I think they only should have kept Nourish at 5 so you can mana growth into it. Because now druid just gets fucked in the early game and Nourish at 6 just is pretty terrible. Nourish only became viable when UI and SP and all other OP shit was printed and because you also could play a 4/4 at the same time. I think they should unnerf Nourish because the card isn't actually that great and it may make Druid somewhat competitive.
I've come to have hope for brutal nerfs due to the Blade Flurry nerf. It was gross overkill at the time, but can you imagine a prenerf Blade Flurry plus a buffed up Kingsbane? That one, 2-mana card could easily OTK you. Or just serve as a ridiculously powerful board clear.
So I think they might have something good lined up for druid that would've been overpowered if it were paired with a 2 mana Wild Growth or 5 mana Nourish.
I get what your saying but this idea that because your going to print totally broken cards with no recourse doesn't really sit well with me. They kind butchered blade flurry. They could have made it just not deal face damage that would have been fine.
I don't have a problem that they nerfed it but how they nerfed it and at what time
yes they have done some good nerfs like dark pact and lackey or simmilar stuff perhaps but then there are nerfs like warsong, fwa and now this. Although cards like these were very powerfull and had to be adjusted in some way they had no reason to destroy those key iconic cards. It's very easy to nerf a card when you destroy it because you don't need to take a lot of effort. Most cards nerfed costed 1 more and what we see is pretty simple. A 5 mana spreding plague was nerfed to 6 mana but still got played - it was around 25%increas of manacost witch is somthing but people still payed it because it was still powerfull. Berfing a wild groth or fwa from 2 to 3 mana is huge. Imagine you changed spreading plague from 5 to 8 mana - not really good anymore aint it?
Wild growth could be changed to gain en empty mana cristal next turn. Fwa is from the best to one of the worst weapons in the entire game! A weapon class! Deathrattle gain 2 armor.
it's not that there shouldn't be nerfs but nerfs should be done carefully witch they sometimes succeeded and sometimes not. I don't care much about druid but i still feel for the druidplayers cause i understand as a warriorplayer
The plan was to Push TREANT archtype and save RR expansion but it failed ....
Everyone was Begging for Druid nerf and when Blizzard did it , now you think its not good ?!
Who exactly was asking for a double nerf of wildgrowth AND nourish, while leaving hunter untouched? I wasn't. If they wanted to push treants, they should have released more support. And actually I just crafted a decent token treant druid deck the day before the nerfs were announced with no notice, and now I waste 800 dust on 2 treant transformer cards that will never be played now. The cost of ever druid card ever printed was balanced around the ramp ability, and now with that decimated, druid of course is stuff with over-costed cards and abysmal winrate.
Almost Everyone was crying and saying Druid is OP class and need to be nerfed into oblivion . as i said it was to save RR they printed Zuljin hero card for hunter which is the only Staple RR Legendary card . this expansion is for hunter , Boomsday was for Warrior , and WW for Shaman they never nerf the Class in Spot light .
It was definitely a mistake to nerf two core cards at once, especially in front of a rotation that is going to hit that class very hard. Barring some incredible cards in the next set, I can't even fathom a viable Druid deck come rotation.
I don't have a problem that they nerfed it but how they nerfed it and at what time
yes they have done some good nerfs like dark pact and lackey or simmilar stuff perhaps but then there are nerfs like warsong, fwa and now this. Although cards like these were very powerfull and had to be adjusted in some way they had no reason to destroy those key iconic cards. It's very easy to nerf a card when you destroy it because you don't need to take a lot of effort. Most cards nerfed costed 1 more and what we see is pretty simple. A 5 mana spreding plague was nerfed to 6 mana but still got played - it was around 25%increas of manacost witch is somthing but people still payed it because it was still powerfull. Berfing a wild groth or fwa from 2 to 3 mana is huge. Imagine you changed spreading plague from 5 to 8 mana - not really good anymore aint it?
Wild growth could be changed to gain en empty mana cristal next turn. Fwa is from the best to one of the worst weapons in the entire game! A weapon class! Deathrattle gain 2 armor.
it's not that there shouldn't be nerfs but nerfs should be done carefully witch they sometimes succeeded and sometimes not. I don't care much about druid but i still feel for the druidplayers cause i understand as a warriorplayer
Well for me the worst thing about druid nerfs is that the class popularity beforehand was quite good, resulting in a meta that all the classes had above or close to 10% play rate. Since nerfs were out, druid players switched to hunters, hunters lost a really bad matchup so they grew exponentially and also a lot of zoolock players switched to this class as well, due to saronite nerf. This resulted in a meta with one class being overplayed. Before you call me salty or point me to the salt thread, (it's pretty easy to find it, saltiness is everywhere), I don't have problem playing against hunter due to lose rate or whatever but due to repetitiveness.
The problem was Druid was balanced around ramp but they made a card like ultimate infestation which is took away a lot of the downside of ramping - ie lack of tempo and card advantage. UI immediately remedied all the issues of ramping quick.
Both wild growth and nourish were really powerful but there was were better ways of nerfing them without killing the class.
My opinion for wild grow was either...
1. Remove the hidden function of “excess mana” off of wild growth. This does two things. First it simplifies a Basic card so new players aren’t confused by this hidden functionality. And secondly it nerfs the card to make it risky if to include if you don’t draw it before 10 mana. Slight nerf as well with auctioneer.
Or
2. Increase to 3 mana but make it “choose one: Add a empty mana crystal or Draw a card” this adds flexibility so you could use it to draw before 10 mana if you want. This does have a side effect of making less simple for a basic card and nerfed with auctioneer but overall the flexibility would make up for the mana nerf. And also removes the hidden functionality off a basic card.
As for Nourish. Would have kept it 5 mana but made it Empty mana crystals instead of full. This stops you essentially ramping 2 mana for only 3 mana. And stops you still being able to maintain some semblance of tempo through a wrath or hero power on 5 or swipe on 7 mana etc.
But it’s done now hopefully this make Druid going forward less balanced around ramp and give them more interesting ramp cards in future sets.
Well for me the worst thing about druid nerfs is that the class popularity beforehand was quite good, resulting in a meta that all the classes had above or close to 10% play rate. Since nerfs were out, druid players switched to hunters, hunters lost a really bad matchup so they grew exponentially and also a lot of zoolock players switched to this class as well, due to saronite nerf. This resulted in a meta with one class being overplayed. Before you call me salty or point me to the salt thread, (it's pretty easy to find it, saltiness is everywhere), I don't have problem playing against hunter due to lose rate or whatever but due to repetitiveness.
So much fail here. What substantiation do you have to make the statement “Druid players switched to Hunter”. And what Druid deck was a bad matchup for Deathrattle Hunter? Token was a slight favorite, but the matchup was winnable for Hunter.
Well for me the worst thing about druid nerfs is that the class popularity beforehand was quite good, resulting in a meta that all the classes had above or close to 10% play rate. Since nerfs were out, druid players switched to hunters, hunters lost a really bad matchup so they grew exponentially and also a lot of zoolock players switched to this class as well, due to saronite nerf. This resulted in a meta with one class being overplayed. Before you call me salty or point me to the salt thread, (it's pretty easy to find it, saltiness is everywhere), I don't have problem playing against hunter due to lose rate or whatever but due to repetitiveness.
So much fail here. What substantiation do you have to make the statement “Druid players switched to Hunter”. And what Druid deck was a bad matchup for Deathrattle Hunter? Token was a slight favorite, but the matchup was winnable for Hunter.
Salt is salt.
So much fail here(Quoting you).
1st fail) Deathrattle is a single hunter archetype. Even against it, with the proper ramp, Malygos Druid could defeat it. Also token, could easily defeat DR Hunter, I was farming them actually with Token druid, as well as other hunter archetypes. I better not speak for the other hunter archetypes, I guess you were not playing the game at this period from your answer and also never looked to the stats.
2nd fail) The other classes have not risen their numbers in players(some lost playrate and other won) and hunter went from...12-13%? to 31%. While druid was like 17% and now is below 5% I think. So given these facts, where did this 12%+ of druid players went? Did they vanish? No, if you do the math, they moved to this class, because they were netdeckers and whatever class is dominant they follow it like meta sheeps. Simple as that. If your math is different, please provide so. Everything in life is math dude.
BS is BS , hatred is hatred and huntards are huntards.
P.S I was playing a lot spell hunter during Witchwood expansion, now I am hardly touching it. I was always playing a lot homebrew or meme decks like Tess Rogue or Evolve shaman with Zentimo and so on. This is just to catch up with your logic that is going to accuse me as a druid player lolw.
I think the Nourish nerf was fair enough as I would still play it at 6 mana, but the Wild Growth nerf kind of destroy the druid classes true class identity.
Well for me the worst thing about druid nerfs is that the class popularity beforehand was quite good, resulting in a meta that all the classes had above or close to 10% play rate. Since nerfs were out, druid players switched to hunters, hunters lost a really bad matchup so they grew exponentially and also a lot of zoolock players switched to this class as well, due to saronite nerf. This resulted in a meta with one class being overplayed. Before you call me salty or point me to the salt thread, (it's pretty easy to find it, saltiness is everywhere), I don't have problem playing against hunter due to lose rate or whatever but due to repetitiveness.
Warrior and Priest had 10% play rate before nerfs ? I don't know from where you are getting these numbers but in my experience, before nerfs, Warriors were pretty rare closely followed by Priest and Mage.
Well for me the worst thing about druid nerfs is that the class popularity beforehand was quite good, resulting in a meta that all the classes had above or close to 10% play rate. Since nerfs were out, druid players switched to hunters, hunters lost a really bad matchup so they grew exponentially and also a lot of zoolock players switched to this class as well, due to saronite nerf. This resulted in a meta with one class being overplayed. Before you call me salty or point me to the salt thread, (it's pretty easy to find it, saltiness is everywhere), I don't have problem playing against hunter due to lose rate or whatever but due to repetitiveness.
Warrior and Priest had 10% play rate before nerfs ? I don't know from where you are getting these numbers but in my experience, before nerfs, Warriors were pretty rare closely followed by Priest and Mage.
Well for me the worst thing about druid nerfs is that the class popularity beforehand was quite good, resulting in a meta that all the classes had above or close to 10% play rate. Since nerfs were out, druid players switched to hunters, hunters lost a really bad matchup so they grew exponentially and also a lot of zoolock players switched to this class as well, due to saronite nerf. This resulted in a meta with one class being overplayed. Before you call me salty or point me to the salt thread, (it's pretty easy to find it, saltiness is everywhere), I don't have problem playing against hunter due to lose rate or whatever but due to repetitiveness.
Warrior and Priest had 10% play rate before nerfs ? I don't know from where you are getting these numbers but in my experience, before nerfs, Warriors were pretty rare closely followed by Priest and Mage.
I said close to or above, that means also less than 10% . I am frequently looking to statistics from hsreplay, hearthpwn and vicioussyndicate and compare them to sum up what's going on in the game. I don't also think that Warrior were rare , Odd Warrior was and is still played a lot. As for the other 2 classes, especially Priest was not played that much I agree, its popularity has grown since it counters Hunter.
What I am trying to state here, and others have stated as well in other threads is that the class diversity play rate was bigger before nerfs.
Also in my games this month from rank 9 to legend I faced less Rogues than Druids! Actually I faced 5 odd rogues out of 88 games, and none other rogue archetype. So I think that a single person's stats are not that indicative. ( I am playing at EU Server)
Well for me the worst thing about druid nerfs is that the class popularity beforehand was quite good, resulting in a meta that all the classes had above or close to 10% play rate. Since nerfs were out, druid players switched to hunters, hunters lost a really bad matchup so they grew exponentially and also a lot of zoolock players switched to this class as well, due to saronite nerf. This resulted in a meta with one class being overplayed. Before you call me salty or point me to the salt thread, (it's pretty easy to find it, saltiness is everywhere), I don't have problem playing against hunter due to lose rate or whatever but due to repetitiveness.
So much fail here. What substantiation do you have to make the statement “Druid players switched to Hunter”. And what Druid deck was a bad matchup for Deathrattle Hunter? Token was a slight favorite, but the matchup was winnable for Hunter.
Salt is salt.
So much fail here(Quoting you).
1st fail) Deathrattle is a single hunter archetype. Even against it, with the proper ramp, Malygos Druid could defeat it. Also token, could easily defeat DR Hunter, I was farming them actually with Token druid, as well as other hunter archetypes. I better not speak for the other hunter archetypes, I guess you were not playing the game at this period from your answer and also never looked to the stats.
2nd fail) The other classes have not risen their numbers in players(some lost playrate and other won) and hunter went from...12-13%? to 31%. While druid was like 17% and now is below 5% I think. So given these facts, where did this 12%+ of druid players went? Did they vanish? No, if you do the math, they moved to this class, because they were netdeckers and whatever class is dominant they follow it like meta sheeps. Simple as that. If your math is different, please provide so. Everything in life is math dude.
BS is BS , hatred is hatred and huntards are huntards.
P.S I was playing a lot spell hunter during Witchwood expansion, now I am hardly touching it. I was always playing a lot homebrew or meme decks like Tess Rogue or Evolve shaman with Zentimo and so on. This is just to catch up with your logic that is going to accuse me as a druid player lolw.
Seems like you are the one full of hatred. Maybe you were "farming" Hunters with Token Druid. But no more. The SALT is real.
Sure wild growth and nourish are good cards, but I don't think they were game breaking. Those 2 cards are crucial to 90% of all druid's gameplans, which has pretty much been beating your opponent to 10 mana and using the mana/card advantage to win.
The problem is that all of Druid's cards were balanced around 2 mana Wild Growth and 5 mana Nourish. So right now, everything is too slow.
Now that those cards are nerfed, new cards will be designed around 3 mana Wild Growth and 6 mana nourish. Things will feel better then.
I hope this is the case, I miss playing Barnabus into Nourish in the same turn with Quest Druid :(
I think they only should have kept Nourish at 5 so you can mana growth into it. Because now druid just gets fucked in the early game and Nourish at 6 just is pretty terrible. Nourish only became viable when UI and SP and all other OP shit was printed and because you also could play a 4/4 at the same time. I think they should unnerf Nourish because the card isn't actually that great and it may make Druid somewhat competitive.
I get what your saying but this idea that because your going to print totally broken cards with no recourse doesn't really sit well with me. They kind butchered blade flurry. They could have made it just not deal face damage that would have been fine.
I don't have a problem that they nerfed it but how they nerfed it and at what time
yes they have done some good nerfs like dark pact and lackey or simmilar stuff perhaps but then there are nerfs like warsong, fwa and now this. Although cards like these were very powerfull and had to be adjusted in some way they had no reason to destroy those key iconic cards. It's very easy to nerf a card when you destroy it because you don't need to take a lot of effort. Most cards nerfed costed 1 more and what we see is pretty simple. A 5 mana spreding plague was nerfed to 6 mana but still got played - it was around 25%increas of manacost witch is somthing but people still payed it because it was still powerfull. Berfing a wild groth or fwa from 2 to 3 mana is huge. Imagine you changed spreading plague from 5 to 8 mana - not really good anymore aint it?
Wild growth could be changed to gain en empty mana cristal next turn. Fwa is from the best to one of the worst weapons in the entire game! A weapon class! Deathrattle gain 2 armor.
it's not that there shouldn't be nerfs but nerfs should be done carefully witch they sometimes succeeded and sometimes not. I don't care much about druid but i still feel for the druidplayers cause i understand as a warriorplayer
Suck it up until the next expansion. When the OP dks rotate out, I imagine the game will change a lot for the better. For most classes
Almost Everyone was crying and saying Druid is OP class and need to be nerfed into oblivion . as i said it was to save RR they printed Zuljin hero card for hunter which is the only Staple RR Legendary card . this expansion is for hunter , Boomsday was for Warrior , and WW for Shaman they never nerf the Class in Spot light .
Well the Majority were pushing to nerf Wild growth and nourish plus Spreading plague .
Suck it up, blame the people who constantly cried about druid. Sure, they didn't know it would destroy an entire class, but they are still at fault.
It was definitely a mistake to nerf two core cards at once, especially in front of a rotation that is going to hit that class very hard. Barring some incredible cards in the next set, I can't even fathom a viable Druid deck come rotation.
The nerf went way too far, there isn't a single druid deck left above 50% win rate https://hsreplay.net/meta/
This guy gets it.
Well for me the worst thing about druid nerfs is that the class popularity beforehand was quite good, resulting in a meta that all the classes had above or close to 10% play rate. Since nerfs were out, druid players switched to hunters, hunters lost a really bad matchup so they grew exponentially and also a lot of zoolock players switched to this class as well, due to saronite nerf. This resulted in a meta with one class being overplayed. Before you call me salty or point me to the salt thread, (it's pretty easy to find it, saltiness is everywhere), I don't have problem playing against hunter due to lose rate or whatever but due to repetitiveness.
The problem was wild growth and the problem was nourish. It was a problem since the start. Its not anymore - GOD BLESS HS
The problem was Druid was balanced around ramp but they made a card like ultimate infestation which is took away a lot of the downside of ramping - ie lack of tempo and card advantage. UI immediately remedied all the issues of ramping quick.
Both wild growth and nourish were really powerful but there was were better ways of nerfing them without killing the class.
My opinion for wild grow was either...
1. Remove the hidden function of “excess mana” off of wild growth. This does two things. First it simplifies a Basic card so new players aren’t confused by this hidden functionality. And secondly it nerfs the card to make it risky if to include if you don’t draw it before 10 mana. Slight nerf as well with auctioneer.
Or
2. Increase to 3 mana but make it “choose one: Add a empty mana crystal or Draw a card” this adds flexibility so you could use it to draw before 10 mana if you want. This does have a side effect of making less simple for a basic card and nerfed with auctioneer but overall the flexibility would make up for the mana nerf. And also removes the hidden functionality off a basic card.
As for Nourish. Would have kept it 5 mana but made it Empty mana crystals instead of full. This stops you essentially ramping 2 mana for only 3 mana. And stops you still being able to maintain some semblance of tempo through a wrath or hero power on 5 or swipe on 7 mana etc.
But it’s done now hopefully this make Druid going forward less balanced around ramp and give them more interesting ramp cards in future sets.
The Increase of only 1 mana in 2 cards is the line between broken tier 1 decks and completely useless garbage.
Let forgive Blizzard in this one, balance druid is just impossible.
Well for me the worst thing about druid nerfs is that the class popularity beforehand was quite good, resulting in a meta that all the classes had above or close to 10% play rate. Since nerfs were out, druid players switched to hunters, hunters lost a really bad matchup so they grew exponentially and also a lot of zoolock players switched to this class as well, due to saronite nerf. This resulted in a meta with one class being overplayed. Before you call me salty or point me to the salt thread, (it's pretty easy to find it, saltiness is everywhere), I don't have problem playing against hunter due to lose rate or whatever but due to repetitiveness.
So much fail here. What substantiation do you have to make the statement “Druid players switched to Hunter”. And what Druid deck was a bad matchup for Deathrattle Hunter? Token was a slight favorite, but the matchup was winnable for Hunter.
Salt is salt.
So much fail here(Quoting you).
1st fail) Deathrattle is a single hunter archetype. Even against it, with the proper ramp, Malygos Druid could defeat it. Also token, could easily defeat DR Hunter, I was farming them actually with Token druid, as well as other hunter archetypes. I better not speak for the other hunter archetypes, I guess you were not playing the game at this period from your answer and also never looked to the stats.
2nd fail) The other classes have not risen their numbers in players(some lost playrate and other won) and hunter went from...12-13%? to 31%. While druid was like 17% and now is below 5% I think. So given these facts, where did this 12%+ of druid players went? Did they vanish? No, if you do the math, they moved to this class, because they were netdeckers and whatever class is dominant they follow it like meta sheeps. Simple as that. If your math is different, please provide so. Everything in life is math dude.
BS is BS , hatred is hatred and huntards are huntards.
P.S I was playing a lot spell hunter during Witchwood expansion, now I am hardly touching it. I was always playing a lot homebrew or meme decks like Tess Rogue or Evolve shaman with Zentimo and so on. This is just to catch up with your logic that is going to accuse me as a druid player lolw.
I think the Nourish nerf was fair enough as I would still play it at 6 mana, but the Wild Growth nerf kind of destroy the druid classes true class identity.
Warrior and Priest had 10% play rate before nerfs ? I don't know from where you are getting these numbers but in my experience, before nerfs, Warriors were pretty rare closely followed by Priest and Mage.
I said close to or above, that means also less than 10% . I am frequently looking to statistics from hsreplay, hearthpwn and vicioussyndicate and compare them to sum up what's going on in the game. I don't also think that Warrior were rare , Odd Warrior was and is still played a lot. As for the other 2 classes, especially Priest was not played that much I agree, its popularity has grown since it counters Hunter.
What I am trying to state here, and others have stated as well in other threads is that the class diversity play rate was bigger before nerfs.
Also in my games this month from rank 9 to legend I faced less Rogues than Druids! Actually I faced 5 odd rogues out of 88 games, and none other rogue archetype. So I think that a single person's stats are not that indicative. ( I am playing at EU Server)
Seems like you are the one full of hatred. Maybe you were "farming" Hunters with Token Druid. But no more. The SALT is real.
I hope this is the case, I miss playing Barnabus into Nourish in the same turn with Quest Druid :(