What a joke, LOL. The recent nerfs did nothing to effect BSM at all. Stil the least skilled deck in the history of card games and insanely broken. Instead of nerfing decks like this, just get rid decks like this with stupid mana cheating Hello, McFly? There is a reason cards cost 8+ mana.
So what do you think about changes to cards and their impact on enjoyment of game?
They do exactly nothing. Mage, Paladin, Hunter and Warlock still being the best decks (Mage the best deck, the other the counters, and close enough demon hunter as another Mage counter). To be fair is a rough call for the devs in what to do. The main focus of most decks is cheating big plays. So if they nerf the best cheating mana deck in the format they also have to...eventually nerf all other mana cheating deck. Which is totally fine...for me that plays full control. For the people that plays Warlock, Pala, Shaman, DH and Hunter, sounds probably like ruining their viable decks. They dont want to make changes fast and surely enough not want to "shake" the meta with this patch. This was only "well now mage can lose by an inch more often"
So what do you think about changes to cards and their impact on enjoyment of game?
They do exactly nothing. Mage, Paladin, Hunter and Warlock still being the best decks (Mage the best deck, the other the counters, and close enough demon hunter as another Mage counter). To be fair is a rough call for the devs in what to do. The main focus of most decks is cheating big plays. So if they nerf the best cheating mana deck in the format they also have to...eventually nerf all other mana cheating deck. Which is totally fine...for me that plays full control. For the people that plays Warlock, Pala, Shaman, DH and Hunter, sounds probably like ruining their viable decks. They dont want to make changes fast and surely enough not want to "shake" the meta with this patch. This was only "well now mage can lose by an inch more often"
Yeah, I like playing Hunter and DH. I am getting stomped because I cannot generate a big enough board to stay in the game. Probably the decks (Egg Hunter and Pirate DH).
I am a terrible deck builder though so that may be my fault.
Well, Big Spell Mage is only bottom tier 2 deck after nerfs but it still destroys bad builds and bad decks. Nevertheless it is very weak against top decks, so probably you just need to netdeck. Almost every class has a deck that beats BSM, you just need to avoid playing Rogue which is the worst class atm anyway. Your best choices against Mage are Pain Warlock, almost any Shaman, Pirate DH, Heal Priest, Ramp Druid or Hunter.
So what do you think about changes to cards and their impact on enjoyment of game?
They do exactly nothing. Mage, Paladin, Hunter and Warlock still being the best decks (Mage the best deck, the other the counters, and close enough demon hunter as another Mage counter). To be fair is a rough call for the devs in what to do. The main focus of most decks is cheating big plays. So if they nerf the best cheating mana deck in the format they also have to...eventually nerf all other mana cheating deck. Which is totally fine...for me that plays full control. For the people that plays Warlock, Pala, Shaman, DH and Hunter, sounds probably like ruining their viable decks. They dont want to make changes fast and surely enough not want to "shake" the meta with this patch. This was only "well now mage can lose by an inch more often"
So what do you think about changes to cards and their impact on enjoyment of game?
They do exactly nothing. Mage, Paladin, Hunter and Warlock still being the best decks (Mage the best deck, the other the counters, and close enough demon hunter as another Mage counter). To be fair is a rough call for the devs in what to do. The main focus of most decks is cheating big plays. So if they nerf the best cheating mana deck in the format they also have to...eventually nerf all other mana cheating deck. Which is totally fine...for me that plays full control. For the people that plays Warlock, Pala, Shaman, DH and Hunter, sounds probably like ruining their viable decks. They dont want to make changes fast and surely enough not want to "shake" the meta with this patch. This was only "well now mage can lose by an inch more often"
Yeah, I like playing Hunter and DH. I am getting stomped because I cannot generate a big enough board to stay in the game. Probably the decks (Egg Hunter and Pirate DH).
I am a terrible deck builder though so that may be my fault.
Glad to see that some people get it. Others dont. The changes didnt change a damned thing. At all. BSM Mage is still easily able to spew huge mana cost cards way ahead of their normal time frame & they can do it over and over and over. Its dumb. This just in.
As for being a bad deck builder? Its not your fault. The game severely punishes anyone that dares to not play BSM, hand barf Warlock or Buffadin.
No, I just play at legend. I play mainly Shaman. There are many other decks that are worth complaining much more than BSM, especially when nerfs already reduced them to bottom tier 2 deck.
Yes, BSM is still tier 1 deck at bronze and silver, sorry that I don't care about these ranks.
Why aren't you - people who complain - try another archetype? another class? diffrent approach? just because you are used to this or that since 17Th century ? somebody moved your cheese - so 'game over' for you?
It happenned and will happen that an expansion or nerf open new ways to play new or good-old-deck. Old goes for wild BUT with replacemets of older good cards with better ones fron recent meta. The concepr is to try. more than few times... then succeed. after you got the idea, practice and improve yourself. Maybe mix types, control+wall+whatever you want. Be dynamic!
But these things require invest, of time and training. not to auto pilot of that old deck you are used to. I suggest: It worth, with fun and suceess.
Be open people! grab ideas from Hearthpwn or another site if you favor. Find your cheese - it is around the corner.
The same kind of reasoning can be used to explain anything which hasn't been balanced properly. Based on that rationale, Azurite Snake should still drain 10 health and people should've just adapted to it. I appreciate your positive spin on this but some design decisions are harmful for the game/less fun and the design team being proactive to fix them is something positive for the game.
So, to some extent, people could adapt to the new meta but it doesn't mean that nothing can ever be criticized. Mistakes happen.
No, I just play at legend. I play mainly Shaman. There are many other decks that are worth complaining much more than BSM, especially when nerfs already reduced them to bottom tier 2 deck.
Yes, BSM is still tier 1 deck at bronze and silver, sorry that I don't care about these ranks.
Of course - always the same reply from the actual bronze players that are milking BSM or whatever busted deck. Uh huh, they are all #1 legend and have been since Day 1 using their home brew decks. Its just a git gud thing.
So what do you think about changes to cards and their impact on enjoyment of game?
They do exactly nothing. Mage, Paladin, Hunter and Warlock still being the best decks (Mage the best deck, the other the counters, and close enough demon hunter as another Mage counter). To be fair is a rough call for the devs in what to do. The main focus of most decks is cheating big plays. So if they nerf the best cheating mana deck in the format they also have to...eventually nerf all other mana cheating deck. Which is totally fine...for me that plays full control. For the people that plays Warlock, Pala, Shaman, DH and Hunter, sounds probably like ruining their viable decks. They dont want to make changes fast and surely enough not want to "shake" the meta with this patch. This was only "well now mage can lose by an inch more often"
So what do you think about changes to cards and their impact on enjoyment of game?
They do exactly nothing. Mage, Paladin, Hunter and Warlock still being the best decks (Mage the best deck, the other the counters, and close enough demon hunter as another Mage counter). To be fair is a rough call for the devs in what to do. The main focus of most decks is cheating big plays. So if they nerf the best cheating mana deck in the format they also have to...eventually nerf all other mana cheating deck. Which is totally fine...for me that plays full control. For the people that plays Warlock, Pala, Shaman, DH and Hunter, sounds probably like ruining their viable decks. They dont want to make changes fast and surely enough not want to "shake" the meta with this patch. This was only "well now mage can lose by an inch more often"
Yeah, I like playing Hunter and DH. I am getting stomped because I cannot generate a big enough board to stay in the game. Probably the decks (Egg Hunter and Pirate DH).
I am a terrible deck builder though so that may be my fault.
Glad to see that some people get it. Others dont. The changes didnt change a damned thing. At all. BSM Mage is still easily able to spew huge mana cost cards way ahead of their normal time frame & they can do it over and over and over. Its dumb. This just in.
As for being a bad deck builder? Its not your fault. The game severely punishes anyone that dares to not play BSM, hand barf Warlock or Buffadin.
This is the most validating response I've gotten in a really long time. Thank you!
No, I just play at legend. I play mainly Shaman. There are many other decks that are worth complaining much more than BSM, especially when nerfs already reduced them to bottom tier 2 deck.
Yes, BSM is still tier 1 deck at bronze and silver, sorry that I don't care about these ranks.
Of course - always the same reply from the actual bronze players that are milking BSM or whatever busted deck. Uh huh, they are all #1 legend and have been since Day 1 using their home brew decks. Its just a git gud thing.
What? Your wild assumptions are not a good substitute for a reasonable discussion, you know? But you are right about one thing - Hearthstone is a game of one busted deck against other busted deck. It's not a matter of nerfing busted decks to the ground, but to make them more or less equal. BSM after nerfs is no more busted than other meta decks.
No, I just play at legend. I play mainly Shaman. There are many other decks that are worth complaining much more than BSM, especially when nerfs already reduced them to bottom tier 2 deck.
Yes, BSM is still tier 1 deck at bronze and silver, sorry that I don't care about these ranks.
Of course - always the same reply from the actual bronze players that are milking BSM or whatever busted deck. Uh huh, they are all #1 legend and have been since Day 1 using their home brew decks. Its just a git gud thing.
What? Your wild assumptions are not a good substitute for a reasonable discussion, you know? But you are right about one thing - Hearthstone is a game of one busted deck against other busted deck. It's not a matter of nerfing busted decks to the ground, but to make them more or less equal. BSM after nerfs is no more busted than other meta decks.
I mean excuse me to enter in this but you are the one that asume that people calling the deck tier 1 is bronze or silver and you dont care about that. Now let me talk for real: BSM is right now just varely beaten in winrate by the aggro decks that we talk and know that were their "main counters" i will said that Pala, Warlock, Hunter and DH usually raise in aggro variants when heavy high roll decks are on top.
But again this is just varely. a week ago the diff between BSM and this deck was very large. And people still call it a "tier 2 deck" data on all the ranks is not enough to make a point valid? So the nerf technically did nothing people still was playing those decks to have a chance against Mage, the ladder is in fact the same. What change is that instead of being "worse than the target deck" now this aggro decks are "stricly better than the target deck" For any other deck this is not even a nerf.
If any the only valid reason to not call it a tier 1 deck anymore is because in HS standards there is place for only 2 or 3 spots in the "tier 1 list" and anything else is tier 2. So, yeah that is still one of the best decks in the format and is for sure still the best high roll deck in the format.
People that forget how different Legend rank (and less competitive) than rank ladder dont get this but: you cant just used the "Skill of the players" as a metric to evalue decks in any case. In legend rank high roll decks are never seem as a problem because people is not pushing for rank 1 Legend in the same way people is pushing to get Legend. In the end is not how fast you win but how many times in a row you win. High Roll decks temp to win a lot more than people belive but you can get unlucky 1 or 2 times in a row and that would ruin your legend rank, but it wont affect that much your ladder climb.
If you "dont care about bronze and silver players opinions" what a interesting way to said that you dont care neither about Daimond or nothing below legend, them you actually dont care about how strong is this deck in reality because every time you lose you will said "oh the mage was lucky they high roll too fast, next time i will beat them" 95% of the decks cant prevent that high roll not even solve the board when it happen.
No, I just play at legend. I play mainly Shaman. There are many other decks that are worth complaining much more than BSM, especially when nerfs already reduced them to bottom tier 2 deck.
Yes, BSM is still tier 1 deck at bronze and silver, sorry that I don't care about these ranks.
Of course - always the same reply from the actual bronze players that are milking BSM or whatever busted deck. Uh huh, they are all #1 legend and have been since Day 1 using their home brew decks. Its just a git gud thing.
What? Your wild assumptions are not a good substitute for a reasonable discussion, you know? But you are right about one thing - Hearthstone is a game of one busted deck against other busted deck. It's not a matter of nerfing busted decks to the ground, but to make them more or less equal. BSM after nerfs is no more busted than other meta decks.
I mean excuse me to enter in this but you are the one that asume that people calling the deck tier 1 is bronze or silver and you dont care about that. Now let me talk for real: BSM is right now just varely beaten in winrate by the aggro decks that we talk and know that were their "main counters" i will said that Pala, Warlock, Hunter and DH usually raise in aggro variants when heavy high roll decks are on top.
But again this is just varely. a week ago the diff between BSM and this deck was very large. And people still call it a "tier 2 deck" data on all the ranks is not enough to make a point valid? So the nerf technically did nothing people still was playing those decks to have a chance against Mage, the ladder is in fact the same. What change is that instead of being "worse than the target deck" now this aggro decks are "stricly better than the target deck" For any other deck this is not even a nerf.
If any the only valid reason to not call it a tier 1 deck anymore is because in HS standards there is place for only 2 or 3 spots in the "tier 1 list" and anything else is tier 2. So, yeah that is still one of the best decks in the format and is for sure still the best high roll deck in the format.
People that forget how different Legend rank (and less competitive) than rank ladder dont get this but: you cant just used the "Skill of the players" as a metric to evalue decks in any case. In legend rank high roll decks are never seem as a problem because people is not pushing for rank 1 Legend in the same way people is pushing to get Legend. In the end is not how fast you win but how many times in a row you win. High Roll decks temp to win a lot more than people belive but you can get unlucky 1 or 2 times in a row and that would ruin your legend rank, but it wont affect that much your ladder climb.
If you "dont care about bronze and silver players opinions" what a interesting way to said that you dont care neither about Daimond or nothing below legend, them you actually dont care about how strong is this deck in reality because every time you lose you will said "oh the mage was lucky they high roll too fast, next time i will beat them" 95% of the decks cant prevent that high roll not even solve the board when it happen.
Silver player here, been back at it for a week. Just from getting an ok DK start. I feel like I'm evenly matched against most decks. I didn't know what the Tsunami was, or anything about the "BSM" meta and it takes me out, every single time I face it on turn 6.
I think nobody should care about diamond players, because it's their fault that they can't beat BSM or whatever. I am surprised that human players below diamond exist.
No, I just play at legend. I play mainly Shaman. There are many other decks that are worth complaining much more than BSM, especially when nerfs already reduced them to bottom tier 2 deck.
Yes, BSM is still tier 1 deck at bronze and silver, sorry that I don't care about these ranks.
Of course - always the same reply from the actual bronze players that are milking BSM or whatever busted deck. Uh huh, they are all #1 legend and have been since Day 1 using their home brew decks. Its just a git gud thing.
What? Your wild assumptions are not a good substitute for a reasonable discussion, you know? But you are right about one thing - Hearthstone is a game of one busted deck against other busted deck. It's not a matter of nerfing busted decks to the ground, but to make them more or less equal. BSM after nerfs is no more busted than other meta decks.
I mean excuse me to enter in this but you are the one that asume that people calling the deck tier 1 is bronze or silver and you dont care about that. Now let me talk for real: BSM is right now just varely beaten in winrate by the aggro decks that we talk and know that were their "main counters" i will said that Pala, Warlock, Hunter and DH usually raise in aggro variants when heavy high roll decks are on top.
But again this is just varely. a week ago the diff between BSM and this deck was very large. And people still call it a "tier 2 deck" data on all the ranks is not enough to make a point valid? So the nerf technically did nothing people still was playing those decks to have a chance against Mage, the ladder is in fact the same. What change is that instead of being "worse than the target deck" now this aggro decks are "stricly better than the target deck" For any other deck this is not even a nerf.
If any the only valid reason to not call it a tier 1 deck anymore is because in HS standards there is place for only 2 or 3 spots in the "tier 1 list" and anything else is tier 2. So, yeah that is still one of the best decks in the format and is for sure still the best high roll deck in the format.
People that forget how different Legend rank (and less competitive) than rank ladder dont get this but: you cant just used the "Skill of the players" as a metric to evalue decks in any case. In legend rank high roll decks are never seem as a problem because people is not pushing for rank 1 Legend in the same way people is pushing to get Legend. In the end is not how fast you win but how many times in a row you win. High Roll decks temp to win a lot more than people belive but you can get unlucky 1 or 2 times in a row and that would ruin your legend rank, but it wont affect that much your ladder climb.
If you "dont care about bronze and silver players opinions" what a interesting way to said that you dont care neither about Daimond or nothing below legend, them you actually dont care about how strong is this deck in reality because every time you lose you will said "oh the mage was lucky they high roll too fast, next time i will beat them" 95% of the decks cant prevent that high roll not even solve the board when it happen.
You neither understood what I said, nor you know how tiers work. I said BSM is tier 1 in low ranks, I was not assuming these are ranks that people who argue it's very good play them. And decks are tier 1 not just because there is some mythical "2 or 3 spots" in the tier 1 list, it's because its winrate is just too low, more than 1 standard deviation, from the best deck. You cannot be 1 of the best if your results are so much worse than the best, even though you still can be quite good.
And also I'm really disappointed that you are so blinded in your anti-BSM crusade that it's enough to make any dumb point that is against BSM that you support it. As statistics show very clearly, BSM was hurt by the nerfs, it's significantly worse, although still tier 2 but some people for some reason refuse to acknowledge this. And if you want my wild assumption, if/when they play at high ranks they are for sure more often highrolled by Pirate DH, Painlock or even Odin Warrior than by Mage.
There are so many things that you are wrong about. What you are wrong from the beginning is your claim BSM warped meta so that aggro decks are so good just because they beat BSM. And surprise, even though BSM got weakened and is really a very rare sight at legend, aggro decks are still powerful. Because it doesn't matter they beat BSM, they are just good overall. Another thing you are wrong about is that BSM got weaker only against its counters, which is not true, for example after nerfs BSM match-up against Rainbow Shaman, Highlander Shaman and Highlander Druid got significantly worse and all these match-ups are now below 50% for BSM. It is funny you are not even right about it being the best highroll deck of the format, because, surprise, Ramp Druid is now better than BSM.
So for any BSM complainer - try to climb with it after nerfs. Tell me how broken it is, how often you win, what is your winrate, how efficiently you climb... or maybe how often you seem to be mysteriously wrecked by a myriad of better decks and you can't climb at all.
I tried to play BSM and I gave it up even before nerfs - it was not good enough and it was quite boring. Have I been highrolled by BSM? Absolutely. And I understand that people can be frustrated by highrolls, but their highrolls are just one of many frustrating game states that can happen in Standard today and not the most frustrating ones.
What a joke, LOL. The recent nerfs did nothing to effect BSM at all. Stil the least skilled deck in the history of card games and insanely broken. Instead of nerfing decks like this, just get rid decks like this with stupid mana cheating Hello, McFly? There is a reason cards cost 8+ mana.
Well, almost nobody plays Mage now, so no need to complain.
They do exactly nothing. Mage, Paladin, Hunter and Warlock still being the best decks (Mage the best deck, the other the counters, and close enough demon hunter as another Mage counter). To be fair is a rough call for the devs in what to do. The main focus of most decks is cheating big plays. So if they nerf the best cheating mana deck in the format they also have to...eventually nerf all other mana cheating deck. Which is totally fine...for me that plays full control. For the people that plays Warlock, Pala, Shaman, DH and Hunter, sounds probably like ruining their viable decks. They dont want to make changes fast and surely enough not want to "shake" the meta with this patch. This was only "well now mage can lose by an inch more often"
Yeah, I like playing Hunter and DH. I am getting stomped because I cannot generate a big enough board to stay in the game. Probably the decks (Egg Hunter and Pirate DH).
I am a terrible deck builder though so that may be my fault.
Rock On!
Well, Big Spell Mage is only bottom tier 2 deck after nerfs but it still destroys bad builds and bad decks. Nevertheless it is very weak against top decks, so probably you just need to netdeck. Almost every class has a deck that beats BSM, you just need to avoid playing Rogue which is the worst class atm anyway. Your best choices against Mage are Pain Warlock, almost any Shaman, Pirate DH, Heal Priest, Ramp Druid or Hunter.
Do you play BSM by any chance?
Glad to see that some people get it. Others dont. The changes didnt change a damned thing. At all. BSM Mage is still easily able to spew huge mana cost cards way ahead of their normal time frame & they can do it over and over and over. Its dumb. This just in.
As for being a bad deck builder? Its not your fault. The game severely punishes anyone that dares to not play BSM, hand barf Warlock or Buffadin.
No, I just play at legend. I play mainly Shaman. There are many other decks that are worth complaining much more than BSM, especially when nerfs already reduced them to bottom tier 2 deck.
Yes, BSM is still tier 1 deck at bronze and silver, sorry that I don't care about these ranks.
Why aren't you - people who complain - try another archetype? another class? diffrent approach? just because you are used to this or that since 17Th century ? somebody moved your cheese - so 'game over' for you?
It happenned and will happen that an expansion or nerf open new ways to play new or good-old-deck. Old goes for wild BUT with replacemets of older good cards with better ones fron recent meta. The concepr is to try. more than few times... then succeed. after you got the idea, practice and improve yourself. Maybe mix types, control+wall+whatever you want. Be dynamic!
But these things require invest, of time and training. not to auto pilot of that old deck you are used to. I suggest: It worth, with fun and suceess.
Be open people! grab ideas from Hearthpwn or another site if you favor. Find your cheese - it is around the corner.
Help me get out of silver as a DK =D
The same kind of reasoning can be used to explain anything which hasn't been balanced properly. Based on that rationale, Azurite Snake should still drain 10 health and people should've just adapted to it. I appreciate your positive spin on this but some design decisions are harmful for the game/less fun and the design team being proactive to fix them is something positive for the game.
So, to some extent, people could adapt to the new meta but it doesn't mean that nothing can ever be criticized. Mistakes happen.
Of course - always the same reply from the actual bronze players that are milking BSM or whatever busted deck. Uh huh, they are all #1 legend and have been since Day 1 using their home brew decks. Its just a git gud thing.
This is the most validating response I've gotten in a really long time. Thank you!
Rock On!
What? Your wild assumptions are not a good substitute for a reasonable discussion, you know? But you are right about one thing - Hearthstone is a game of one busted deck against other busted deck. It's not a matter of nerfing busted decks to the ground, but to make them more or less equal. BSM after nerfs is no more busted than other meta decks.
I mean excuse me to enter in this but you are the one that asume that people calling the deck tier 1 is bronze or silver and you dont care about that. Now let me talk for real: BSM is right now just varely beaten in winrate by the aggro decks that we talk and know that were their "main counters" i will said that Pala, Warlock, Hunter and DH usually raise in aggro variants when heavy high roll decks are on top.
But again this is just varely. a week ago the diff between BSM and this deck was very large. And people still call it a "tier 2 deck" data on all the ranks is not enough to make a point valid? So the nerf technically did nothing people still was playing those decks to have a chance against Mage, the ladder is in fact the same. What change is that instead of being "worse than the target deck" now this aggro decks are "stricly better than the target deck" For any other deck this is not even a nerf.
If any the only valid reason to not call it a tier 1 deck anymore is because in HS standards there is place for only 2 or 3 spots in the "tier 1 list" and anything else is tier 2. So, yeah that is still one of the best decks in the format and is for sure still the best high roll deck in the format.
People that forget how different Legend rank (and less competitive) than rank ladder dont get this but: you cant just used the "Skill of the players" as a metric to evalue decks in any case. In legend rank high roll decks are never seem as a problem because people is not pushing for rank 1 Legend in the same way people is pushing to get Legend. In the end is not how fast you win but how many times in a row you win. High Roll decks temp to win a lot more than people belive but you can get unlucky 1 or 2 times in a row and that would ruin your legend rank, but it wont affect that much your ladder climb.
If you "dont care about bronze and silver players opinions" what a interesting way to said that you dont care neither about Daimond or nothing below legend, them you actually dont care about how strong is this deck in reality because every time you lose you will said "oh the mage was lucky they high roll too fast, next time i will beat them" 95% of the decks cant prevent that high roll not even solve the board when it happen.
Silver player here, been back at it for a week. Just from getting an ok DK start. I feel like I'm evenly matched against most decks. I didn't know what the Tsunami was, or anything about the "BSM" meta and it takes me out, every single time I face it on turn 6.
If you tired of BSM and aggro, just play better.
I think nobody should care about diamond players, because it's their fault that they can't beat BSM or whatever. I am surprised that human players below diamond exist.
Honestly its the game mechanics that make the game stupid at the moment. All about cheating out stuff.
Mage, Warrior, Hunter, Paladin, Druid, Shaman
Its a shame that games dont take longer then to turn 6. The decision making troughout a game makes it more attractive to play.
Well said. Too many people just want to face roll through this game. Some people would complain if they were given 10 free legendaries.
You neither understood what I said, nor you know how tiers work. I said BSM is tier 1 in low ranks, I was not assuming these are ranks that people who argue it's very good play them. And decks are tier 1 not just because there is some mythical "2 or 3 spots" in the tier 1 list, it's because its winrate is just too low, more than 1 standard deviation, from the best deck. You cannot be 1 of the best if your results are so much worse than the best, even though you still can be quite good.
And also I'm really disappointed that you are so blinded in your anti-BSM crusade that it's enough to make any dumb point that is against BSM that you support it. As statistics show very clearly, BSM was hurt by the nerfs, it's significantly worse, although still tier 2 but some people for some reason refuse to acknowledge this. And if you want my wild assumption, if/when they play at high ranks they are for sure more often highrolled by Pirate DH, Painlock or even Odin Warrior than by Mage.
There are so many things that you are wrong about. What you are wrong from the beginning is your claim BSM warped meta so that aggro decks are so good just because they beat BSM. And surprise, even though BSM got weakened and is really a very rare sight at legend, aggro decks are still powerful. Because it doesn't matter they beat BSM, they are just good overall. Another thing you are wrong about is that BSM got weaker only against its counters, which is not true, for example after nerfs BSM match-up against Rainbow Shaman, Highlander Shaman and Highlander Druid got significantly worse and all these match-ups are now below 50% for BSM. It is funny you are not even right about it being the best highroll deck of the format, because, surprise, Ramp Druid is now better than BSM.
So for any BSM complainer - try to climb with it after nerfs. Tell me how broken it is, how often you win, what is your winrate, how efficiently you climb... or maybe how often you seem to be mysteriously wrecked by a myriad of better decks and you can't climb at all.
I tried to play BSM and I gave it up even before nerfs - it was not good enough and it was quite boring. Have I been highrolled by BSM? Absolutely. And I understand that people can be frustrated by highrolls, but their highrolls are just one of many frustrating game states that can happen in Standard today and not the most frustrating ones.