Hearthpwn

i think war axe needs a nerf and its an unhealthy card for the game. you remember the pre standard days where everyone was playing sticky minions, back then war axe was completely fine since killing a mad scientist would give a secret, killing a minibot qould require 2 hits etc etc. now almost all minions die from the first swing of the axe. that is broken, war axe right now is basically 2 drops at once + ensures tempo. bring back sticky minions or nerf war axe i dont want to have to deal with this for the rest of the standard years

I don't really think it need a nerf, (i'd rater have them nerf shammy) but if they were to nerf it - could something like something like this work?

This way it wouldn't be able to kill of every single creature you play in the early game, but it would still be playable.  (it's only a slight nerf)

Quote from Kinxill >>

Fiery axe is just a good answer to Aggro deck, but a OP card ? Nah, Warrior must have a good staple weapon. Execute is far more problematic as a card.

Quote from DragonConsort >>

Quote from plebcrusher >>

I mean Blizzard nerfed keeper and ancient of lore because they were played in all druid archetypes. Doesn't fiery war axe suffer from the exact same problem?

 EXactly.  That is why I criticized the nerfs so much, yeah those were auto includes in Druid...but every class has auto includes.  Blizzard gave that reason, but it is inconsistent...cause there were no nerfs for the auto includes of other classes.  

All cards except for river crocolisk and chillwind yeti should be BANNED. 

Quote from Komorebi3 >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

Quote from Wonyenners >>

Quote from maroon5five >>

Quote from BigFatMurloc >>

 

Its not a good argument to say a card needs to be OP because other cards are.

 You're right, it's not a good argument to say a card needs to be OP because other cards are. The thing is, war axe is not OP.

For example if i keep my one drop on hand to play around and than play a 2 drop, war axe still counters my 2 drop even if its a 2/3 so yu cant play around it if your control/midrange or Agro. Thus why this has to be a 2/2. 

War axe can be played around by playing more than one minion a turn. If you play two minions then one can't be hit by the war axe next turn allowing you to get onto the board. Obviously you can't completely play around it, but you can't completely play around early removal from any other class if you want to play minions in the early game either.

Also you ignore the fact that this card can go face and it often does in aggressive arrior decks and there your whole "needs to be a 3/2" to remove minions argument becomes invalid because the card just turns into deal 6 damage to enemy hero which is also imbalanced for 2 mana.

I never once said that war axe "needs to be a 3/2 to remove minions". In fact, a 2/3 like you suggested earlier is arguably better than a 3/2. As far as 6 damage to face over two turns for 2 mana, that's just how weapons are. If war axe is OP because of its face damage potential then so is every other weapon in the game essentially.

To summ this up. Its a design flaw of many and when this gets nerfed Blizz should imo nerf the out of order one drops aswell. Nothing legits a 1/3 statline with an upside on a one drop from a balance view.

You're right that the 1/3 snowball minions are bad design. You're wrong that war axe is.

 Contradiction is not argumentation. You say very little and what you do say doesn't mean much. You do a poor job explaining why Fiery War Axe is balanced and a poor job defending against others that hold an opposing opinion. You're free to do so, of course, but if I were you I wouldn't be quite so smug about it. 

 War-axe doesn't snowball entire games into futility. War-axe doesn't make entire classes unviable on ladder. War-axe is easily teched against. War-axe has been around for years and never been a balance problem.

There you go. War-axe is fine.

Also, the "enrage" suggestion that is cropped up in this thread (2/2 when not enraged) is dishonest to the extreme. No joke.

The only thing that make people whine about war-axe is that it makes certain minions less powerful in the early game. That is an extremely uncompelling argument, as there is nothing inherent in the game that in any way or form makes it believable that the game is designed around some notion that 1 and 2 drops should be immune to efficient removal. In fact, a quick look at a rather stale metagame in standard would let any objective observer realize that a lot of 1-2 drops is too resilient to removal in general, often doing 10-15 damage or stalling the opponent into a never-ending tempo-loss loop. 

 

 "War-axe has been around for years and never been a balance problem."

This is a fallacy.

War axe is fine as a 2 mana 3/2 in most classes, and even in pre-GVG warrior, because the offset of losing life for each hit VS dealing 3 damage only once is fair ; One of the many reasons rogue is bad is because they litterally can't use their weapons, it puts too much strain on their health, so this downside is real.

However, now enter GvG and subsequent expansions that all make Warrior's armor skyrocket extremely reliably. To put it simply, no warrior deck has 30 health like other classes do, they will all quite reliably amass massive amounts of "health" over the course of the game*, and these 2 hits because of Fiery War Axe will become negligible.

This has made the trade-off extremely unbalanced as warrior just shrugs off the disadvantage of losing at most 6 life, for the advantage of utter early board and hand domination.

 

* : and you might say "Yeah but these come at a cost", and I would answer that that cost is also negligible, because 1 : It fuels Shield Slam, one of, if not the most efficient removal in the game right now, and while previously going into fatigue wasn't so easy to warrior because of priest and handlock being there to contest that spot, and many hero powers severely reducing the efficiency of armoring up, now that only priests and handlocks aren't a thing ( Okay I heard Anduin is making a comeback, am not playing the game enough to know that for myself ) and other classes don't use Justicar...Nobody can follow a warrior into fatigue anymore, and that armour is a win condition in itself, even if it didn't fuel all those warrior cards.

People cry about overpowered minions all the time (and I agree some creatures are too over-stated) but then a thread like this shows up, an thread aimed specifically to try and nerf one of the only reliable removal in the game.

There you got blizz, that's your HS playerbase.

On a more serious note, fiery war axe is good removal, exactly what the game needs, the real problem is that armor can be built up too high and too fast, reducing the armor gain in cards that give it would be more than enough. Besides there are enough weapons around classes to justify a 2 weapon-removers in your deck if you start facing too many opponents piloting those decks.

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

 

The only thing going on this thread is that war-axe makes a few decks and some cards a bit less good, and so people whine.

 

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

 

The only thing going on this thread is that war-axe makes a few decks and some cards a bit less good, and so people whine.

 

 Warrior currently has four completely different archetypes in the top two tiers -- more than any other class -- and Fiery War Axe and Execute are 2-of autoincludes in every single one of them.

The only Basic or Classic card from another class that fits that kind of description (with 2 copies in multiple top-tier archetypes) is Rockbiter Weapon, which is part of the reason Shaman comes in second, with three different archetypes in the top two tiers.

I don't think it's mere whining.

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

 

The only thing going on this thread is that war-axe makes a few decks and some cards a bit less good, and so people whine.

 

 Warrior currently has four completely different archetypes in the top two tiers -- more than any other class -- and Fiery War Axe and Execute are 2-of autoincludes in every single one of them.

The only Basic or Classic card from another class that fits that kind of description (with 2 copies in multiple top-tier archetypes) is Rockbiter Weapon, which is part of the reason Shaman comes in second, with three different archetypes in the top two tiers.

I don't think it's mere whining.

Because it's the only class that doesn't get crushed by shaman, which now make up about 40% of legend ranks.

Who wants to sit and hear friggin Murgle BM all day long.

 

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

 

The only thing going on this thread is that war-axe makes a few decks and some cards a bit less good, and so people whine.

 

 Warrior currently has four completely different archetypes in the top two tiers -- more than any other class -- and Fiery War Axe and Execute are 2-of autoincludes in every single one of them.

The only Basic or Classic card from another class that fits that kind of description (with 2 copies in multiple top-tier archetypes) is Rockbiter Weapon, which is part of the reason Shaman comes in second, with three different archetypes in the top two tiers.

I don't think it's mere whining.

Because it's the only class that doesn't get crushed by shaman, which now make up about 40% of legend ranks.

Who wants to sit and hear friggin Murgle BM all day long.

 

 And this just supports my point that both classes are a little too strong. If only one class can beat Shaman, there is a problem with both Shaman and the class that beats it. Both have a troublingly low number of unfavorable matchups.

Warrior is the strongest class in the game right now, that is proven buy the incredible diversity of high tier decks it can create.  Shaman has one strong deck...aggro, which will be gone next rotation.  Warrior as a class is currently the strongest and it isn't even close.  

Quote from DragonConsort >>

Warrior is the strongest class in the game right now, that is proven buy the incredible diversity of high tier decks it can create.  Shaman has one strong deck...aggro, which will be gone next rotation.  Warrior as a class is currently the strongest and it isn't even close.  

 

Quote from DragonConsort >>

Warrior is the strongest class in the game right now, that is proven buy the incredible diversity of high tier decks it can create.  Shaman has one strong deck...aggro, which will be gone next rotation.  Warrior as a class is currently the strongest and it isn't even close.  

 

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

 

The only thing going on this thread is that war-axe makes a few decks and some cards a bit less good, and so people whine.

 

 Warrior currently has four completely different archetypes in the top two tiers -- more than any other class -- and Fiery War Axe and Execute are 2-of autoincludes in every single one of them.

The only Basic or Classic card from another class that fits that kind of description (with 2 copies in multiple top-tier archetypes) is Rockbiter Weapon, which is part of the reason Shaman comes in second, with three different archetypes in the top two tiers.

I don't think it's mere whining.

Well, now that warrior winrates are in the dumpster and shamans officially have the best early game weapon in the game (along with the best early game AoE, best soft removal, best early game minions, heaviest mid-game value and highest burst potential) - this thread is hopefully over.

You mean the condition dependent storm claw?  Where you have to have spell damage or it is a pitiful 1/3 in your hand?  

That's better than fiery war axe?  Yeah sure.

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

 

The only thing going on this thread is that war-axe makes a few decks and some cards a bit less good, and so people whine.

 

 Warrior currently has four completely different archetypes in the top two tiers -- more than any other class -- and Fiery War Axe and Execute are 2-of autoincludes in every single one of them.

The only Basic or Classic card from another class that fits that kind of description (with 2 copies in multiple top-tier archetypes) is Rockbiter Weapon, which is part of the reason Shaman comes in second, with three different archetypes in the top two tiers.

I don't think it's mere whining.

Because it's the only class that doesn't get crushed by shaman, which now make up about 40% of legend ranks.

Who wants to sit and hear friggin Murgle BM all day long.

 

 And this just supports my point that both classes are a little too strong. If only one class can beat Shaman, there is a problem with both Shaman and the class that beats it. Both have a troublingly low number of unfavorable matchups.

No, that's nonsense - sorry. First of all only one warrior deck consistently beats shaman, secondly - a favored counter isn't necessarily the stronger deck in a meta.

Grinder mage, for example, crushes a bunch of warrior decks - according to your logic this makes it a too strong deck, but grinder mage is actually a useless deck in the meta. 

The simple truth is that shaman is holding the entire standard meta hostage, making three entire classes close to unviable for play and restricting most others (except warrior) to a maximum of 1-2 competitive decks. Warrior isn't even in the ballpark of that.

 

 

 

Quote from GiantDwarf0 >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

 

The only thing going on this thread is that war-axe makes a few decks and some cards a bit less good, and so people whine.

 

 Warrior currently has four completely different archetypes in the top two tiers -- more than any other class -- and Fiery War Axe and Execute are 2-of autoincludes in every single one of them.

The only Basic or Classic card from another class that fits that kind of description (with 2 copies in multiple top-tier archetypes) is Rockbiter Weapon, which is part of the reason Shaman comes in second, with three different archetypes in the top two tiers.

I don't think it's mere whining.

Because it's the only class that doesn't get crushed by shaman, which now make up about 40% of legend ranks.

Who wants to sit and hear friggin Murgle BM all day long.

 

 And this just supports my point that both classes are a little too strong. If only one class can beat Shaman, there is a problem with both Shaman and the class that beats it. Both have a troublingly low number of unfavorable matchups.

No, that's nonsense - sorry. First of all only one warrior deck consistently beats shaman, secondly - a favored counter isn't necessarily the stronger deck in a meta.

Grinder mage, for example, crushes a bunch of warrior decks - according to your logic this makes it a too strong deck, but grinder mage is actually a useless deck in the meta. 

The simple truth is that shaman is holding the entire standard meta hostage, making three entire classes close to unviable for play and restricting most others (except warrior) to a maximum of 1-2 competitive decks. Warrior isn't even in the ballpark of that.

 

 

 

 Presumably you are talking about priest, Rogue, and paladin. Assuming that's what you mean, you're wrong. Midrange decks dominate the meta and are what's crushing control. Hard control still smokes aggro Shaman. The midrange variant is much more problematic; but no more so than hunter, druid, Dragon warrior, and tempo mage (this one to a lesser degree). 

 

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

Quote from GiantDwarf0 >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from brilliant_gnome >>

 

The only thing going on this thread is that war-axe makes a few decks and some cards a bit less good, and so people whine.

 

 Warrior currently has four completely different archetypes in the top two tiers -- more than any other class -- and Fiery War Axe and Execute are 2-of autoincludes in every single one of them.

The only Basic or Classic card from another class that fits that kind of description (with 2 copies in multiple top-tier archetypes) is Rockbiter Weapon, which is part of the reason Shaman comes in second, with three different archetypes in the top two tiers.

I don't think it's mere whining.

Because it's the only class that doesn't get crushed by shaman, which now make up about 40% of legend ranks.

Who wants to sit and hear friggin Murgle BM all day long.

 

 And this just supports my point that both classes are a little too strong. If only one class can beat Shaman, there is a problem with both Shaman and the class that beats it. Both have a troublingly low number of unfavorable matchups.

No, that's nonsense - sorry. First of all only one warrior deck consistently beats shaman, secondly - a favored counter isn't necessarily the stronger deck in a meta.

Grinder mage, for example, crushes a bunch of warrior decks - according to your logic this makes it a too strong deck, but grinder mage is actually a useless deck in the meta. 

The simple truth is that shaman is holding the entire standard meta hostage, making three entire classes close to unviable for play and restricting most others (except warrior) to a maximum of 1-2 competitive decks. Warrior isn't even in the ballpark of that.

 

 

 

 Presumably you are talking about priest, Rogue, and paladin. Assuming that's what you mean, you're wrong. Midrange decks dominate the meta and are what's crushing control. Hard control still smokes aggro Shaman. The midrange variant is much more problematic; but no more so than hunter, druid, Dragon warrior, and tempo mage (this one to a lesser degree). 

 

So, my post doesn't mention "aggro shaman" with a single word... and as long as it doesn't, it doesn't make any statements that contradict anything you want to say.

So you do the natural thing, presume it DOES speak of aggro shaman, and then proceed to tell me how wrong I am.

Your post might be the single dumbest thing in this entire thread, and that is no small feat.