And, as we know, if my neighbor is doing bad, I am given leeway to do bad as well.
While it might seem less concerning within the context of a deck with weaker cards, the card itself is still highly problematic. Its low cost relative to its powerful impact makes it disproportionately strong, which is a significant design flaw. It creates non-games when drawn, and when not drawn, its impact becomes evident because losing becomes significantly easier without it.
The card’s effect is simply not balanced for 4-mana.
I don’t wear my rank as a badge of honor because it means nothing in this context.
I’ve judged the effect based on its design, yet you want to diminish my opinion because I am only a “mid-Legend player.”
Simply put, I don’t care about its standing in the meta. The design of the card is abhorrent and problematic. It does too much for a 4-cost card.
How is my opinion nonsense? It’s literally MY opinion.
You shifting the conversation to its meta standing and comparing it to other cards, which are also problematic by my standards, is what I consider nonsense.
I’m triggered and it’s not your fault but I generally dislike the general consensus that VS is near infallibe. They are really not that much better than daily browsing the Meta tab of hsguru and doing custom filtering yourself; even if they had more data: hsguru is an interesting testament to the variability of the game; every single filter you change: brings different results making “what is best” obscenely SUBJECTIVE.
E.g. browse the Meta tab for at least 3 days in a row and start changing filters of number of games in the past day; you’ll see that what archetype is the “best” keeps shuffling around depended on day or depended on filter; it’s not even a good argument when people say “highest sample size is best” because 100 games for only 1 archetype is interesting data and the deck may be hidden otherwise.
You misquoted me. Don’t put “” unless you’re direct-quoting. I said that EVEN mid-legend players don’t understand the game, which is completely opposite in meaning than saying that you are “only mid-legend player”
No, I’m not diminishing your opinion based on a rank, I literally posted 3 wall of texts full of arguments and examples from games, and you yourself watched HUNDREDS of those.
Now I’m sad that my friend turned malicious on me and started acting like two of the least liked forum users…
As a 4 cost card it does literally nothing except losing tempo, since it’s a 2/6 do nothing card.
Since when is sarcasm an opinion? It’s literally mocking with me.
Because it’s the only thing important. A card is not strong or weak by design. It’s strong or weak depending on the meta and compared to other cards in that meta. There are many examples of cards which seem broken yet never see play, and vice versa. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it, because everyone makes predictions when the cards are announced and everyone fails at those predictions miserably.
What happened to Incendius? Broken by design, never sees play. Nerf it? Why???
Your design-based analysis is meaningless in a conversation about nerfing a potentially overpowered card. I’m sorry my friend, but this is a conversation where your opinion doesn’t matter. But hey! At least you got to mock me a little bit -.-
I didn’t read the entire conversation, just expressed my own opinion. You deliberately responded to me, and I read only what you wrote directly to me. I didn’t find your arguments compelling.
Just like Sif, a 6-mana 4/6 that doesn’t do much either.
Truly compelling.
I did not reply to you.
And yes, sarcasm is very much an opinionated statement.
And that’s why I didn’t suggest it should be nerfed or anything like that.
You can’t just start making things up. I wasn’t involved in that conversation at all.
Clearly, I was just replying to the thread, not to anyone specific, and sharing my opinion.
That’s your opinion on the matter.
I believe people have the freedom to express themselves, whether their opinion matters to others or not.
You guys realize Warlock is a really bad matchup for Druids to face, right?
And that we’re still very much a Tier 2 / borderline 1 with at least one meta deck?
Nerfing locks in any capacity (except Doomkin) is going to catapult us back into the stratosphere. Which, as a Dr00d main, I’m okay with. But my sense from around here is y’all kind of hate us right now. Sooooo maybe don’t nerf locks?
So far, the common card amongst every “problem deck” since the expansion released has been “Tidepool Pupil” The ability to cheaply create an additional copy of a spell in your deck is proving to be very powerful and problematic.
Yeah Druid is very powerful at the moment. The only thing that pushed my druid deck out of a high 80% winrate was the advent of this fel/insanity combo deck.
That being said, yes I think Druid is overly powerful currently as well. But at the moment Crescendo OTK keeps it heavily in check.