You don't seem to understand that maximizing the power level of deck does not necessarily mean maximizing the value out of each single card but by deckbuilding. Be it one-offs for Reno, be it the upcoming odd/even mechanic or be it draw mechanics that need you to empty your hand. This is not bad design, but the opposite.
How is Reno not reducing the value of your cards? You do not play your 15 best cards as 2-offs, but 30 one-offs. This reduces (in the first step, at least) the power level average of your cards, but the healing power of Reno maximizes the overall power level of your deck.
You keep repeating the same hollow arguments while ignoring what I say, and always drop back to the "I don't like Divine Favor because people play it in fast decks to draw cards" sermon. This is high class whining and ranting, but still whining and ranting.
I don't get why people whine about Divine Favor, a niche card that is only good in an archetype that is easily countered by control decks. Doom Guard on the other hand fits more - played in almost every Warlock deck since ever, while being powerful.
Likely because it -feels- unfair if you're not playing control. Fairness is the general sense that if do something to gain an advantage, you must be giving something else up in return. Divine Favor makes it seem like the paladin isn't being punished for vomiting their hand.
Exactly. It's punishing you for holding a big hand and not playing out enough cards against them. So you either give them the reload or you spend more of your cards. That's kind of what Risk vs Reward is all about. I'll just assume you think DK Guldan is a balanced card though?
I will go with Bloodlust. It is always annoying to play against and is a factor in preventing control Shaman archetypes from achieving viability.
Not sure it's whats stopping control shaman - the primary issue there seems to be clunkiness and lack of good boardwipes that don't cripple your next turn. Also, most of the shaman cards aren't geared towards control, because that's not a deck they want to push ATM.
What you stated is probably correct. What I am trying to convey is the fact that even if shaman had the proper cards to build a good control or combo deck, why bother when you can just jam a copy or 2 of Bloodlust in your deck, get to the mid-game, spam a few totems while playing minions, and end the game. I feel that this card reduces overall design space and I guess I will never understand why objects that do not bleed (totems) could ever be 'Bloodlusted'.
I have played countless of Shaman decks without bloodlust. I have also reached legend several times with control Shaman, without Bloodlust. I don't see how Bloodlust reduces any designspace, because only cards like Unleash the Hounds or Steward of Darkshire (with Call in the Finishers) would push it to OPness. There are plenty ways to design cards which does not make Bloodlust OP, as long as you can clear the board as easy as it is filled (and no cheap charge minions).
You don't seem to understand that maximizing the power level of deck does not necessarily mean maximizing the value out of each single card but by deckbuilding. Be it one-offs for Reno, be it the upcoming odd/even mechanic or be it draw mechanics that need you to empty your hand. This is not bad design, but the opposite.
How is Reno not reducing the value of your cards? You do not play your 15 best cards as 2-offs, but 30 one-offs. This reduces (in the first step, at least) the power level average of your cards, but the healing power of Reno maximizes the overall power level of your deck.
You keep repeating the same hollow arguments while ignoring what I say, and always drop back to the "I don't like Divine Favor because people play it in fast decks to draw cards" sermon. This is high class whining and ranting, but still whining and ranting.
Probably Wisp for me.
Three mana draw 8 cards.
Doomguard, it has charge, pretty much the only charge cards that i'd leave in the eternal set are Argent Commander and Reckless Rocketeer