The first two are too situational and only target a very small percentage of the meta, and thus can not be used with enough accuracy (they'll end up becoming cards akin to Hemet Nesingwary).
The last one is interesting, and it would certainly be a cool tech against Aggro decks, but we do have Mind Control Tech available and does provide the functionality similar to your idea so... don't think there's really a need.
I like the idea of counter cards but I would argue that number three is definitely not balanced. The stats are almost vanilla yet the AOE is incredible. Compare this to the new murloc (6 mana 2/3 - deal two damage to all minions that aren't murlocs) and you can see that this is far too strong.
I like #2 because I think warriors just carelessly stack armor to absurd levels sometimes but most people on these forums get defensive about cards that pretty much just counter warrior so you probably won't get support.
#1 seems like a more balanced Hemet. However, I think the bodies on these tech cards are probably too strong for them to be implemented.
counter cards would rarely see play even control decks prefer being proactive or they just run massive board clears.
This statement bothers me quite a bit. Perhaps it's true but I've run cards like Kezan Mystic and Flare when secret classes were bigger. Ooze and Harrison are played often now, mostly to counter shaman even though they help against warrior too. Counter cards allow you to have some choice in your deckbuilding and make certain matchups more winnable. An armor removal card would be used in many OTK decks and would find use against freeze mage, Yogg druid and especially warrior. I don't see the beast one being run since most beasts don't even have 5 health and they aren't that prevalent in the meta. The 3rd card he has would be found in every control deck.
Hi guys! I've just met Hunter with all his beasts and had nothing to answer.
I asked myself, why there Is no special card in Standard to counter it?
So I imagine couple of cards like Harrison that effectively helps to fight against special things.
1) 5 mana 5/5. Battlecry: deal 5 dmg to beast (or dragon)
2) 5 mana 5/5. Battlecry: remove 10 armor.
3) 4 mana 4/4. Battlecry: if opponent has 4+ minions - deal 2 dmg for all.
All are balanced because battlecries require conditions. and with out battlecries they are just decent.
So we can discuss about rarity and stats. Just realise main idea.
The first two are too situational and only target a very small percentage of the meta, and thus can not be used with enough accuracy (they'll end up becoming cards akin to Hemet Nesingwary).
The last one is interesting, and it would certainly be a cool tech against Aggro decks, but we do have Mind Control Tech available and does provide the functionality similar to your idea so... don't think there's really a need.
I like the idea of counter cards but I would argue that number three is definitely not balanced. The stats are almost vanilla yet the AOE is incredible. Compare this to the new murloc (6 mana 2/3 - deal two damage to all minions that aren't murlocs) and you can see that this is far too strong.
I like #2 because I think warriors just carelessly stack armor to absurd levels sometimes but most people on these forums get defensive about cards that pretty much just counter warrior so you probably won't get support.
#1 seems like a more balanced Hemet. However, I think the bodies on these tech cards are probably too strong for them to be implemented.
I like to play control decks and I find counter cards as useful and intresting.
For me - It is more attractive then just spam powerful drops on curve.