Those of you, who have read the recent developer Q&A, would know that Bloodbloom is a potential candidate for a nerf. For people, who aren't aware, there is a new warlock deck in RoS, that utilizes Rafaam's Scheme, Bloodbloom and Darkest Hour with a bunch of big threats. You can see the deck in the following link:
Many people are complaining about its mana cheating ability and how bad it feels to lose against it, when it highrolls. Oftentimes this deck was compared to Nagalock due to how hopeless you were to deal with a gigantic board on turn 5 or 6 (or 4 with The Coin).
Now, I didn't make this thread to complain about DH warlock. I should mention, that it often loses to aggressive lists and to its own card draw inconsistencies. I've mentioned it just because I wanted to explain the context of Bloodbloom's nerf discussion. I've made this thread to talk about how the nerf would look like and what impact it would have on the wild meta. Feel free to leave your own suggestions, but please try to make constructive posts only.
Possible changes:
1) Concerning its cost (i.e. an increase to 3 mana). If you think about it, this might be the most logical modification ever. The devs always preferred such internal nerfs, as they preserve the soul of the card and are easier to comprehend. However I have a small issue with this - I don't think this will change things THAT much. Pulling off the combo would be delayed by a turn, but what does it matter, if you still can't play your AoEs due to how early the warlock casts the DH spell? Agressive lists would benefit from this nerf mainly.
If anything, this would hurt Mecha'thun a lot more. In order to pull off the combo, the warlock would need 3 ticks (either Emperor Thaurissan should stick 2 turns on the board and decrease the cost of BB and Mecha'thun or the warlock player should play a Galvanizer afterwards or start with The Coin). I know that the current Mecha'thun lists run the 1/2 mechs, but if this change would be implemented, then they couldn't bluff their opponents anymore. Right now they can play both Galvanizers and bait out a Dirty Rat, but if Bloodbloom's cost increases, then they would give a clear sign when they have all of the combo pieces in hand.
And if for some reason BB's cost increases to 4 mana (just like Naga Sea Witch's cost was increased to 8 mana to REALLY delay the "giant" board), then this will kill the purpose of the spell. The card would become super weak on its own, because you could only cheat out 2-6 mana, which isn't really worth it. And Mecha'thun warlock would be crushed.
2) Change to the card text (i.e. making a specific requirement). In other words, imagine how the spell works ONLY with 5 or less cost spells (like Cataclysm). This would preserve Mecha'thun warlock as a whole, but it would ruin the soul of the card and it would kill an archtype. This makes me believe, that the devs won't choose this nerf. Naga Sea Witch warlock can still be played on the ladder, but it's a different topic if it's viable or not.
3) Change to both of those factors (suggested by BrokenCycle), i.e. "0 mana: Spend all your mana crystals. You lose twice that much life, gain twice that many mana crystals this turn only" or "0 mana: The next spell you cast this turn only costs half the mana, rounded up, but also costs health". The user gave the following scenarios as examples:
spend one mana: gain two mana crystals, lose two life. (bad innervate)
spend two mana: gain four mana crystals, lose four life. (Mecha'thun still intact)
etc.
As you can see, only the existing mana can be cheated out. In terms of design, the devs will most likely ignore this suggestion, because it's kinda hard to comprehend by the playerbase and not easy to implement into the game. It doesn't fit a simple game like hearthstone as well. I wanted to add it here, because I liked the creative approach towards balancing it and this thread is about discussing BB's possible nerfs after all. BrokenCycle made a note, that the first version could be abused with minions, so keep this in mind.
My opinion
I personally think, that the Darkest Hour is the real offender here. I remember the time, when the devs introduced the recruit mechanic and how concerned I was from hearing this. The whole mana cheating ability in the early game sounded way too unfair and unfun to play against and that was the reason why Possessed Lackey got rightfully nerfed. When Bloodbloom got revealed for the first time, the only amazing combos people could do with it regarded casting Twisting Nethers or DOOM!s for cheap and getting some value from Medivh, the Guardian. Since then warlocks didn't get any expensive spells, which they wanted to cheat out, and the only place BB saw play was in the well-known Mecha'thun deck. I am aware, that the nerf to this spell is inevitable, because it limits design space, but it's kinda sad to me not to see a smooth solution for this problem.
TL;DR - Bloodbloom is a potential candidate for a nerf due to the existence of DH warlock in wild, that causes unfun experience just like pre-nerfed Naga Sea Witch. The foreseeable changes would be to either increase its cost (this would affect Mecha'thun warlock a lot more) or to give it a specific requirement like synergising with cheap spells only (this would kill an archtype and the soul of the card). In my opinion the Darkest Hour and the recruit mechanic are the ones to blame, but BB limits space design, so its nerf is inevitable.
I forgot to talk about another card, which is also heavily brought up in discussions:
Voidcaller - even outside DH warlock this demon is too good. It might have been ok in the past, but with the inclusion of strong late-game demons and demon synergies (Carnivorous Cube, Bloodreaver Gul'dan) this gives warlocks a big advantage over their opponents and it limits design space. Even though I'm a warlock player myself and I run this demon in every wild deck of mine, I strongly support people's demand for a cost increase. I think we should put it in line of Oblivitron, who has a beneficial effect but it's a legendary. Voidcaller would still be used to summon Mal'Ganis or a Voidlord for cheap and make your DK shenanigans easier to pull off.
[edit] I've mentioned it, because some people (Slyde) believe this is the biggest offender in DH warlock. Whether this is true or not, I believe that the devs should change their philosophy regarding mana cheating and make such problematic cards balanced (like Barnes, but this is a topic for another discussion).
IMO, Darkest Hour should cost no less than (10) for what it can currently do, Voidcaller something like (5) (it would still be VERY strong).
Indeed, Bloodbloom is a cool card per se, but since the devs seem to be willing to print increasingly strong spells for Warlock, the card is a big problem, and I think a simple mana nerf for it would not be enough. Maybe also a DOUBLE LIFE cost?
OT: I hope they also target Barnes and Shadow Essence with nerfs. It would be honestly unfair to hit only DH Warlock (even tho I wholeheartedly hate both decks).
I agree with the fact that Bloodbloom is not the target here. Why nerf one card that has it's uses in other decks, punishing other people that don't play DH Warlock, instead of nerfing what's actually causing the problem? What this tells us is that Blizzard wants to see DH Warlock become an archetype in standard, and that there are other synergistic cards in mind for the upcoming expansion(s). My biggest issue with Blizzard right now is that they always use such ambiguous phrases like "it's something we're interested in" or "we're looking into it". Don't get me wrong, I'm super glad that they're being at least a little transparent with us, but I don't see why they aren't giving us the whole spiel. Like when they previously said that they aren't going to work on new game modes, yeah, it's sad to hear, but at least we knew not to expect anything. Saying "we're interested in it" doesn't tell us anything.
That being said, I stand for not nerfing Zilliax and I will never leave this position. I've just come to the conclusion that such people just cry because a card is unfun to play against in the one scenario that it's amazingly good in. Like when people said to nerf Stonetusk Boar. Fucking Stonetusk Boar, because APM Priest and Quest Rogue existed (that weren't even that popular, and didn't even have a good winrate). These are the people that have gone past the "nerf every single card until all that's left is beta Hearthstone" phase and into "I don't like any card under any circumstance and I'm going to make angry posts about the devs pretending I'd be a better dev and posts about me leaving the game and everyone should agree with me and feel bad that they lost one player".
So the devs have to ask themselves some questions and then decide what sort of answers they are willing to accept.
For Wild these apply:
1. Do you want mana cheating in the game? If so, how much is acceptable? Is filling the board with 5 big minions on turn 6 fair, fun and interactive?
2. If you don't want too much mana cheating, what is the best way to solve the issue? Cards get nerfed with mana increase? Cards get completely reworded to change the intent of the card?
3. If you want cards like Darkest Hour to function and become a thing, won't this limit design space the more big minions you print in the future?
4. What is the real problem with filling a board with big minions? Is it the fact that the opponent has zero chance of dealing with it? Or is it that board clears cost too much mana?
I think we need to decide as a community AND the devs how they see the Wild format and how much are they willing to allow in the game. If putting out 30 to 40 points of stats on turn 6 is acceptable, then the game needs more and cheaper board clears.
I know that the Warlock deck is disguisting but I have to admit I love playing it because I mostly face big priests, and it feels sooooo good. They usually have such a slow start so you dont have to worry and then BOOM. Game over, Baby. Feels good, Mr. Big Priest. Other than that, its meh.
So the devs have to ask themselves some questions and then decide what sort of answers they are willing to accept.
For Wild these apply:
1. Do you want mana cheating in the game? If so, how much is acceptable? Is filling the board with 5 big minions on turn 6 fair, fun and interactive?
2. If you don't want too much mana cheating, what is the best way to solve the issue? Cards get nerfed with mana increase? Cards get completely reworded to change the intent of the card?
3. If you want cards like Darkest Hour to function and become a thing, won't this limit design space the more big minions you print in the future?
4. What is the real problem with filling a board with big minions? Is it the fact that the opponent has zero chance of dealing with it? Or is it that board clears cost too much mana?
I think we need to decide as a community AND the devs how they see the Wild format and how much are they willing to allow in the game. If putting out 30 to 40 points of stats on turn 6 is acceptable, then the game needs more and cheaper board clears.
Problem is that bloodbloom massively restricts design space for high cost warlock spells, as this card will sooner or later break wild (which might very well be the case right now).
It's like preparation on steroids in terms of limiting spell design space.
I wouldn't be opposed to a major increase in the card's mana cost. Even though it might not seem to be the problem in this specific scenario, I still think it is.
IMO I think it's too early to change darkest hour or bloodbloom, like the devs stated. It's not easy to pull out all the combo pieces together. Just take a look at hsreplay.net and you can see the WR of this deck is just ok. We have been facing Big Priests for months now and nothing has been done yet...
I have no problem with mana cheating as long as it can be countered. For instance, Paladin now has Duel, Shaman have Ancestor's Call and Eureka, but the difference is that they can't RESURRECT those big minions (ok, you can use Ancestral Spirit, etc., but it's just one minion!). On the other hand, Warlocks have DK that insta resurrects all demons (though counter-productive in a DH deck) and priests... well, you all know...
OT: To this day I can't understand why people hate Gul'dan's resurrect battlecry. It happens on turn 10+ (it can't be cheated out except with The Coin or Emperor Thaurissan) and it's comparable to N'zoth's effect, which every class can utilize. The only thing, which is broken in resurrecting the demons, is cheating them out in the first place and negating their drawbacks with Skull of the Man'ari and Voidcaller. So I wouldn't say, that the demons' resurrection is problematic in warlock. Especially, if a lot of Voidlords died before that and you summon a bunch of 1/3s. Millzoth Rogue also resurrects taunts and they can multiply this legendary with Togwaggle's Scheme, but it's not a hot topic.
As for DH warlock - yeah, I am aware of its weaknesses. I've acknowledged them in the original post and I even post a link. But I have to disagree, that there should be no change whatsoever. As far as I recall, Naga lock also had an average win-rate, but it was nerfed, because it enabled insane turns in the early game, which were hard to answer.
We have been facing Big Priests for months now and nothing has been done yet...
This shouldn't be taken as an excuse for the devs' lack of activity. If you go to the Q&A comment section, you will see that people are heavily critisizing them for being passive. And imho a nerf to Bloodbloom is inevitable. It's only a matter of time, before this happens. My concern is that other archtypes will suffer from this change a lot more than the responsible deck. Just like you, I also don't have any problems with mana cheating as long it happens in the late game. Big Shaman is a good example, but Big Priest and Big Warlock aren't. I can easily goof around with Steal Priest and answer their board with Mass Hysteria (if Nerubian Unraveler is not on the board), but not all classes have this option and some people want to play seriously w/o facing such BS.
I know that the Warlock deck is disguisting but I have to admit I love playing it because I mostly face big priests, and it feels sooooo good. They usually have such a slow start so you dont have to worry and then BOOM. Game over, Baby. Feels good, Mr. Big Priest. Other than that, its meh.
have you had this magnificent start yet: T1 coin bloodbloom implosion for 4, T2 bloodbloom darkest hour ?
i know that this only works cause of bloodbloom but regardless the real offender aint bloodbloom, its Darkest Hour, they should change the card to summon copies of the minions, they attack random enemies then die. or summon the minions that cost six or less from ur deck. that should reduce the power lvl. u can still summon the nerubians which will protect the board and then some mid sized threats, powerfull but not over the top
i know that this only works cause of bloodbloom but regardless the real offender aint bloodbloom, its Darkest Hour, they should change the card to summon copies of the minions, they attack random enemies then die. or summon the minions that cost six or less from ur deck. that should reduce the power lvl. u can still summon the nerubians which will protect the board and then some mid sized threats, powerfull but not over the top
Good suggestion! Keeps BB intact and preserves the idea of DH. There are plenty of great 6 mana minions. I doubt they’ll do it though, since it’s a standard card
Darkest Hour is a dangerous card. I predict this card will create a broken standard deck before it rotates out. Maybe even multiple ones, like the rogue quest did. But blood bloom IS ALSO problematic. And I honestly think it is the main offender. It limits design space severely. Could you imagine Ultimate Infestation in warlock, for example? Or even Dimensional Ripper? Cards have a certain mana cost for a reason, and cheating up to 8 mana is bound to create problems. Now and in the future.
It is hard to fix, too. Changing one mana doesn't make much of a difference. I feel like the best fix would be if the card got worse exponentially as the mana cost increases. Maybe:
0 mana: Spend all your mana crystals. You lose twice that much life, gain twice that many mana crystals this turn only.
In other words, you can cheat out only double the amount of mana you already have.
spend one mana: gain two mana crystals, lose two life. (bad innervate)
spend two mana: gain four mana crystals, lose four life. (Mecha'thun still intact)
etc.
But that sounds a bit too complicated for hearthstone. Of course, this also works on minions, which opens a whole different can of worms.
Another idea:
0 mana: The next spell you cast this turn only costs half the mana, rounded up, but also costs health.
Hey, those are some nice suggestions. Unlike some people, I don't care if complicated ideas don't fit a game like hearthstone. For me it's way more important to find the smoothest solution for a problematic card instead of going on the typical "cost increase" route.
If you don't mind, I will add them in the OP (with your name ofc) so that people can have a good glimpse at all possible card versions. This goes to other users as well. This was the point of the thread after all.
[edit] I might create a poll just to ask for the community's opinion on which nerf they like the most.
The problem is Darkest Hour, not Bloodbloom, and the problem with Darkest Hour is that once its played, paired with nerubians it is impossible to clear the board for ANY class. Increasing its mana cost to 8 or even 10 wouldnt solve that problem, because if warlock can afford to cast it, summoning Mal'Ganis from it would give the warlock invulnerability anyway.
A fair nerf would be to hard code the base HP of the summoned creatures to the ones that are being sacrificed or make it a X hp summon just like Zerek's Cloning Gallery where X=1, or Shadow Essence. This idea makes the board removable with your own minions, or at least to a point where Mal'Ganis and Voidlord arent together.
Another idea is to recruit only minions with X or less mana cost or attack points like Oaken Summons, but this would weaken the mechanic a lot.
Although this thread should be all about BB, I made a poll regarding DH warlock itself in order to hear people's opinion regarding the biggest offenders. The users here have different PoVs (they expressed them in their comments), so I wanted to hear them all out. If this thread gathers enough attention, I might make a thread in the official forums and share a link to this page.
I'm also planning to make a poll regarding the possible nerfs to BB and DH, so that people could choose which one they prefer.
You lay out the discussion well. I´d like to weigh in on your conclusion, in the original post in this thread, that Darkest Hour is the offender. It is true, that is the "payoff" card. Blood bloom is only as good as the card it enables.
But still, it is Blood Bloom that is the broken card, not Darkest Hour. Breaking a game isn´t about doing the most powerful thing. It is about doing something really powerful very early in the game. Thus, the most important recource of Hearthstone is mana. Life, on the oteher hand, is in many matchups a completely irrelevant resource, especially in the early game. So turning life into mana is an incredibly strong effect. This is what years and years of different card games has taught us - doing something broken is almost always about doing something fast.
So yeah, Darkest Hour is the powerful card that "does" something, but it is Blood Bloom that is doing the cheating. If you don´t do anything about Blood Bloom now, there will be another spell down the line which is broken when it can be played "for free". Because Blood Bloom is an incredibly powerful effect, just waiting for something to enable. Even nerfing Blood Bloom by one mana will probably still enable some broken combo down the line.
[Edit: I realize this sounds like I want to nerf Blood Bloom badly. I actually think it is a fun card, and would like it to stay! But I think that it is wrong to say that Blood Bloom isn´t the main offender. So for me, if you feel that Darkest Hour combo is a problem, I am all for nerfing Darkest Hour in some way. It is a bit of a slippery slope to nerf all the powerful cards in wild, since that is one fun part about playing wild. If you want very balanced game play, maybe that is what standard is supposed to be like]
as u can see all the cards u mention in the poll somehow cheat mana
Voidcaller is strong card and need nerf but its not the core of DH warlock he is just a op warlock card that can fit into any warlock deck discussing about Voidcaller nerf need another thread in my opinion
i hope they nerf Darkest Hour instead of Bloodbloom so Mecha'thun warlock stay playable warlock deck (we need playable combo deck to address possible wild slow control meta)
but i can completely understand if they choose to nerf Bloodbloom because as i mention every mana cheat abilty eventually end up being problematic card
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Introduction
Those of you, who have read the recent developer Q&A, would know that Bloodbloom is a potential candidate for a nerf. For people, who aren't aware, there is a new warlock deck in RoS, that utilizes Rafaam's Scheme, Bloodbloom and Darkest Hour with a bunch of big threats. You can see the deck in the following link:
https://hsreplay.net/decks/aAHdZVNeOPqZFe9PUYrNSb/#gameType=RANKED_WILD
Many people are complaining about its mana cheating ability and how bad it feels to lose against it, when it highrolls. Oftentimes this deck was compared to Nagalock due to how hopeless you were to deal with a gigantic board on turn 5 or 6 (or 4 with The Coin).
Now, I didn't make this thread to complain about DH warlock. I should mention, that it often loses to aggressive lists and to its own card draw inconsistencies. I've mentioned it just because I wanted to explain the context of Bloodbloom's nerf discussion. I've made this thread to talk about how the nerf would look like and what impact it would have on the wild meta. Feel free to leave your own suggestions, but please try to make constructive posts only.
Possible changes:
1) Concerning its cost (i.e. an increase to 3 mana). If you think about it, this might be the most logical modification ever. The devs always preferred such internal nerfs, as they preserve the soul of the card and are easier to comprehend. However I have a small issue with this - I don't think this will change things THAT much. Pulling off the combo would be delayed by a turn, but what does it matter, if you still can't play your AoEs due to how early the warlock casts the DH spell? Agressive lists would benefit from this nerf mainly.
If anything, this would hurt Mecha'thun a lot more. In order to pull off the combo, the warlock would need 3 ticks (either Emperor Thaurissan should stick 2 turns on the board and decrease the cost of BB and Mecha'thun or the warlock player should play a Galvanizer afterwards or start with The Coin). I know that the current Mecha'thun lists run the 1/2 mechs, but if this change would be implemented, then they couldn't bluff their opponents anymore. Right now they can play both Galvanizers and bait out a Dirty Rat, but if Bloodbloom's cost increases, then they would give a clear sign when they have all of the combo pieces in hand.
And if for some reason BB's cost increases to 4 mana (just like Naga Sea Witch's cost was increased to 8 mana to REALLY delay the "giant" board), then this will kill the purpose of the spell. The card would become super weak on its own, because you could only cheat out 2-6 mana, which isn't really worth it. And Mecha'thun warlock would be crushed.
2) Change to the card text (i.e. making a specific requirement). In other words, imagine how the spell works ONLY with 5 or less cost spells (like Cataclysm). This would preserve Mecha'thun warlock as a whole, but it would ruin the soul of the card and it would kill an archtype. This makes me believe, that the devs won't choose this nerf. Naga Sea Witch warlock can still be played on the ladder, but it's a different topic if it's viable or not.
3) Change to both of those factors (suggested by BrokenCycle), i.e. "0 mana: Spend all your mana crystals. You lose twice that much life, gain twice that many mana crystals this turn only" or "0 mana: The next spell you cast this turn only costs half the mana, rounded up, but also costs health". The user gave the following scenarios as examples:
As you can see, only the existing mana can be cheated out. In terms of design, the devs will most likely ignore this suggestion, because it's kinda hard to comprehend by the playerbase and not easy to implement into the game. It doesn't fit a simple game like hearthstone as well. I wanted to add it here, because I liked the creative approach towards balancing it and this thread is about discussing BB's possible nerfs after all. BrokenCycle made a note, that the first version could be abused with minions, so keep this in mind.
My opinion
I personally think, that the Darkest Hour is the real offender here. I remember the time, when the devs introduced the recruit mechanic and how concerned I was from hearing this. The whole mana cheating ability in the early game sounded way too unfair and unfun to play against and that was the reason why Possessed Lackey got rightfully nerfed. When Bloodbloom got revealed for the first time, the only amazing combos people could do with it regarded casting Twisting Nethers or DOOM!s for cheap and getting some value from Medivh, the Guardian. Since then warlocks didn't get any expensive spells, which they wanted to cheat out, and the only place BB saw play was in the well-known Mecha'thun deck. I am aware, that the nerf to this spell is inevitable, because it limits design space, but it's kinda sad to me not to see a smooth solution for this problem.
I forgot to talk about another card, which is also heavily brought up in discussions:
Voidcaller - even outside DH warlock this demon is too good. It might have been ok in the past, but with the inclusion of strong late-game demons and demon synergies (Carnivorous Cube, Bloodreaver Gul'dan) this gives warlocks a big advantage over their opponents and it limits design space. Even though I'm a warlock player myself and I run this demon in every wild deck of mine, I strongly support people's demand for a cost increase. I think we should put it in line of Oblivitron, who has a beneficial effect but it's a legendary. Voidcaller would still be used to summon Mal'Ganis or a Voidlord for cheap and make your DK shenanigans easier to pull off.
[edit] I've mentioned it, because some people (Slyde) believe this is the biggest offender in DH warlock. Whether this is true or not, I believe that the devs should change their philosophy regarding mana cheating and make such problematic cards balanced (like Barnes, but this is a topic for another discussion).
IMO, Darkest Hour should cost no less than (10) for what it can currently do, Voidcaller something like (5) (it would still be VERY strong).
Indeed, Bloodbloom is a cool card per se, but since the devs seem to be willing to print increasingly strong spells for Warlock, the card is a big problem, and I think a simple mana nerf for it would not be enough. Maybe also a DOUBLE LIFE cost?
OT: I hope they also target Barnes and Shadow Essence with nerfs. It would be honestly unfair to hit only DH Warlock (even tho I wholeheartedly hate both decks).
I agree with the fact that Bloodbloom is not the target here. Why nerf one card that has it's uses in other decks, punishing other people that don't play DH Warlock, instead of nerfing what's actually causing the problem? What this tells us is that Blizzard wants to see DH Warlock become an archetype in standard, and that there are other synergistic cards in mind for the upcoming expansion(s). My biggest issue with Blizzard right now is that they always use such ambiguous phrases like "it's something we're interested in" or "we're looking into it". Don't get me wrong, I'm super glad that they're being at least a little transparent with us, but I don't see why they aren't giving us the whole spiel. Like when they previously said that they aren't going to work on new game modes, yeah, it's sad to hear, but at least we knew not to expect anything. Saying "we're interested in it" doesn't tell us anything.
That being said, I stand for not nerfing Zilliax and I will never leave this position. I've just come to the conclusion that such people just cry because a card is unfun to play against in the one scenario that it's amazingly good in. Like when people said to nerf Stonetusk Boar. Fucking Stonetusk Boar, because APM Priest and Quest Rogue existed (that weren't even that popular, and didn't even have a good winrate). These are the people that have gone past the "nerf every single card until all that's left is beta Hearthstone" phase and into "I don't like any card under any circumstance and I'm going to make angry posts about the devs pretending I'd be a better dev and posts about me leaving the game and everyone should agree with me and feel bad that they lost one player".
So the devs have to ask themselves some questions and then decide what sort of answers they are willing to accept.
For Wild these apply:
1. Do you want mana cheating in the game? If so, how much is acceptable? Is filling the board with 5 big minions on turn 6 fair, fun and interactive?
2. If you don't want too much mana cheating, what is the best way to solve the issue? Cards get nerfed with mana increase? Cards get completely reworded to change the intent of the card?
3. If you want cards like Darkest Hour to function and become a thing, won't this limit design space the more big minions you print in the future?
4. What is the real problem with filling a board with big minions? Is it the fact that the opponent has zero chance of dealing with it? Or is it that board clears cost too much mana?
I think we need to decide as a community AND the devs how they see the Wild format and how much are they willing to allow in the game. If putting out 30 to 40 points of stats on turn 6 is acceptable, then the game needs more and cheaper board clears.
I know that the Warlock deck is disguisting but I have to admit I love playing it because I mostly face big priests, and it feels sooooo good. They usually have such a slow start so you dont have to worry and then BOOM. Game over, Baby. Feels good, Mr. Big Priest. Other than that, its meh.
Well said.
Problem is that bloodbloom massively restricts design space for high cost warlock spells, as this card will sooner or later break wild (which might very well be the case right now).
It's like preparation on steroids in terms of limiting spell design space.
I wouldn't be opposed to a major increase in the card's mana cost. Even though it might not seem to be the problem in this specific scenario, I still think it is.
IMO I think it's too early to change darkest hour or bloodbloom, like the devs stated. It's not easy to pull out all the combo pieces together. Just take a look at hsreplay.net and you can see the WR of this deck is just ok. We have been facing Big Priests for months now and nothing has been done yet...
I have no problem with mana cheating as long as it can be countered. For instance, Paladin now has Duel, Shaman have Ancestor's Call and Eureka, but the difference is that they can't RESURRECT those big minions (ok, you can use Ancestral Spirit, etc., but it's just one minion!). On the other hand, Warlocks have DK that insta resurrects all demons (though counter-productive in a DH deck) and priests... well, you all know...
OT: To this day I can't understand why people hate Gul'dan's resurrect battlecry. It happens on turn 10+ (it can't be cheated out except with The Coin or Emperor Thaurissan) and it's comparable to N'zoth's effect, which every class can utilize. The only thing, which is broken in resurrecting the demons, is cheating them out in the first place and negating their drawbacks with Skull of the Man'ari and Voidcaller. So I wouldn't say, that the demons' resurrection is problematic in warlock. Especially, if a lot of Voidlords died before that and you summon a bunch of 1/3s. Millzoth Rogue also resurrects taunts and they can multiply this legendary with Togwaggle's Scheme, but it's not a hot topic.
As for DH warlock - yeah, I am aware of its weaknesses. I've acknowledged them in the original post and I even post a link. But I have to disagree, that there should be no change whatsoever. As far as I recall, Naga lock also had an average win-rate, but it was nerfed, because it enabled insane turns in the early game, which were hard to answer.
This shouldn't be taken as an excuse for the devs' lack of activity. If you go to the Q&A comment section, you will see that people are heavily critisizing them for being passive. And imho a nerf to Bloodbloom is inevitable. It's only a matter of time, before this happens. My concern is that other archtypes will suffer from this change a lot more than the responsible deck. Just like you, I also don't have any problems with mana cheating as long it happens in the late game. Big Shaman is a good example, but Big Priest and Big Warlock aren't. I can easily goof around with Steal Priest and answer their board with Mass Hysteria (if Nerubian Unraveler is not on the board), but not all classes have this option and some people want to play seriously w/o facing such BS.
have you had this magnificent start yet: T1 coin bloodbloom implosion for 4, T2 bloodbloom darkest hour ?
i know that this only works cause of bloodbloom but regardless the real offender aint bloodbloom, its Darkest Hour, they should change the card to summon copies of the minions, they attack random enemies then die. or summon the minions that cost six or less from ur deck. that should reduce the power lvl. u can still summon the nerubians which will protect the board and then some mid sized threats, powerfull but not over the top
Good suggestion! Keeps BB intact and preserves the idea of DH. There are plenty of great 6 mana minions. I doubt they’ll do it though, since it’s a standard card
Darkest Hour is a dangerous card. I predict this card will create a broken standard deck before it rotates out. Maybe even multiple ones, like the rogue quest did. But blood bloom IS ALSO problematic. And I honestly think it is the main offender. It limits design space severely. Could you imagine Ultimate Infestation in warlock, for example? Or even Dimensional Ripper? Cards have a certain mana cost for a reason, and cheating up to 8 mana is bound to create problems. Now and in the future.
It is hard to fix, too. Changing one mana doesn't make much of a difference. I feel like the best fix would be if the card got worse exponentially as the mana cost increases. Maybe:
0 mana: Spend all your mana crystals. You lose twice that much life, gain twice that many mana crystals this turn only.
In other words, you can cheat out only double the amount of mana you already have.
But that sounds a bit too complicated for hearthstone. Of course, this also works on minions, which opens a whole different can of worms.
Another idea:
0 mana: The next spell you cast this turn only costs half the mana, rounded up, but also costs health.
Hey, those are some nice suggestions. Unlike some people, I don't care if complicated ideas don't fit a game like hearthstone. For me it's way more important to find the smoothest solution for a problematic card instead of going on the typical "cost increase" route.
If you don't mind, I will add them in the OP (with your name ofc) so that people can have a good glimpse at all possible card versions. This goes to other users as well. This was the point of the thread after all.
[edit] I might create a poll just to ask for the community's opinion on which nerf they like the most.
Proposed nerfs so far
Darkest Hour
(give me a moment to gather the info)
The problem is Darkest Hour, not Bloodbloom, and the problem with Darkest Hour is that once its played, paired with nerubians it is impossible to clear the board for ANY class. Increasing its mana cost to 8 or even 10 wouldnt solve that problem, because if warlock can afford to cast it, summoning Mal'Ganis from it would give the warlock invulnerability anyway.
A fair nerf would be to hard code the base HP of the summoned creatures to the ones that are being sacrificed or make it a X hp summon just like Zerek's Cloning Gallery where X=1, or Shadow Essence. This idea makes the board removable with your own minions, or at least to a point where Mal'Ganis and Voidlord arent together.
Another idea is to recruit only minions with X or less mana cost or attack points like Oaken Summons, but this would weaken the mechanic a lot.
Although this thread should be all about BB, I made a poll regarding DH warlock itself in order to hear people's opinion regarding the biggest offenders. The users here have different PoVs (they expressed them in their comments), so I wanted to hear them all out. If this thread gathers enough attention, I might make a thread in the official forums and share a link to this page.
I'm also planning to make a poll regarding the possible nerfs to BB and DH, so that people could choose which one they prefer.
You lay out the discussion well. I´d like to weigh in on your conclusion, in the original post in this thread, that Darkest Hour is the offender. It is true, that is the "payoff" card. Blood bloom is only as good as the card it enables.
But still, it is Blood Bloom that is the broken card, not Darkest Hour. Breaking a game isn´t about doing the most powerful thing. It is about doing something really powerful very early in the game. Thus, the most important recource of Hearthstone is mana. Life, on the oteher hand, is in many matchups a completely irrelevant resource, especially in the early game. So turning life into mana is an incredibly strong effect. This is what years and years of different card games has taught us - doing something broken is almost always about doing something fast.
So yeah, Darkest Hour is the powerful card that "does" something, but it is Blood Bloom that is doing the cheating. If you don´t do anything about Blood Bloom now, there will be another spell down the line which is broken when it can be played "for free". Because Blood Bloom is an incredibly powerful effect, just waiting for something to enable. Even nerfing Blood Bloom by one mana will probably still enable some broken combo down the line.
[Edit: I realize this sounds like I want to nerf Blood Bloom badly. I actually think it is a fun card, and would like it to stay! But I think that it is wrong to say that Blood Bloom isn´t the main offender. So for me, if you feel that Darkest Hour combo is a problem, I am all for nerfing Darkest Hour in some way. It is a bit of a slippery slope to nerf all the powerful cards in wild, since that is one fun part about playing wild. If you want very balanced game play, maybe that is what standard is supposed to be like]
all mana cheating cards become a problem some day
as u can see all the cards u mention in the poll somehow cheat mana
Voidcaller is strong card and need nerf but its not the core of DH warlock he is just a op warlock card that can fit into any warlock deck discussing about Voidcaller nerf need another thread in my opinion
i hope they nerf Darkest Hour instead of Bloodbloom so Mecha'thun warlock stay playable warlock deck (we need playable combo deck to address possible wild slow control meta)
but i can completely understand if they choose to nerf Bloodbloom because as i mention every mana cheat abilty eventually end up being problematic card