Navel mine and Boars are not the problem

Multiplayer Discussion
1

People quick to blame Boar and Navel mine for toxic play but fail to notice they neutral cards be used by two classes.

If Navel mine is problem the card, then why do not see hunter, DH or warlock using them? Unless Navel mine is not key problem card meaning it rouge cards to blame not Navel mine.

Boar is in same boat it only problem in priest deck and no one else it because only they got cards that make it a problem.

so, if these cards are problem cards tell me how in modern stander, they are toxic without rouge or priest cards supporting it. (With same level of effectivity)

2

I seen boar in hunter it does alright but need to understand the deck I played it a few its kinda fun.
of course weak to aggro if don’t draw well.

AAECAR8E5e8D25EEwLkEltQEDerpA9P5A5T8A6mfBOOfBL2gBNejBOWkBMCsBJmtBJS1BIPIBL/TBAA=

idk things I link don’t show anymore correctly but thats somewhat what I used

and I heard/seen a warlock use mine once idk how that deck works at all tho

1 Like
3

Sometimes problematic neutral cards only create a problem in a singular class because of specific synergies.

At that point there has to be decisions made about if it makes more sense to nerf the neutral, or the class specific synergy.

With the boar example, amulet is the card that lets them more easily get enough boars to get the sword. If you decide that “amulet is the real problem” with boar priest, because it allows the sword to be made with only 2 spell casts other than the boars, you should also consider that amulet hasn’t been an issue in any other deck priest has, so targeting it as “the problem” also doesn’t make much sense.

In general, it’s best to try to minimize the collateral damage on nerfs to limit it to a deck you think is a problem.

If you wanted to target bomb rogue, naval mine would be the obvious target, simply because the impacts of the nerf would be almost entirely limited to bomb rogue, as other decks don’t generally use it, and the other rogue deathrattle synergies aren’t killing you on turn 5 with any other deathrattle.

2 Likes
4

yea i know but we all know mine prob wont be nerfed watch it end up being graveyard or sketchy nerfed lol and kills the whole deathrattle decks that would want to try something if mine did get nerfed

2 Likes
5

fact is Navel Mine is not the core problem but if they got nerf it should make it like the owl it damage targets a random enemy instead.

if they want fix core problem should nerf forsaken lieutenant, Snowfall grave and counterfeit blade to copy or trigger death rattles that coast 3 or more that way solve this problem and avoid future problems

6

This is a weird take.

Obviously, naval mine and the boar aren’t the problem cards, there are cards that synergize TOO well with them in the aforementioned classes.

No one is yelling to nerf naval mine just because it exists. Nerf it because it ONLY sees play in rogue or warlock decks and is essentially a pseudo-class card.

7

people acting like Boar and Mine are the be all end all of the problem making them easy pray for unneeded nerfs on them and not real problem cards.

Like for example all cards that got nerf because of sorcerer’s apprentice existing who was the real problem card in all those decks.

8

Well that’s not what the topic of this thread is about.

Specifically, naval mine and boar are problematic because like I said they only see play in certain classes where their power level is wildly different.

Naval mine in a druid deck? Pointless. Naval mine in a rogue deck? Phenomenal. These differences are what make the cards stand out and thus, be a target for nerfs.

The cards that the classes have that bolster these are also not overpowered. Only together are these rough and overpowered combinations.

9

My disdain for the predominant take is palpable.

Why? Mine Rogue has a 50.02% winrate in Diamond 4-1. It’s spookily close to perfectly balanced.

Oh, and if you’re going to say “it feels bad to play against,” then this is what I have to say to you.

10

For me it’s more like “some neutral cards are garbage, but they can be played optimally in one class because it fits its identity”.

I wouldn’t nerf DR rogue (lol) because of naval mine.
The fact that naval rogue is the best DR rogue deck in standard just shows how bad DR rogue is.
If a class can heal, that deck is doomed to lose every time.
If a class can get good boards (paladin) in the early game, naval rogue can’t to anything to stop it.

I see it as a meme deck that tries to win by drawing the good cards in the correct order against a class that can’t stop its plan.

Naval mine is a bad card, that’s why it isn’t played unless you can exploit its effect (also warlock can).
There have always been cards like this, I think they are fine

Go to your collection, type “deathrattle” and look at what a rogue can do.
Spoiler: not much.
Nerfing these cards as you are proposing is only going to kill an archetype that has never had the chance to be competitive

11

Well, I never did say that’s why it should be nerfed and it probably won’t however your post you quoted flies in the face of your apparent disdain for the obvious. It also just means you’re what? A contrarian by design?

Of course, not everyone will ever be happy. Nerf one card and you get 10 cheers and 5 jeers. The fact of the matter though is that there are cards wholly unhealthy to the game and the overall meta. Is Naval Mine one of those cards? Probably not.

Was Grim Patron one of those cards? No. But Warsong Commander made it a T1 deck for a very very long time. Do you remember the Mindrender nerf? That deck was doing alright but the card was so unhealthy for the overall meta that it was changed. The stats for that deck were fairly similar to mine rogue as well.

12

There’s a problem common to democratic (small d, not referring to the American political party) systems where the proper units for measuring effect are discarded, and replaced by the unit of voters.

It should be pretty clear that nerfing a deck that’s considered “unfun” will yield only mild happiness, if any at all, to its supporters. It’s not like you play against the same deck every match; on the high end of things we’re talking about 1 in 4 games. In contrast, it should be pretty clear that having your deck nerfed to the point you can’t play it anymore is pretty devastating if you loved the deck for what it was. (If you were only playing it because it had a disproportionate winrate, it’s easy to move on with a Dust refund.)

So if each of those ten cheers got +10 happiness, and each of the five jeers is -25 happiness, you’re not increasing the net happiness of the system. Indeed, if you do this twenty times to twenty different decks, you would see almost everyone’s net happiness decrease. But each instance of such a proposal is going to be popular because the majority will look at the situation with shortsighted selfishness.

It’s worth noting that the design affordances of social media are inherently democratic. On Reddit you don’t get more votes than someone else if the impact of a proposal would disproportionately effect you. One person, one vote. These affordances in turn apply conditioning, like Pavlov’s dogs salivating at the bell, making one want to say popular, or even populist, things. Social media brainwashes people into thinking in terms of units of democratic popularity and not in terms of units of real utilitarian impact. Argue against the nerf, and you’ll get 5 cheers and 8 jeers, even if you’re a persuasion god and you convince two of them you might not be wrong.

You don’t control what your opponent plays, but you do control what you play. I stand by firmly by the conviction that giving players the choice to choose what they play as thoroughly outweighs the frustrations caused by what they play against, and that when cards are nerfed because they’re “unhealthy” it invariably is the case that that card existing created more fun for its lovers than it created unfun for its haters. So, no, it’s a lie that there are cards wholly unhealthy to the game and the overall meta, except when those cards win too much.

I’m not against nerfing cards due to too high of a winrate. This is a problem because the player playing as that deck might not love the deck for what it is, but just for its disproportionate winrate.