Kazakus does was Cascading does, only slower most of the time. But you get Canadians back with Ysha
Thatâs true, there is no way to play minions right now. Every deck has to rely in direct damage, full control tools or being a Paladin. Which is quite sad for a game that is about minions fighting each other.
No its fine. Blizzard stance on Midrange seems to be that it shouldnât exist. Over and over there is stuff that punishes Midrange play styles as it either doesnât survive aggro push or get aggro enough to finish off control.
LOL people actually want to complain about Warlock cards when itâs currently one of the weakest classes in the game after Rogue and Shaman, regardless of how annoying you find cascading disaster or even Tickatus to be. First of all, you need near perfect draw order to stand a chance against MOST classes. You clearly donât actually understand the difficulty of corrupting Cascading Disaster TWO times for it to even be useful in MOST cases. You donât just get the card and remove 3 like its no big deal - the card sits in your hand until turn 8+ MOST of the time, and a lot of the time, by that point the opponents board is too big for it to even be helpful, and at that point you need to just drop Twisting Nether and pray you have Strongman so that doesnât end up being your whole turn.
As far as I;m concerned, they can get rid of Cascading Disaster from this game sure, but first why donât they get rid of Sword of the Fallen and Oh My Yogg and maybe even just the Paladin class as a whole so I donât have to see them in 8 out of every 10 games I play?
Letâs also be real, you might find Priest so be annoying and restrictive too, but at least they donât just spend the entire game dropping face cards like Paladin and Hunter. Most of the issue belongs to Blizzard in the first place as well when it comes to Priest. Because of them removing every spell Priest had to actually do damage to face, their ONLY option at this point is to play ridiculous amounts of generation cards and pray to the Light that they end up getting the right amount of useful random cards to burn out their opponent. There is no clear-cut win condition aside from getting your opponent to forfeit because they ran out of steam, and thatâs not fun for the opponent or for the Priest, but literally what else can they do?
I donât even understand the point of complaining about Warlock OR Priest when they are essentially irrelevant trash compared to the actual high-tier decks in this terrible aggro meta.
1 Like
Well, for starters, you donât need to be a top deck to have an effect on the meta, and Second of all, priest is VERY popular at high legend. That Said:
Cards can be disruptive for a meta, even If they are bad, If they keep being played. It does not matter Illucia is a bad card. Her presence alone kills OTK, and things like Hysteria and Disaster are a little too good at keeping midrange in check.
We have like, 2 midrange decks right now? Paladin and Warrior. Even though Mages, Shaman, Druids and a few other classes got resources for them.
3 Likes
They are not irrelevant⌠They are an important part of the meta, and right now the meta is really restrictive about what can be played. And part of that problem are this control classes that can clear in the most efficient way any board that is developed.
1 Like
Sorry, not irrelevant, just terrible win rates compared to nearly every other class except for Shaman and Rogue which are arguably in even worse positions.
Control classes can clear any board that is developed? Maybe by the time things get to turn 8, but generally that is just a completely laughable sentiment. If you get incredibly lucky card draw and generation then maybe, but when most of the meta consists of dropping 1, 2, 3 cost cards every turn and hitting face, there is hardly any amount of removal that can effectively deal with it, and the win rates of these control classes reflects that. If that was supposed to be their strength its clearly not working, and therefore I donât understand the point of whining about crappy classes when the classes that are actually problematic donât even show up in the discussion when they have 60%+ win rates.
I think youâre missing the point of what Iâm saying.
1 Like
Are you a high legend player, or are you like 99.9% of the player base? If its the ladder, then I donât understand your point in bringing that up. âOnly the absolute best players in the world can pilot this class that has a <45% WR, therefore its still goodâ. Nice logic.
If hysteria and cascading disaster are so good, then why are the 2 classes that use them some of the worst in the meta right now?
I think its simply laughable to complain about these cards and these classes in general as if the classes with 60%+ win rates arenât the actual issue. If youâre playing mid range and running into Warlock and Priest in 2 out of every 10 matches, then how are you not climbing if these aggro decks like face hunter and secret paladin are such a non-issue? If its only control decks that are extremely unpopular and have terrible win rates that are screwing you up, then I donât see what there is to cry about.
Talk about face hunter and secret paladin if you want to talk about nerfs, otherwise shut up imho.
1 Like
Iâm gonna assume a little here and understand youâre talking about priest. yeah, priest dominance in high legend has skill as one of itâs factors. The others are that thereâs no Tickatus lock there, which is the hardcounter to the deck that infests the rest of the ladder, and with a t ighter spread of builds, you can actually tech adequately with a control deck, that is an opinion also held by the VS team, by the way. That said:
No one is saying other classes arenât a issue dude. Take your bias out when discussing something. No one is saying tickatus or priest are an issue, people are saying they have significant effects on the meta, even with their respectively low winrates.
Also, no one is arguing against control decks, people are arguing specifically against or in favor of CD (or hysteria). Not every argument is fueled by what i like or dislike in game. I can recognize patterns and argue about them even if i have no burning passion against X deck type in general or control in particular.
2 Likes
Obviously Paladin is another poison in the meta. No one is saying the opposite, but the meta is not form by just one class. It seems that for you the only thing that can be critisaised is Paladin or Hunter, which is a narrow way to analyze the problems in the meta.
This is a topic about Warlock. So people will talk about it in hereâŚ
Actually, there are people complaining about priests in this thread, which is why I brought them up. Tickatus was also mentioned HERE, and itâs complained about all over this forum, so I brought that up as well.
Get off your high horse about your debating prowess - my eyes are rolling so hard youâre going to need to pay to have my new lazy eye fixed. Donât try to take away from my point by simply calling me biased - it is lazy and it is weak and does nothing to further any âdiscussionâ.
MY issue is with people constantly coming into this forum to complain about classes that suck, and the few barely decent cards they have when there are much greater and glaring issues in this game right now, but sure, letâs talk about Cascading Disaster.
It is a 4 cost card that sucks if you use it by itself on turn 4. You need to hope you have a 5 cost card in your hand in order for it to corrupt just the first time, meaning you need to play it on turn 6 in order for it to remove 2 - how many useful 5 cost Warlock cards exist that you can play on turn 5 without it ruining your tempo or letting the constant barrage of aggro decks build up their board more to crush you on their turn 5 or 6? Envoy Rustwix? Felsoul Jailer? Siphon Soul? Donât make me laugh. Ogremancer is a neutral card that I could see filling in that spot, and with spell mage becoming less popular it is hardly as useful as it once was, and as a stand alone drop when you need to be worrying about removal, its not even very good. Next, you need to hope that you have ANOTHER card to corrupt Cascading Disaster if you want its absolute value, and you need for there to be nothing else you need to accomplish on turn 6 with lower cost cards that wonât corrupt it for a second time, which means now youâre going to be LUCKY if you can play it on turn 7 - and like I said before, most of the time you wonât even get to play it at this time.
How exactly is a 4 cost card that relies on multiple conditions and lucky card draw to play on turn 7 so problematic that it is actually worth crying about in this thread?
2 Likes
Paladin and Hunter ARE the most problematic classes in the meta, and their strength defines what is going on in the game right now much more than Cascading Disaster does. That is my entire point. Why bother discussing a half decent card and its need to be nerfed when its not even broken in the first place when youâre talking about a class with barely more than a 50% WR while saying nothing about the classes breaching 60%+.
1 Like
Games are and should be balanced around the highest levels of play.
If below legend people are not using priestâs full potential and as a consequence, priest has a low winrate, thatâs their problem. Thereâs a learning curve for them work on.
Thereâs a reason priest is being brought massively at tournaments, thereâs a reason priest grows in popularity at top legend. Because the class is actually one of the strongest.
Skill cap is not an excuse to allow cards to remain inbalanced.
1 Like
If you think cascading is the one and only imbalanced card in the game , then youâre wrong mate. Hereâs a list of the ââ issue ââ cards they should adress : Flow, Spring Water, Illgynoth, Crabrider, Inquisitor,Skull of guldan,Hysteria, All priest randomly generated cards,Kolkar, Rhino,Field contact, Shadowstep⌠And I donât even mention how broken is Wild KEKW.
That said and considering how team 5 never correctly balanced the game, I doubt things will ever change. I do believe itâs their strat to make us addicted for some pepega reason.
1 Like
Ok then.
Donât act biased then dude.
People complain about everything dude. Some are deserved, some are not. But i digress.
Itâs a 4 cost unconditional random removal. Itâs regular but for laddering purposes regular means bad, i know.
Here, first, letâs not talk like control warlock is running low curves and has few high costs cards that it has to dig for in the deck, or like it has a hard time digging for whatever it needs.
Truly. Few. But Control Warlock is not a tempo deck, nor itâs trying to be. Thir tempo is irrelevant to the discussion.
Again, please.
First of all, it relies on no lucky card draw. The deck is designed around corrupting itâs key cards. Second of all, the multiple conditions you state are valid to any card. Cascading Disasterâs conditions are simple: You have to play a higher cost card to corrupt it. But to your point:
Donât translate the poor effectiveness of the deck, overall, to their cards. If the card was bad, people wouldnât be running it. The card is problematic because , when you play midrange, meaning, you drop escalating single threats on board each turn, warlock is more than capable of responding to it with effective removal, even without disaster.
Disaster only turns it that much more consistent, and allow for a much more effective Yâshaarj turn, or a Tickatus turn on 9/10, if you roll with any discount. Itâs akin to Illucia in that their decks arenât good, but singular cards in them turns them very effective at shutting down certain archetypes.
And again. No one is arguing against Tickatus Warlock here. Itâs fact that Tickatus Warlock is a non-issue, power wise. Unfortunately, tho, even then, given itâs popularity, it has effects on the meta, one of them being Priest poor winrate through the ladder and the other being that Midrange is mostly shutdown. In that, it has Priest as a partner in crime, but thatâs only because both of them run Hysteria.
So, TL; DR: The fact that warlock has a poor winrate now does not mean every single card the deck runs is equally bad. Control Warlock simply has no effective win condition and is bad at dealing with decks that can quickly refill the board . Itâs pretty good at shutting down Midrange.
1 Like
Iâm acting biased because Iâm directly talking about how discussing a barely decent card needs to be nerfed is a waste of time? I donât see how that is biased - seems more like once again youâre just trying to beat down my point with a weak character judgement when it does absolutely nothing to further your own points.
Ya man, tempo is totally irrelevant in this game as long as you play control, I should just shut up - lmao. Are you actually listening to yourself? On top of that, playing it on turn 4 as an unconditional removal is not just okay in this meta, it is outright terrible. What does removing 1 RANDOM minion do on turn 4 against an aggro opponent going to accomplish? More than half the time youâll remove a 1/1, or get yoggâd, or trigger avenge, or get counter spelled, or theyâll replace that 1 minion with 3 more than next turn while they keep the other 2 or 3 minions they already had down.
If youâre trying to say that it doesnât matter that you canât play it on curve because youâre not going to play it until late in the game no matter what, then I still donât see how that makes it a problematic card. Warlock has a tonne of removal if you make it to turn 10 - wow they are actually good at one thing that 90% of games never make it to in this meta, so lets nerf it then!
If you think that Warlock doesnât rely on any lucky card draw to actually survive and make it to their âwin conditionâ in this aggro heavy meta, then youâre either trying to be intentionally ignorant or youâre just a moron. You NEED removal in order to make it through most games on the ladder as the game is today, and the fact remains that Cascading Disaster is not that great at effectively accomplishing that in an amount of time that will truly help you win.
I can talk about poor effectiveness of a deck and its cards at the same time. I never said Cascading Disaster was bad, I said its simply not so good that it is anywhere near needing to be nerfed, and I listed various reasons as to exactly why that is the case. Just because every Warlock runs it doesnât make it game breaking - they also all run Spirit Jailer, so should that be nerfed too? Tamsin Roame? May as well get rid of Twisting Nether too because that clears a whole board and by your logic, that hurts mid-range and therefore it must be bad for the game.
Next, are you honestly trying to say that mid-range is completely cancelled because of a 1 card that belongs to 1 class? Thatâs laughable. An archetype should have a an archetype that counters it. Simple. If mid-range sucks right now, itâs much more than likely not close to being because of Cascading Disaster, and especially not JUST because of Cascading Disaster, and the fact that someone wants to talk about it like it is is completely narrow and shallow thinking.
No, youâre acting biased when you start an argument in high agressiveness becvause of your personal issue with people arguing about whatever. I can understand, iâm just asking you to not bring that up when itâs unnecessary. Also, iâm not talking about your opinion; iâm specifically talking about you.
I never said that. What i said is that Control Warlock isnât a tempo deck, so arguing that X or Y card will remove X or Y thing but will be a tempo loss is irrelevant. The deck isnât trying to compete on board to win. If you play nothing on board, Warlock is perfectly happy on just playing things to corrupt things and carrying on. They are gonna win either by running you out of resources through good trades or outvaluing you with Jaraxxus, ergo, value.
Then donât dude. God, if your opponent has a wide board, you have schools spirits. If itâs paladin, you have to test this kind of thing before critical turns, and control his board early. Mage isnât running counterspell, and if they replace it, good, that minion didnât hit you. What youâre saying applies to literally any removal right now, itâs not that CD is particularly bad. You can say the same things about combustion, for example.
No one is saying warlock has no counters. It has, we are arguing itâs relative power against a specific strategy.
Removal is, by nature, a tempo loss, with rare exceptions. If you donât have a situation where CD is strictly necessary, you simply donât use it.
Warlock isnât LACKING removal. You need no lucky draw because the whole deck is removal with a side of shard generators, and 3-4 late game win conditions. Besides , youâre not working with non-existent draw, like priest. Priest need lucky draws, because if he donât get what he needs, he is, quite literally, done.
Yes, cascading disaster is not bad. No, you didnât list any reason in particular why it needs no nerfs, other than anything that apply to any removal on the midgame. No, i never said running a card is a signal itâs gamebreaking, i implied that if they are running, itâs not a bad card. No, spirit jailer isnât choking an archetype, Tamsim is also neither, itâs at best an extension of warlock removal and heal. Twisting nether isnât gamebreaking also. Please engage my arguments dude. Iâm not saying CD is some over the top removal carrying a deck alone. Iâm saying CD is responsible for the perceived power on warlock because board based, midrange strategies tend to not be able to outpace the consistency CD produces, which in turn means the game drags on with no resources sticking, which means Tickatus actually can close a game, which makes T. Warlock actually pretty good against midrange decks.
Nope. There are other factors on why midrange is mostly dead, which i listed in my post.
Midrange already has counters in both specialized aggro and control. CD is no archetype, just like Hysteria is not. Counters also donât need to be so heavily favored.
Thatâs what you think dude. You keep saying CD is not responsible for midrange âdyingâ which i concur, but you offer no rebutal on itâs relative power against the archetype, because thereâs none. The reason midra nge is mostly dead is because Warlock is highly prevalent, and you canât really beat it by throwing progressively bigger things at it. This is a situation since the last expansion.
2 Likes
Oh my lord you are pretentious and draining.
I did bring up various reasons why it is not broken - see above where I mention the inordinate amount of conditions necessary to get full value from it anywhere close to an on curve turn where it can have a big impact beyond shutting the opponent down for good by turn 10. And ya dude, oh my god, they can use school spirits and their other removal too! Wow, itâs almost like thatâs how a control deck is supposed to work! I never thought of that. Youâre saying Warlock will always have school spirits on turn 4, so therefore CD being awful as a turn 4 play doesnât matter? Lmao, your entire point depends upon the warlock getting lucky card draw by turn 4 so that way CDâs weakness becomes irrelevant because you draw Soul Shear, Drain Soul, and School Spirits in the first 3 turns. Thatâs a strawman if I have ever seen one.
I know that what Iâm saying applies to most all removal and not just CD, and that detracts exactly 0 from what Iâm saying, thank you for pointing that out though. And thank you for explaining to me the science behind using removal, I was aware of when to use them as well, but go on sounding like a pretentious idiot since that clearly suits you.
You want to say Iâm not explaining any particular reason why a CD nerf discussion is not necessary in the current meta, and youâre saying exactly what to support this threadâs relevance? Where exactly are you pointing out the leering issues with the card? CD gets rid of mid-range deckâs cards on tempo? Okay, so does that mean all removal in the game should just be taken out to help out mid-range decks? Or is it CD specifically that you think is such an issue compared to every other removal card in the game? Where exactly has it gotten Warlock with its truly immense power for helping you win the game if things make it to turn 10?
All I read here is you pointing to exactly the win condition of warlocks that run CD and Tickatus as if that wasnât obvious to literally everyone in this thread and probably every single person who plays this game outside of just starting. Where exactly in any of that explanation about having lots of removal and Tickatus to close the game did you explain how any of that is an issue. That is literally the plan going in and the entire point of the deck moron. By your logic, I can just explain the exact strategy behind every deck archetype and therefore call it OP because it is a method of winning matches.
Frankly, Iâm beginning to wonder what point youâre even trying to make here at all. Iâm saying that people complaining about Warlock are idiotic to not be paying closer attention to the classes that are vastly overpowered right now. Additionally, I am saying that Warlock and more specifically CD are not responsible for the death of mid-range. Even if your point is that they contribute to it, then it means mid-range decks donât have enough good options in the first place to be strong in the meta if they canât even deal with the other 9 decks they will run into out of 10 with enough consistency that running into their counter 1 time and that being a consistent loss is going to cancel their viability when Warlock is not so frequently played that you can possibly blame it and CD, an only decent card, for being their grim reaper.
Yep. Been saying this for a while. Cascading disaster is not a healthy card for the game.
A lot of the issue isnât just that itâs removal, but that
1- itâs one-sided hard removal. Kills all sizes of minion and only hits one half of the board. So in the late game they get to just ignore your board and go face.
2- it costs 4 mana and says âdestroyâ on it. Thatâs just too cheap for a hard removal effect.
3- weâre at a critical mass of removal where lock can just run too much of it, creating highly polarized matchups. If you need to stick a board to win, lock is going to beat you, period. Thatâs why people are forced to rely on things like burn and whatever charge/combo pieces they can scrape together to kill the Lock from hand.
Is control warlock a powerful deck? Not really in terms of win rate, no. But itâs an unhealthy one and it has a bad influence on the meta.
That is literally the win condition of the deck - having a win condition that works only after you get to late game when youâre playing a control deck doesnât make it OP. If they manage to survive to that point without having the strength of dropping 50 minions or spells and hitting face every turn, then why would they not deserve to win against a deck that seeks to close out before that? This point is a strawman.
âRandomâ being the key word you so conveniently choose to leave out. Against most high tier decks in this meta, removing 1 RANDOM minion on their board is terrible and does next to nothing to help your situation for ALL of your mana on turn 4. Most removal that you would use by this point in the game does 3+ damage and costs the same or less for arguably more useful effects. If youâre talking about late game when it takes out 3 minions, then I would refer you right back to my response for your first point.
This is simply untrue, and the WR of the deck and the WR of board heavy decks in contrast like paladin and warrior reflect that. You can argue that they are getting âluckyâ with whatever damage âthey can scrape togetherâ, but when their entire deck archetypes revolve around doing face damage from the hand and constantly buffing their board, then what point are you even actually trying to make here? The game would be better if these classes didnât have to deal with their boards getting removed? You must be kidding. And even then, if Warlock was so good at shucking these decks then why would it not be seeing a high WR when nearly everyone is playing decks that should be in the Warlockâs favour by your logic?