Maybe something that eats the enemy armor, gains +1 attack for every 4 armor the enemy has (or some other multiple). Obviously a tech against a warrior meta, would work against the mage secret a bit too. So not super powerful overall, but extremely good against what it's teched against, which to me is an excellent tech card. Because all the armor the warrior has kept would tend to keep it's HP pretty high, this doesn't destroy the warriors chance to stay in the game (basically he has to restart armoring up from time to time, if the opponent has teched for him). The point is for decks that can't deal 80 damage to have a chance to stay in the game.
No just no. If you want warriors to have less armour, nerf Tank Up to 3 armour and/or nerf Shield Slam to destroy armour equal to the destroyed minion's life
I won't be surprised if one day Blizzard comes up with a card that specifically preys on armor in some way. That said, there is a current mechanism that removes armor quite efficiently; it's called damage to the opposing hero.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
No not really, I hate zoolock very much, and run whatever I can to beat it. Face decks where the opponent can draw well and completely ignore you for a win make me rage as much as anyone else.
But I think it is needed, there isn't any other way but to damage them, as someone said, but it's a ridiculous amount that it can get to. I'm up for nerfing the armor too, but why not an anti-armor tech card? There isn't one yet.
And even if that existed, nobody would play it since it would be very strong only against one class out of nine.
I mean, sure it could be a little good against Mage Freeze and sometimes Druid but then it's still very situational.
And sometimes Warriors play aggro decks with low or no armor at all. So in the end it's just gonna be like Eater of Secrets, a tech card so situational it's hardly a good addition in a deck.
Unless armor become more frequent, we're not gonna need that one.
If your opponent is standing atop of 80 life, he controlled the game so well that he would win with or without armor.
That being said, I believe a Tank Up! nerf would be OK since it helps fatigue warriors so much in mirrors or against similar decks. Shield Slam nerf (they way it was purposed) makes no sense. Maybe it should cost 1 more, but that's all.
Armour is not the main reason warriors see such uprising. Problem is that warriors do EVERYTHING great (single target removal, aoe clear, card draw, weapons and fantastic minions + burst). I had no problem keeping up with them no matter how much armour they have as long as you have a better board.
no, its not an auto-include card, it's a tech card that serves a purpose. and people would put it in it they needed/want it, that's why I am arguing that it would be a good tech card to have. The fact that people don't / wouldn't run it a lot doesn't mean its a bad card, it just means its situational (which is exactly the point of the card).
Thus, if you tech right (i.e. you run it against a control/C'thun warrior meta and you get one) you get an advantage that you would not have had otherwise.
So like your reasoning we need a eater of spells against rogue , eater of small minions against zoo , eater of mana crystals against druid , eater of 7/7 against shaman ecc... has no sense
No, because AoE already can be used to counter a zoo / small minions, single target removal can take out big minions. There is not anything at all that counters armor in the form of cards (other than burn spells) and so this is something for which there is NOTHING, and so there is a gap.
Armour is not the main reason warriors see such uprising. Problem is that warriors do EVERYTHING great (single target removal, aoe clear, card draw, weapons and fantastic minions + burst). I had no problem keeping up with them no matter how much armour they have as long as you have a better board.
Yes, they are a great class, perhaps other classes need some better balancing so they can have the versatility of warrior...
But the point is to have a counter for an aspect of the game for which one does not exist yet. And no, it doesn't always help but its a tech choice that helps your chances against the right warrior build.
And if the card isn't strong enough, it can be buffed to be better (my goal was to design it to NOT be OP)
But in my opinion I would like such a card to exist. Even though it would be unplayable Just that the tools where there if I needed them in deck building.
However, BB has said that they won't make cards which target 1 class specifically
no, its not an auto-include card, it's a tech card that serves a purpose. and people would put it in it they needed/want it, that's why I am arguing that it would be a good tech card to have. The fact that people don't / wouldn't run it a lot doesn't mean its a bad card, it just means its situational (which is exactly the point of the card).
Thus, if you tech right (i.e. you run it against a control/C'thun warrior meta and you get one) you get an advantage that you would not have had otherwise.
How much more techy are you willing to go? Should there be a thing that prevents paladin from making dudes for example? A neutral eater of silverhand recruits maybe? This is not needed in any way since it is one of the upsides of warrior that he is basically invulnrable to face decks and it's a good thing. His armour doesn't lose you the game, the boardstate does. Exception is fatigue fights which are super rare nowadays.
If your opponent is standing atop of 80 life, he controlled the game so well that he would win with or without armor.
That being said, I believe a Tank Up! nerf would be OK since it helps fatigue warriors so much in mirrors or against similar decks. Shield Slam nerf (they way it was purposed) makes no sense. Maybe it should cost 1 more, but that's all.
it would still be good even at 2 mana, but maybe you change it so it can target face :P
Warrior is an average class in Wild. Just a couple of cards they have a hard time dealing with, and they are held back enough. And.. Acidic Swamp Ooze, Harrison Jones and Cairne Bloodhoof are already in the game if you want to hard-tech.
Warrior's hero power literally does nothing against the board unlike most other hero powers. Even if the warrior gains armour then loses it from the minions taking face. We need to ask ourselves the question when do warriors gain mass amounts of armour? They gain armour in the late game and newsflash, control warrior would easily armour up and shield block to prevent them from dying against aggro/midrange decks. When this happens, it just means the aggro/midrange player failed to rush the warrior down and the warrior is just stabilising and coming back into the game. As for tank up being op, getting to the stage of the game where warrior tanks up means the aggro player failed his job to rush the warrior down. Just wait for 1 year when LoE and TGT gets rotated out of standard.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
That was topdecked? Nah, it was because I let the Heart of the Cards guide me ;)
If I had to choose, I'd probably make this card a legendary. Since it's a techcard that has pretty bad stats, you lower the powerlevel of your deck significantly, but get a useful effect in exchange. I don't see a single reason not to include this card in the game; it works versus druids, warriors, and mages rather well, so in no way it counters only a single class. Technically speaking, any class might get some armour (stealing an armoursmith with priest, burgling, and stuff like that).
Maybe something like 4 mana, 2/4
Maybe something that eats the enemy armor, gains +1 attack for every 4 armor the enemy has (or some other multiple). Obviously a tech against a warrior meta, would work against the mage secret a bit too. So not super powerful overall, but extremely good against what it's teched against, which to me is an excellent tech card. Because all the armor the warrior has kept would tend to keep it's HP pretty high, this doesn't destroy the warriors chance to stay in the game (basically he has to restart armoring up from time to time, if the opponent has teched for him). The point is for decks that can't deal 80 damage to have a chance to stay in the game.
No just no. If you want warriors to have less armour, nerf Tank Up to 3 armour and/or nerf Shield Slam to destroy armour equal to the destroyed minion's life
I won't be surprised if one day Blizzard comes up with a card that specifically preys on armor in some way. That said, there is a current mechanism that removes armor quite efficiently; it's called damage to the opposing hero.
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
And even if that existed, nobody would play it since it would be very strong only against one class out of nine.
I mean, sure it could be a little good against Mage Freeze and sometimes Druid but then it's still very situational.
And sometimes Warriors play aggro decks with low or no armor at all. So in the end it's just gonna be like Eater of Secrets, a tech card so situational it's hardly a good addition in a deck.
Unless armor become more frequent, we're not gonna need that one.
well there are cards that can eat secrets, i don't see the reason why there shouldn't be a card that eats armor as well
I'm missing old Alexstrasza, when she would cut through all the armor. Maybe it's time to let her do that again?
If your opponent is standing atop of 80 life, he controlled the game so well that he would win with or without armor.
That being said, I believe a Tank Up! nerf would be OK since it helps fatigue warriors so much in mirrors or against similar decks. Shield Slam nerf (they way it was purposed) makes no sense. Maybe it should cost 1 more, but that's all.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Corvus oculum corvi non eruit.
Armour is not the main reason warriors see such uprising. Problem is that warriors do EVERYTHING great (single target removal, aoe clear, card draw, weapons and fantastic minions + burst). I had no problem keeping up with them no matter how much armour they have as long as you have a better board.
no, its not an auto-include card, it's a tech card that serves a purpose. and people would put it in it they needed/want it, that's why I am arguing that it would be a good tech card to have. The fact that people don't / wouldn't run it a lot doesn't mean its a bad card, it just means its situational (which is exactly the point of the card).
Thus, if you tech right (i.e. you run it against a control/C'thun warrior meta and you get one) you get an advantage that you would not have had otherwise.
These types of threads already exist.
But in my opinion I would like such a card to exist. Even though it would be unplayable Just that the tools where there if I needed them in deck building.
However, BB has said that they won't make cards which target 1 class specifically
Hearthstone is a game of "copy and pasting"
Old suggestion, never going to happen.
Warrior is an average class in Wild. Just a couple of cards they have a hard time dealing with, and they are held back enough. And.. Acidic Swamp Ooze, Harrison Jones and Cairne Bloodhoof are already in the game if you want to hard-tech.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
Warrior's hero power literally does nothing against the board unlike most other hero powers. Even if the warrior gains armour then loses it from the minions taking face. We need to ask ourselves the question when do warriors gain mass amounts of armour? They gain armour in the late game and newsflash, control warrior would easily armour up and shield block to prevent them from dying against aggro/midrange decks. When this happens, it just means the aggro/midrange player failed to rush the warrior down and the warrior is just stabilising and coming back into the game. As for tank up being op, getting to the stage of the game where warrior tanks up means the aggro player failed his job to rush the warrior down. Just wait for 1 year when LoE and TGT gets rotated out of standard.
That was topdecked? Nah, it was because I let the Heart of the Cards guide me ;)
I'll pretend I didn't read this.
The problem with most of Card Games playerbase is that either people want an OP card or want that card to be unplayable. Rofl.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Corvus oculum corvi non eruit.
I absolutely agree.
If I had to choose, I'd probably make this card a legendary. Since it's a techcard that has pretty bad stats, you lower the powerlevel of your deck significantly, but get a useful effect in exchange. I don't see a single reason not to include this card in the game; it works versus druids, warriors, and mages rather well, so in no way it counters only a single class. Technically speaking, any class might get some armour (stealing an armoursmith with priest, burgling, and stuff like that).
Short answer: No, we dont need.