Funny because I don’t see pure in the title of this thread
Repentance is a terrible example.
And Pure Paladin is the only Paladin archetype, right now, that doesn’t consist of mostly neutrals. It also isn’t Murloc Paladin, which, as a matter if fact, can lose turn 4.
Paladin doesn’t have viable, good card draw (not talking about cycle. There is a massive difference!), nor good comeback mechanics.
And an aggro deck that aims to win turn 4, tends to lose if it doesn’t manage to stick a good board.
1 Like
It’s still an example.
He was talking about during RoS but before the nerf to mage.
Like I said, I only disagree on the fact that the OP said that freeze was a problem.
I personnaly think that paladin is too weak and one or two changes to his basic set would be nice. (But doing this would buff Zeph)
Now. How is that an argument?
Zeph is janky enough that a buff to the Paladin Classic/Basic set could legitimately make him worse.
Also. The quality of examples needs to reach a certain point, because you are otherwise losing credibility. And it also detracts from the validity of your arguments and their structure.
I tend to agree that RNG based archetypes are terrible, design-wise, however.
That’s not really an argument, more a thought. I was imagining all the complaints about Zeph receving an indirect buff (poor Zeph is already criticized a lot)
I mean, he was suddenly accusing mage of complaining about a nerf decision I never saw anyone complain about.
I didn’t think I needed a good example to show him he was wrong on a tiny detail.
While that is true, using terrible cards as examples in arguments to invalidate bad arguments, is kind of ironic. Or lazy. Or whatever.
As for Zeph: I don’t mind him too much.
DQA, however, due to being a RNG-board-swing card, annoys me.
2 Likes
Every post in this thread is basically “it’s okay for Paladin to auto lose against Mages, they can run these terrible cards that might give them a chance against Mage at the cost of being useless against everything else.”
You don’t give a crap about the state of Paladin, just stop posting in this thread.
1 Like
Yes because saying that you should wish for a more proactive pally is clearly saying it’s okay for pally to be bad
I don’t see how giving Paladin a rush minion will suddenly stop freeze cards from destroying any Paladin deck outside aggro but okay
“Proactive” is a nightmarish term for paladin players.
It essentially translates into uninspired, stale aggro.
Such has been the trend.
I disagree. Paladins by and large love the attendant buff, curving it out followed by a’dal or libram of wisdom. Curving out turn 4 zealot or turn 5 truthseeker is also great.
While control paladin has been an archetype in many points in the past, the class has always had a solid aggro and midrange foundation. Some of the best pally decks from LoE secret pally to odd pally to mech pally to murloc pally puts pallies closer to hunters than they do to priests.
The ones who loath “uninspired stale aggro” I wager are speaking more from their personal preference for control decks in general, not really about pallies specifically.
Hey soda, how would you fix the problem were it you?
Mage only has stall now. So how would you make it so that mage has some type of damage mitigation that is also more fair to paladin?
The Attendant buff is undeniably great.
As for this “foundation”: the classic/basic set of Paladin is bad. Aggro tends to find a way. Murloc Paladin either relied on a very gimmicky synergy in Prismatic Lense, or, right now, primarily uses neutral cards with a few otherwise mediocre class cards.
Card quality is what enables new archetypes. And many, many Paladin cards (including Finley, due to his very inconsistently useful nature), still follow the old and very “fair” curvestone-ish formula.
You certainly must have noticed the additional lack of coherence in this class. The several, distinct archetypes that were pushed every new expac don’t exactly help the longevity and, ironically, flexibility of this class.
Also: disliking the fact Paladin is the only class that has failed establishing new archetypes in Wild is quite understandable, I believe.
I do not disagree with you. But my main issues are the design choices and trends.
Here are 2 examples. I don’t know how good they are, since I’m not a good player myself :
Frost nova + doomcaller ? -> use your rush minion + one or two buffs to kill the doomcaller. Board saved !
Kalecgos + blizzard ? -> turn kalec into a 1/1 + your rush minion. Dangerous minion eliminated !
Play frozen shadoweaver, fight fire with fire (or freeze with freeze in this case).
Why does Mage need so much damage mitigation when they have burn, better class minions then Paladin, better control spells, better legendaries, etc
Because they don’t have heal nor taunt.
You know, 2 of the 3 things that allow most non-aggro deck to fight aggro
Is there an effective Burn Mage deck in the meta?
Highlander Mage, the only really good Mage deck right now, wins largely off of minion damage. It only survives to that point, or is able to go face instead of trading (then getting traded into, then dying) because of Freeze effects oftentimes.
1 Like
Paladin has both of those things and yet they pretty much have to only play aggro decks, ever ask yourself why is that
Because of freeze ?
I mean, I already said that I think paladin needs a buff.