strong too, but not broken by itself, it can still see play as some late game board clear and threat, but thats it.

But Vicious Syndicate said that both cubelock and aggro paladin are stronger then Reno Priest in wild.... And in wild Reno Priest was strong but not oppressive, we have a lot of powerfull deck to use as counter... Pirate Warrior was a lot more oppressive then Reno Priest for example...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Synesthesy said:

But Vicious Syndicate said that both cubelock and aggro paladin are stronger then Reno Priest in wild.... And in wild Reno Priest was strong but not oppressive, we have a lot of powerfull deck to use as counter... Pirate Warrior was a lot more oppressive then Reno Priest for example...

Both aggro paladin and pirate warrior is nerfed. Cubelock is untouched, which is suprising anyways.

The problem with Reno Priest is the same with standard actually. Dealing 40 damage in one turn is unacceptable and because of Spawn of Shadows, it is way easier to accomplish in wild. With any 4 additional cards, 32 damage is dealt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/1/2018 at 9:10 PM, Synesthesy said:

[...]

In facts, I don't like most nerfs I saw. Killing Quest Rogue back before KotFT made jade druid overpowered. Nerfing jade druid made Highlander Priest king of the meta. Now, will Cubelock be the next? Maybe aggro paladin?

 

On 29/1/2018 at 10:30 PM, FanOfValeera said:

Without Patches and Creeper? Not likely. [...]

Yesterday Vicious Syndicate publicated their first meta report after the nerf. They put 3 different paladin deck as the first 3 place of tier 1..... I was actually enjoying the slow, control meta... will we return to a "you are dead by turn 4" kind of meta? :|

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Synesthesy said:

 

Yesterday Vicious Syndicate publicated their first meta report after the nerf. They put 3 different paladin deck as the first 3 place of tier 1..... I was actually enjoying the slow, control meta... will we return to a "you are dead by turn 4" kind of meta? :|

Have you ever seen an aggro paladin after nerfs? I haven't seen a single one.

My predictions about aggro paladin might be wrong but those numbers are way off.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Synesthesy said:

 

Yesterday Vicious Syndicate publicated their first meta report after the nerf. They put 3 different paladin deck as the first 3 place of tier 1..... I was actually enjoying the slow, control meta... will we return to a "you are dead by turn 4" kind of meta? :|

Murloc paladin is definitely a large part of the meta game, but the other two decks have such small numbers of games played, there isn't even reliable match up data for them.  Right now, the meta is pretty much control/cube lock, murloc paladin, tempo mage, and spiteful priest (also some combo dragon priest once you hit some higher ranks).  Most of the games I have played this month, like legit over 90% from about 18-8, have been against one of the aforementioned decks (not including combo priest).  Around rank 8, I started seeing a lot more of the dragon priests though.  Looking at my match up data, I have played against, 2 druids, 1 rogue, 3 shaman, 0 warriors, and 5 hunters.  Also, I would gladly go back to a more aggro meta if it would push out the spiteful decks, I god damn hate that card.  Like those decks are pretty much exactly everything that is wrong with hearthstone (That is to say, a deck with minimal interactivity, with a ton of very swingy RNG, whose only goal is to play curve stone, and takes very little skill to pilot well).  

 

Edit: 3 druids, jade druid burned 2 cards with a naturalize vs control priest, hit my geist, I am done with hearthstone for the weekend.

Edited by VaraTreledees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had time to play 67 games only after nerfs (control priest, jade druid and big spell mage). From rank 15 to 9.

I played against 4 paladins, just 4. 21 mages and 17 priests were my most common matchups by far. Then there were like 10 warlocks.

These numbers are fairly different than what HSR or VS suggests.

Apparently they have the numbers, I don't. I'm just saying that my experience is different. Plus, there is no f***ing way that aggro paladin survived the nerfs, no matter what the number suggests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, FanOfValeera said:

I had time to play 67 games only after nerfs (control priest, jade druid and big spell mage). From rank 15 to 9.

I played against 4 paladins, just 4. 21 mages and 17 priests were my most common matchups by far. Then there were like 10 warlocks.

These numbers are fairly different than what HSR or VS suggests.

Apparently they have the numbers, I don't. I'm just saying that my experience is different. Plus, there is no f***ing way that aggro paladin survived the nerfs, no matter what the number suggests.

I agree.  I have seen a lot of murloc paladin, and I think 1 control paladin and 1 dude paladin, I think the win rate of aggro paladin is just a fluke, far to few data points to make an accurate read on the decks power from statistics.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't play ladder anymore, maybe when the next rotation hits I will start again to do that seriously.

But anyway, I feel like even though the nerfs were reasonable and we stop seeing all deck/classes use the same cards (Pirate Package) the meta is more boring than before the nerfs, but that's just my personal impression, I might be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.