Malygos needs to be HOF'd like all the other OP cards

Community Discussion
1

HOF the stupid card it is OP and allows to many decks to be OP

3 Likes
2

An interesting time to choose Malygos, in particular, to complain about.

4 Likes
3

Let’s now all guess, against which card the OP lost.

3 Likes
4

Does it matter? It is a dumb card needs to be HOF’d like Leeroy or any other card that was a neutral and got hof’d.

1 Like
5

Malygos:

  • Is not used in any popular decks
  • Is not played in a deck with an incredibly high winrate
  • Does not homogenize or warp the meta to any capacity
  • Does not force any archetype out of the meta
  • Is not responsible for the creation of non-games on the scale of decks like Naga Giants et al.
  • Does not break class identities to any significant degree

Which collectively means it has none of the characteristics of a card that should be nerfed or sent to the HoF.

4 Likes
6

I call bull on you no skittle away like a good blizzard fanboi,.

7

Maybe OP just woke up from a coma and thinks we’re still in the Rastakhan meta?

4 Likes
8

But why’d you play Malygos when Shirvallah was superior in almost every way?

9

did druid have a top tier deck in that meta ?

because im sure i saw him ask for a druid nerf too

1 Like
10

?

So, can you show me one good example of how Malygos is a threat to the meta?

Because the data (you know, the sort of thing Blizz uses to determine balance patches) shows that malygos is untiered right now. There is no objective definition of “OP” which fits the card, unless you count “beats players who don’t know anything about the game”.

4 Likes
11

I mean, it’s always, ALWAYS just a matter of time before some degenerate deck pops up during a year that’s all about stalling long enough to play Malygos and then one shot some poor bastard.

12

Pre-ramp nerf, they did. Those were the days of Combostone, and Maly/Togg was one of the big ones if I remember correctly.

13

Does anybody really believe that fanboi is an argument? One could twist the sentence and say something like “why listen to a BLIZZARD hater?”

2 Likes
14

No. Everybody knows that calling names and baseless accusations of being a fanboi or a Blzzard shill is an admission of defeat.
(Just as the opposite, calling someone a Blizzard hater or a shill for a competing company, would be an admission of defeat as well).

Think about it. You have an opinion and share it. Someone else disagrees and explains why. At this point there are a few options:

  1. You disagree with their reasons and believe you have good counter arguments. If you choose to continue the conversation, then obviously presenting those arguments gives you the best chance of convincing the other person, so that’s what you would do.
  2. Their reasons convince you that you were wrong. Here you can choose to stop responding or to post a response acknowledging that they made a good point and changed your mind.
  3. Their reasons did not convince you but you don’t see a counter argument. At this point you can choose to walk away from the debate. Or to write a text like “I understand where you come from so let’s agree to disagree”. But neither is satisfactory if you are somehow hell-bent on “winning” the argument. On convincing other readers that your point is right and the other point is wrong, even though you have no arguments left. In that case, discrediting the source of the counter arguments is typically the only “weapon” left.

What people fail to realize is that most of the audience here is smart enough to see that posters that call names and accuse others of being a fanboi or an undercover staff member only manage to discredit themselves.

1 Like
15

Because we are not Blizzard haters moron

16

And by calling me names you prove your point how?

Having a different opinion does not make me a fanboy either.

4 Likes
17

So lemme get this straight.

You have an opinion

Someone disagrees with your opinion, and explains why that is the case

Your first assumption about this person is that they must be a “Blizzard fanboi”. This is not because they claim to love Blizzard or even mentioned it in their post. No, the only reason they could possibly disagree with you in the first place (as opposed to using precedence and logic) is that they mus blindly follow Blizz and agree with anything they say.

Yeah sure, “not a Blizzard hater” :rofl:

1 Like
18

@Infinity

I only say that because the 2 of you always no matter what the thread is defends Blizzard in everything they do. Have you two ever said anything negative or critical of Blizzard?

That is why we call you fanboi’s

19

That’s mostly because the forums are 95% unwarranted salt from the playerbase and not constructive criticism in the slightest. If you dig around you’ll find that I have plenty of criticisms of Blizzard’s practices. The lack of autosquelch, a general lack of communication with the playerbase (they’ve improved this recently but it was at the top of my list for a long time), no meaningful player stats or equivalent in-game feature, a misunderstanding of how core game mechanics (card draw/healing among others) should be implemented as strengths and weaknesses, etc.

More recently I’ve gone off about how the nerfs to Quest Mage will do nothing to slow the deck as well as how Shaman, from a game design and flavor perspective, should not have Murlocs included in its class identity.

I just wind up posting a lot more “in defense” of Blizzard because the forums are flooded with ungrounded and salt-laden complaints more than they are with constructive criticism. When I see someone complain about how “OP” Malygos is despite the card having a sub-50% deck winrate and a whopping 0.8% representation in the meta, what do you think my reaction is going to be?

2 Likes