Falls in the category of not interactive for sure.
"Non interactive" is something you can't proactive oder reactive counter like Prince-2 for example. When the Rogue has it on the hand, he can play him and buff his whole deck and you can do nothing against it. If a Hunter for example puts down a Naga and 3-4 Giants on the board on turn 5 you can do something proactive against it (kill him) or reactive (Lightbomb, Equality + Con, Nova + Doomsayer...). So the Naga-Giants-Combo is interactive.
Blizzard should make a special stream lessons or youtube videos in which they explain the the only way hs should be played is with supa dupa 1000 IQ control/combo homebrewed decks and 30 minutes long match is a minimum time period that proves you're not braindead blah blah something etc.
Blizzard should make a special stream lessons or youtube videos in which they explain the the only way hs should be played is with supa dupa 1000 IQ control/combo homebrewed decks and 30 minutes long match is a minimum time period that proves you're not braindead blah blah something etc.
I've played a lot of wild recently, and the Naga deck either (1) gets run over by aggro, or (2) destroys everything not named Lightbomb or Doomsayer/Frost Nova. It's also very unfun to play - search for Naga by life tap/Stitched Tracker/Nourish, win on turn 6. Stupid.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard Legend - July '16 (Rank 56), June '17, Dec. '18, Apr. '19
Wild Legend - Mar. '18 (Rank 30), Apr. '18, Aug. '19
Twelve Arena Wins - Shaman, Warlock, Mage x2, Rogue, Priest (12-0), Druid, Hallow's End x2, Hunter, Taverns of Time x3 (Pa,D,WL), Paladin
Falls in the category of not interactive for sure.
"Non interactive" is something you can't proactive oder reactive counter like Prince-2 for example. When the Rogue has it on the hand, he can play him and buff his whole deck and you can do nothing against it. If a Hunter for example puts down a Naga and 3-4 Giants on the board on turn 5 you can do something proactive against it (kill him) or reactive (Lightbomb, Equality + Con, Nova + Doomsayer...). So the Naga-Giants-Combo is interactive.
I disagree that it is interactive and your definition of what interactive is, so we may just have different viewpoints and that is fine. I would contest that Naga is not interactive because it has a single win condition based solely on drawing Naga and then playing 3-6 giants that you must have an immediate answer to or you will lose (1. lightbomb, equality + pyro or 2. you have been playing aggressively and can kill them). Those are the results 95% or more of the time. I don't recall actually seeing one of those decks win if they don't draw Naga and play multiple giants in a turn, but surely it has happened.
I know Keleseth is everyone's favorite new whipping boy for why Hearthstone is broken, but at least the decks that play him still play minions that do interact with your board and can actually win games without playing him. It is probably silly to even argue this because I don't think anything will change as I mentioned before.
It is possible that they will nerf it because their given reason behind the change was fairly weak and could just as easily go another way.
The main issue seems to be the coding behind the Professor Putricide wing of the free KFT mission. The rumor is that the coding was changed to accommodate that mission. If they change the coding back, it may mess up the Professor Putricide mission too much. That is one reason they may never change Naga Sea Witch back again.
Standard is where they are supposed to worry about "balance" and "interactivity" and that kind of crap. As long as the wild meta isn't completely centered on a certain deck over several expansions, it should be left well enough alone. There will be more and more stupid OP combos over time in wild, its only worth interfering with the ones that are at a bare minimum, highly competitive.
Is it really necessary? Deck is really not that good.
This is the same argument people wanted to use on Quest Rogue.
Nerfing Quest Rogue was so Blizzard can actually sell those death knight cards. Chances are they were just too slow to ever see any play if Quest Rogue remained without nerfs.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Sorry, I couldn't get past your hole vs. whole spelling error.
I've played a lot of wild recently, and the Naga deck either (1) gets run over by aggro, or (2) destroys everything not named Lightbomb or Doomsayer/Frost Nova. It's also very unfun to play - search for Naga by life tap/Stitched Tracker/Nourish, win on turn 6. Stupid.
Standard Legend - July '16 (Rank 56), June '17, Dec. '18, Apr. '19
Wild Legend - Mar. '18 (Rank 30), Apr. '18, Aug. '19
Twelve Arena Wins - Shaman, Warlock, Mage x2, Rogue, Priest (12-0), Druid, Hallow's End x2, Hunter, Taverns of Time x3 (Pa,D,WL), Paladin
It is possible that they will nerf it because their given reason behind the change was fairly weak and could just as easily go another way.
The main issue seems to be the coding behind the Professor Putricide wing of the free KFT mission. The rumor is that the coding was changed to accommodate that mission. If they change the coding back, it may mess up the Professor Putricide mission too much. That is one reason they may never change Naga Sea Witch back again.
Standard is where they are supposed to worry about "balance" and "interactivity" and that kind of crap. As long as the wild meta isn't completely centered on a certain deck over several expansions, it should be left well enough alone. There will be more and more stupid OP combos over time in wild, its only worth interfering with the ones that are at a bare minimum, highly competitive.