The only change I think should be made is for Hunter.
I mean, Warrior gets to double the armour. Paladin gets to double to units. Priest gets to double the healing. Mage, Rogue and Druid get to double their damage. But Hunter only gets the hero power increased by 50%.
Direct damage that can go face is more expensive than healing simply because it's more valuable. There's a reason Pyroblast is 10 damage for 10 mana whereas Greater Healing Potion is 12 healing for 4 mana. Huge, and balanced, difference.
Hunter hitting face for 4 is worth more than priest healing for 4. Trust me, you do not want to see a world with a 4 face damage hero power...
I agree that Baku is a problematic card and it is going to continue to be problematic. Namely, I think it's going to encourage a ton of power creep in non-Baku classes (i.e. everything except Warrior, Paladin, and Rogue...and to a much lesser degree Mage).
For example, the reasons 2 drops suck isn't because all the 2 drops are terribly designed. It's because they are just much worse than a Rogue Dagger, 4 armor, or 2 dudes every turn.
But, like Rogue Quest, we'll probably just have to suffer through it until it rotates. 4 more sets! 4 more sets!
For most of Hearthstone's existence the warrior hero power was considered one of the worst hero powers in the game. When most of the hero powers are doubled all of the sudden people think it is one of the best hero powers in the game. Is it really that the boosted warrior hero power is that much better than their regular hero power, or is it that warrior's odd cost cards are better and synergize more with their hero power than other classes odd cost cards? Is gaining 4 armor really better than 2 armor and 2 attack (the druid hero power)?
4 armor a turn is why warrior can get away with stalling for so long. They require greater threats on the board, to force warrior to play removal compared to other control decks.
4 armor a turn is why warrior can get away with stalling for so long. They require greater threats on the board, to force warrior to play removal compared to other control decks.
That's how the warrior hero power has always worked. The same was true with their base hero power in comparison to other control decks with their base hero power.
Nope, you sacrifice half the card pool to play Baku, so not needed. I mean why Baku and not Genn, have you played things like even pally or shaman? A 1-cost tap is pretty damn sick too.
It's a build-around with a trade-off. You're looking at the wrong card if you think the builds are oppressive.
I mean, I'm not going to word for word say what kibler did, but he is right in the sentiment that it's not really that big a drawback for the effect and that by printing cards that limit what you can play in your deck like genn and baku; you also make the game less interesting because half of the cards in the game won't be explored or ever see play.
So yeah, you do give up a little bit for something, but the effect is consistent and the drawback doesn't matter. I mean look at raza priest before it was neutered. Sure it had to give up running duplicates but that didn't stop it from being oppressive despite that fact that is wasn't even close to being as consistent as baku is. Raza priest proves that "drawbacks" are irrelevant when the reward is game winning and in competitive odd deck, it definitely is game winning.
Off topic, I am sick of hero power stone. Yes, it was fun when justicar was introduced and the dks were fun for awhile too, but I feel the game has become a game of dick waving at this point. Who's hero power does more? It's hardly about the cards anymore, the hero powers are too impactful. What was originally a neat idea for giving players something to do with their spare mana has become the win conditions in themselves. It's fucked.
4 armor a turn is why warrior can get away with stalling for so long. They require greater threats on the board, to force warrior to play removal compared to other control decks.
That's how the warrior hero power has always worked. The same was true with their base hero power in comparison to other control decks with their base hero power.
Simple experiment: Play odd warrior without Baku and see how far you can get. Then you will see how much of a difference 2 additional armor is.
Tank Up from Justicar was a big problem back when Control Warrior was a leading archetype, at least in my opinion. After all this time, I am still quite happy when Warrior is at the bottom because I hated that deck so much. Warrior had all the answers to any minion strategy, and you were forced to play into them because if you didn't, Warrior would Tank Up beyond any chance of catching up to. Tank Up should give 3 armor, not 4.
I think it damages future expansions as these decks will always be around and can only get improved which Is why this expansion seemed not impact too samey
I think they're probably fundamentally unfixable. Hero Powers aren't balanced, and instead class cards are balanced around hero powers. 1 mana or extra-strength Hero Powers are simply never going to be fair. Thing is, I think Baku and Genn are cool designs. It makes for interesting deck building. However, I know I'm going to be bored of them over the course of the next *year and a half.*
As to warrior in particular, I think it'd probably good to institute a hard 30 armor cap. 30 armor, same as 30 life.
4 armor a turn is why warrior can get away with stalling for so long. They require greater threats on the board, to force warrior to play removal compared to other control decks.
That's how the warrior hero power has always worked. The same was true with their base hero power in comparison to other control decks with their base hero power.
Simple experiment: Play odd warrior without Baku and see how far you can get. Then you will see how much of a difference 2 additional armor is.
What is that going to prove? I never claimed that 4 armor is worse than 2. I think you missed the entire point of my post.
4 armor a turn is why warrior can get away with stalling for so long. They require greater threats on the board, to force warrior to play removal compared to other control decks.
That's how the warrior hero power has always worked. The same was true with their base hero power in comparison to other control decks with their base hero power.
Simple experiment: Play odd warrior without Baku and see how far you can get. Then you will see how much of a difference 2 additional armor is.
What is that going to prove? I never claimed that 4 armor is worse than 2. I think you missed the entire point of my post.
Maybe I did (although I never wanted to imply that you‘d think something obviously stupid like 4 armorgain is worse than 2). I understood your post as playing down the effect of the additional armor gain since you asked whether Tank Up! is actually better than the upgraded Druid hero power. And it is for the viable decks warrior plays. Simply because warrior has the tools to control the board and using the life as a resource is much easier when the armor gain is doubled. Only two armor per turn wouldn’t be enough to survive.that‘s what it would prove. Druid also relies on cards for armor gain and dismisses his upgraded hero power entirely.
Just for the sake of clarity: I am not for a Baku nerf.
For me the only change Baku need is change your stats for 7/6 or 7/5 or 5/7 and reduce the cost to 7 manas, 9 manas 7/8 is too bad, Genn is a playable minion 6/5 for 6 manas.
Exactly what I've been thinking. It's a mess with 9 mana cards so you can't use your hero power that turn.
About that 4 armor, when I play Odd Warrior against a druid I'm far behind when it comes to armor nevertheless. Warror needs to use up the armor to clean the table.
Direct damage that can go face is more expensive than healing simply because it's more valuable. There's a reason Pyroblast is 10 damage for 10 mana whereas Greater Healing Potion is 12 healing for 4 mana. Huge, and balanced, difference.
Hunter hitting face for 4 is worth more than priest healing for 4. Trust me, you do not want to see a world with a 4 face damage hero power...
I agree that Baku is a problematic card and it is going to continue to be problematic. Namely, I think it's going to encourage a ton of power creep in non-Baku classes (i.e. everything except Warrior, Paladin, and Rogue...and to a much lesser degree Mage).
For example, the reasons 2 drops suck isn't because all the 2 drops are terribly designed. It's because they are just much worse than a Rogue Dagger, 4 armor, or 2 dudes every turn.
But, like Rogue Quest, we'll probably just have to suffer through it until it rotates. 4 more sets! 4 more sets!
After seeing the last trollden video, the most broken thing about Baku is apparently the Beast tag ahaha :)
- Click Here To Join Us On Discord! -
Sorry didn't see this thread when I made mine. I also agree that the three hero powers that need immediate attention are rogue, warrior and paladin.
Ideas discussed in my thread were
She makes some deck strong(er), but I haven't found a deck that isn't beatable.
For most of Hearthstone's existence the warrior hero power was considered one of the worst hero powers in the game. When most of the hero powers are doubled all of the sudden people think it is one of the best hero powers in the game. Is it really that the boosted warrior hero power is that much better than their regular hero power, or is it that warrior's odd cost cards are better and synergize more with their hero power than other classes odd cost cards? Is gaining 4 armor really better than 2 armor and 2 attack (the druid hero power)?
4 armor a turn is why warrior can get away with stalling for so long. They require greater threats on the board, to force warrior to play removal compared to other control decks.
That's how the warrior hero power has always worked. The same was true with their base hero power in comparison to other control decks with their base hero power.
I mean, I'm not going to word for word say what kibler did, but he is right in the sentiment that it's not really that big a drawback for the effect and that by printing cards that limit what you can play in your deck like genn and baku; you also make the game less interesting because half of the cards in the game won't be explored or ever see play.
So yeah, you do give up a little bit for something, but the effect is consistent and the drawback doesn't matter. I mean look at raza priest before it was neutered. Sure it had to give up running duplicates but that didn't stop it from being oppressive despite that fact that is wasn't even close to being as consistent as baku is. Raza priest proves that "drawbacks" are irrelevant when the reward is game winning and in competitive odd deck, it definitely is game winning.
Off topic, I am sick of hero power stone. Yes, it was fun when justicar was introduced and the dks were fun for awhile too, but I feel the game has become a game of dick waving at this point. Who's hero power does more? It's hardly about the cards anymore, the hero powers are too impactful. What was originally a neat idea for giving players something to do with their spare mana has become the win conditions in themselves. It's fucked.
Simple experiment: Play odd warrior without Baku and see how far you can get. Then you will see how much of a difference 2 additional armor is.
Tank Up from Justicar was a big problem back when Control Warrior was a leading archetype, at least in my opinion. After all this time, I am still quite happy when Warrior is at the bottom because I hated that deck so much. Warrior had all the answers to any minion strategy, and you were forced to play into them because if you didn't, Warrior would Tank Up beyond any chance of catching up to. Tank Up should give 3 armor, not 4.
I think it damages future expansions as these decks will always be around and can only get improved which Is why this expansion seemed not impact too samey
I Bought All The Funnel Cakes
I think they're probably fundamentally unfixable. Hero Powers aren't balanced, and instead class cards are balanced around hero powers. 1 mana or extra-strength Hero Powers are simply never going to be fair. Thing is, I think Baku and Genn are cool designs. It makes for interesting deck building. However, I know I'm going to be bored of them over the course of the next *year and a half.*
As to warrior in particular, I think it'd probably good to institute a hard 30 armor cap. 30 armor, same as 30 life.
What is that going to prove? I never claimed that 4 armor is worse than 2. I think you missed the entire point of my post.
Why does our community have to suck so much?
Is this because of that stupid Kibler video?
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
Maybe I did (although I never wanted to imply that you‘d think something obviously stupid like 4 armorgain is worse than 2). I understood your post as playing down the effect of the additional armor gain since you asked whether Tank Up! is actually better than the upgraded Druid hero power. And it is for the viable decks warrior plays. Simply because warrior has the tools to control the board and using the life as a resource is much easier when the armor gain is doubled. Only two armor per turn wouldn’t be enough to survive.that‘s what it would prove. Druid also relies on cards for armor gain and dismisses his upgraded hero power entirely.
Just for the sake of clarity: I am not for a Baku nerf.
What about buffing shaman and priest hero powers? They look so bad in comparison to other hero powers.
Exactly what I've been thinking. It's a mess with 9 mana cards so you can't use your hero power that turn.
About that 4 armor, when I play Odd Warrior against a druid I'm far behind when it comes to armor nevertheless. Warror needs to use up the armor to clean the table.
i think, it costing 9 mana specifically is very much on purpose :)