Some of you might remember the nerfs on both this Cards which almost make them kind of unviable or even unplayable.
But as we get more expansions and more ways to remove cards like them and even after the nerf of Big Game Hunter i started to ask myself if it would be healthy or good to bring them back to their start values.
On Nat Pagle i think it would be a good idea to take one HP of the Card (Making him a 0/3) but giving his ability to draw an extra Card (50%) at the End of your turn back. We remember that Nat Pagel didn't see so much play because he was super good, more like there are no other ways to draw cards. So an this point keeping him as an 0/4 would be probably right.
On Tinkmaster Overspark i have really a problem with why this Card got nerfed. You had a 50% Chance on removing a 7/7 and replacing it with a 5/5 or 1/1 and u still had to deal with them. Also to mention we got other and better ways to remove a 7/7 i think Tinkmaster wouldn't be that Op as before and it would even still fit Blizzards way of "Starting with good Cards and get probably better cards which make the same job, just better".
And imo it would be pretty good and healthy for new players too. Because they don't get "shitty" legendarys. ( Not to forget this are still legendarys, they are limited to one per Deck, and they are rare)
(All this Nat Pagle typos. Rip) And feel free to write some opinions.
I didn't play back then, but wasn't 50% of Tinkmasters power the ability to silence a minion? And since silence effects is not the most popular thing among players (re: the nerf or Ironbreak Owl) I don't see this being a good idea. He also nerfs N'Zoth which you can see Blizzard is trying to promote.
I didn't play back then, but wasn't 50% of Tinkmasters power the ability to silence a minion? And since silence effects is not the most popular thing among players (re: the nerf or Ironbreak Owl) I don't see this being a good idea. He also nerfs N'Zoth which you can see Blizzard is trying to promote.
Nop, the old effect were that you select the minion you wish to transform, and that was really really strong.
Nat pagle drew at the end of your turn, granting 0.5 more cards in average, too much for 2 mana. It is OK, you reverse it and everyone will be using it within 2 days. Reverse this doesn't help fight power creep.
Tinkmaster's nerf was in the context of a too powerful druid class, but in the end every deck was using it to deal with ragnaros or ysera. You targeted the minion and whether you get a 5/5 or 1/1 you are better off than leaving a 4/12 like Ysera for your opponent.
Tinkmaster may be reversed, but it has an use in its current form, dealing with concealed auctioneers, for one thing is far better than dealing with am Ysera in 2016, when noone uses her anymore.
I didn't play back then, but wasn't 50% of Tinkmasters power the ability to silence a minion? And since silence effects is not the most popular thing among players (re: the nerf or Ironbreak Owl) I don't see this being a good idea. He also nerfs N'Zoth which you can see Blizzard is trying to promote.
Nop, the old effect were that you select the minion you wish to transform, and that was really really strong.
Hello everyone.
Some of you might remember the nerfs on both this Cards which almost make them kind of unviable or even unplayable.
But as we get more expansions and more ways to remove cards like them and even after the nerf of Big Game Hunter i started to ask myself if it would be healthy or good to bring them back to their start values.
On Nat Pagle i think it would be a good idea to take one HP of the Card (Making him a 0/3) but giving his ability to draw an extra Card (50%) at the End of your turn back. We remember that Nat Pagel didn't see so much play because he was super good, more like there are no other ways to draw cards. So an this point keeping him as an 0/4 would be probably right.
On Tinkmaster Overspark i have really a problem with why this Card got nerfed. You had a 50% Chance on removing a 7/7 and replacing it with a 5/5 or 1/1 and u still had to deal with them. Also to mention we got other and better ways to remove a 7/7 i think Tinkmaster wouldn't be that Op as before and it would even still fit Blizzards way of "Starting with good Cards and get probably better cards which make the same job, just better".
And imo it would be pretty good and healthy for new players too. Because they don't get "shitty" legendarys. ( Not to forget this are still legendarys, they are limited to one per Deck, and they are rare)
(All this Nat Pagle typos. Rip) And feel free to write some opinions.
I didn't play back then, but wasn't 50% of Tinkmasters power the ability to silence a minion? And since silence effects is not the most popular thing among players (re: the nerf or Ironbreak Owl) I don't see this being a good idea. He also nerfs N'Zoth which you can see Blizzard is trying to promote.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Corvus oculum corvi non eruit.
Nat pagle drew at the end of your turn, granting 0.5 more cards in average, too much for 2 mana. It is OK, you reverse it and everyone will be using it within 2 days. Reverse this doesn't help fight power creep.
Tinkmaster's nerf was in the context of a too powerful druid class, but in the end every deck was using it to deal with ragnaros or ysera. You targeted the minion and whether you get a 5/5 or 1/1 you are better off than leaving a 4/12 like Ysera for your opponent.
Tinkmaster may be reversed, but it has an use in its current form, dealing with concealed auctioneers, for one thing is far better than dealing with am Ysera in 2016, when noone uses her anymore.
Greatness, at any cost.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Corvus oculum corvi non eruit.
Tink was just too strong. It really doesn't matter if their Tirion gets turned into a dino or a squirrel - they still lose the game.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
... sure, if you say so...
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Corvus oculum corvi non eruit.