They need to nerf spectral cutlass and the 1/5 rogue lackey
I'm thinking 4 mana 2/2 weapon THAT ONLY LIFESTEALS ON THE TURN IT'S PLAYED and the lackey is a 1/3 instead
Because as bliz already showed us, rogue doesn't need reliable healing.
I'm thinking they should release a 2-drop neutral that destroys weapons.
Don't talk to me about this shit i've seen you complain about way less lol
This isn't the salt thread. Double Ooze = no more Rogue lifesteal weapon.
The complaint isn't about the longevity of the weapon it's about the longevity of the weapon PLUS the lifesteal, just like kingsbane, and if they nerf that into the ground it makes zero sense that this goes by unscathed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Those who are given more in life, must not cling to it, but risk it all at every moment!
They need to nerf spectral cutlass and the 1/5 rogue lackey
I'm thinking 4 mana 2/2 weapon THAT ONLY LIFESTEALS ON THE TURN IT'S PLAYED and the lackey is a 1/3 instead
Because as bliz already showed us, rogue doesn't need reliable healing.
I'm thinking they should release a 2-drop neutral that destroys weapons.
Don't talk to me about this shit i've seen you complain about way less lol
This isn't the salt thread. Double Ooze = no more Rogue lifesteal weapon.
The complaint isn't about the longevity of the weapon it's about the longevity of the weapon PLUS the lifesteal, just like kingsbane, and if they nerf that into the ground it makes zero sense that this goes by unscathed.
Since there are no cards that silence a weapon, Kingsbane was infinite value/lifesteal. Spectral Cutlass is not. In fact, when playing Tess Rogue you often have to play assuming they have at least ONE Ooze, and balance your weapon buffs so you're not stuck with a lousy 2-attack Cutlass later in the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
They need to nerf spectral cutlass and the 1/5 rogue lackey
I'm thinking 4 mana 2/2 weapon THAT ONLY LIFESTEALS ON THE TURN IT'S PLAYED and the lackey is a 1/3 instead
Because as bliz already showed us, rogue doesn't need reliable healing.
I'm thinking they should release a 2-drop neutral that destroys weapons.
Don't talk to me about this shit i've seen you complain about way less lol
This isn't the salt thread. Double Ooze = no more Rogue lifesteal weapon.
The complaint isn't about the longevity of the weapon it's about the longevity of the weapon PLUS the lifesteal, just like kingsbane, and if they nerf that into the ground it makes zero sense that this goes by unscathed.
Since there are no cards that silence a weapon, Kingsbane was infinite value/lifesteal. Spectral Cutlass is not. In fact, when playing Tess Rogue you often have to play assuming they have at least ONE Ooze, and balance your weapon buffs so you're not stuck with a lousy 2-attack Cutlass later in the game.
Outside factors, don't change base concepts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Those who are given more in life, must not cling to it, but risk it all at every moment!
They need to nerf spectral cutlass and the 1/5 rogue lackey
I'm thinking 4 mana 2/2 weapon THAT ONLY LIFESTEALS ON THE TURN IT'S PLAYED and the lackey is a 1/3 instead
Because as bliz already showed us, rogue doesn't need reliable healing.
I'm thinking they should release a 2-drop neutral that destroys weapons.
Don't talk to me about this shit i've seen you complain about way less lol
This isn't the salt thread. Double Ooze = no more Rogue lifesteal weapon.
The complaint isn't about the longevity of the weapon it's about the longevity of the weapon PLUS the lifesteal, just like kingsbane, and if they nerf that into the ground it makes zero sense that this goes by unscathed.
Since there are no cards that silence a weapon, Kingsbane was infinite value/lifesteal. Spectral Cutlass is not. In fact, when playing Tess Rogue you often have to play assuming they have at least ONE Ooze, and balance your weapon buffs so you're not stuck with a lousy 2-attack Cutlass later in the game.
Outside factors, don't change base concepts.
Well that is certainly another way to look at it and you are correct, "infinite value that keeps enchantments" is not the same as "limited value that doesn't keep enchantments.'
"B-b-b-b-b-but you have to actually draw your removal! If you don't, this card is just broken!"
Welcome to every control deck ever.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
They need to nerf spectral cutlass and the 1/5 rogue lackey
I'm thinking 4 mana 2/2 weapon THAT ONLY LIFESTEALS ON THE TURN IT'S PLAYED and the lackey is a 1/3 instead
Because as bliz already showed us, rogue doesn't need reliable healing.
I'm thinking they should release a 2-drop neutral that destroys weapons.
Don't talk to me about this shit i've seen you complain about way less lol
This isn't the salt thread. Double Ooze = no more Rogue lifesteal weapon.
The complaint isn't about the longevity of the weapon it's about the longevity of the weapon PLUS the lifesteal, just like kingsbane, and if they nerf that into the ground it makes zero sense that this goes by unscathed.
Since there are no cards that silence a weapon, Kingsbane was infinite value/lifesteal. Spectral Cutlass is not. In fact, when playing Tess Rogue you often have to play assuming they have at least ONE Ooze, and balance your weapon buffs so you're not stuck with a lousy 2-attack Cutlass later in the game.
Outside factors, don't change base concepts.
Well that is certainly another way to look at it and you are correct, "infinite value that keeps enchantments" is not the same as "limited value that doesn't keep enchantments.'
"B-b-b-b-b-but you have to actually draw your removal! If you don't, this card is just broken!"
Welcome to every control deck ever.
In the same patch, just around-about, the same time rastakahn was out, they released a tech card against kingsbane, you probably forgot, like everyone else did about this card. Drakkari Trickster This card would enable control matchups to win late game against a kingbane deck, by taking the weapon the rogue built up until that point with zero effort. Kingsbane decks were built to draw their entire deck quickly so the kingsbane being the only weapon in the deck wasn't even a question. This was a way to out play kingsbane, similar to what you describe doing, with what i'm assuming is a deck you enjoy playing. With this tech option out there, the people still complained and bliz STILL nerfed kingsbane to what it is today. And many people think of this and say, "Oh well control can beat kingsbane but aggro can't, that's not fair, it still deserved what it got" Kingsbane rogue was a control deck back in the day it's not a full fledged aggro one like it is now, it had aggro elements like all rogue decks but with the lifesteal you got from the weapon you were allowed to play slower, and kingsbane was without a doubt a control deck, with cards like Blade Flurry and Doomerang commonly ran in two-ofs. So it's pretty common for a control deck to beat an aggro deck, it's literally nothing to get worked up about. Yet all people did what whine and moan, sort of like how they're doing with bomb warrior now, and i'm sure that'll get thanos'd too.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Those who are given more in life, must not cling to it, but risk it all at every moment!
.........so you agree with me that Spectral Cutlass is totally fine?
I agree with you, where you think i'm blowing it out of proportion.
But i still don't like the fact that kingsbane was nerfed into the ground to the state it's currently in where the focus is more on getting as much out of it in an aggro deck, removing the hope of a control focused rogue playstyle.
While spectral cutlass, which in essence is literally everything people saw as bad about kingsbane, but it doesn't break unless your opponent breaks it, goes unnoticed.
They could have made kingsbane a 0/3 weapon, they could have made it a 0/1 weapon and it would still work in a control type playstyle, because like you said before sometimes you don't draw the cards you need in a deck(ooze/leaching poison) when you need them.
I thought they shit on kingsbane because they hated fatigue decks, since at around the time of the patch they just got rid of coldlight oracle.
But now with elysianna being printed, i think they just caved to what people were constantly screaming at them about.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Those who are given more in life, must not cling to it, but risk it all at every moment!
I won't be surprised if nerfing barns increase the deck's overall win rates or only slightly decrease it. Unlike popular belief they don't always have barns on t3/4. nerfing barns take away the deck's high roll but also fix it's low roll of shadow essence into barns or Y'Shaarj into barns.
They need to nerf spectral cutlass and the 1/5 rogue lackey
I'm thinking 4 mana 2/2 weapon THAT ONLY LIFESTEALS ON THE TURN IT'S PLAYED and the lackey is a 1/3 instead
Because as bliz already showed us, rogue doesn't need reliable healing.
I'm thinking they should release a 2-drop neutral that destroys weapons.
Don't talk to me about this shit i've seen you complain about way less lol
This isn't the salt thread. Double Ooze = no more Rogue lifesteal weapon.
The complaint isn't about the longevity of the weapon it's about the longevity of the weapon PLUS the lifesteal, just like kingsbane, and if they nerf that into the ground it makes zero sense that this goes by unscathed.
Since there are no cards that silence a weapon, Kingsbane was infinite value/lifesteal. Spectral Cutlass is not. In fact, when playing Tess Rogue you often have to play assuming they have at least ONE Ooze, and balance your weapon buffs so you're not stuck with a lousy 2-attack Cutlass later in the game.
Outside factors, don't change base concepts.
Well that is certainly another way to look at it and you are correct, "infinite value that keeps enchantments" is not the same as "limited value that doesn't keep enchantments.'
"B-b-b-b-b-but you have to actually draw your removal! If you don't, this card is just broken!"
Welcome to every control deck ever.
In the same patch, just around-about, the same time rastakahn was out, they released a tech card against kingsbane, you probably forgot, like everyone else did about this card. Drakkari Trickster This card would enable control matchups to win late game against a kingbane deck, by taking the weapon the rogue built up until that point with zero effort. Kingsbane decks were built to draw their entire deck quickly so the kingsbane being the only weapon in the deck wasn't even a question. This was a way to out play kingsbane, similar to what you describe doing, with what i'm assuming is a deck you enjoy playing. With this tech option out there, the people still complained and bliz STILL nerfed kingsbane to what it is today. And many people think of this and say, "Oh well control can beat kingsbane but aggro can't, that's not fair, it still deserved what it got" Kingsbane rogue was a control deck back in the day it's not a full fledged aggro one like it is now, it had aggro elements like all rogue decks but with the lifesteal you got from the weapon you were allowed to play slower, and kingsbane was without a doubt a control deck, with cards like Blade Flurry and Doomerang commonly ran in two-ofs. So it's pretty common for a control deck to beat an aggro deck, it's literally nothing to get worked up about. Yet all people did what whine and moan, sort of like how they're doing with bomb warrior now, and i'm sure that'll get thanos'd too.
Trickster a tech card for Kingsbane? What? I can see your point but I doubt that it ever was intended as a techcard for Kingsbane and its a terrible tech card. For it to work you need to survive till your opponents deck is empty, otherwise its really useless. Control was able to survive against Kingsbane but it was not guaranteed imo
So for everyone saying Barnes is the issue in Big Priest in Wild is wrong. I just played 5 different Big Priests in a row and 4 of them had Barnes on turn 4. Of those 4, I only lost to one of them and it was because they happened to have Eternal Servitude to follow up with it. A 1/1 minion won't win you the game, it's how you resurrect and the fact that being able to perfectly discover an answer from your minions makes that deck work.
So for everyone saying Barnes is the issue in Big Priest in Wild is wrong. I just played 5 different Big Priests in a row and 4 of them had Barnes on turn 4. Of those 4, I only lost to one of them and it was because they happened to have Eternal Servitude to follow up with it. A 1/1 minion won't win you the game, it's how you resurrect and the fact that being able to perfectly discover an answer from your minions makes that deck work.
So for everyone saying Barnes is the issue in Big Priest in Wild is wrong. I just played 5 different Big Priests in a row and 4 of them had Barnes on turn 4. Of those 4, I only lost to one of them and it was because they happened to have Eternal Servitude to follow up with it. A 1/1 minion won't win you the game, it's how you resurrect and the fact that being able to perfectly discover an answer from your minions makes that deck work.
But how will they resurrect that minion as soon as turn 4 without Barnes pulling it out?
So for everyone saying Barnes is the issue in Big Priest in Wild is wrong. I just played 5 different Big Priests in a row and 4 of them had Barnes on turn 4. Of those 4, I only lost to one of them and it was because they happened to have Eternal Servitude to follow up with it. A 1/1 minion won't win you the game, it's how you resurrect and the fact that being able to perfectly discover an answer from your minions makes that deck work.
So for everyone saying Barnes is the issue in Big Priest in Wild is wrong. I just played 5 different Big Priests in a row and 4 of them had Barnes on turn 4. Of those 4, I only lost to one of them and it was because they happened to have Eternal Servitude to follow up with it. A 1/1 minion won't win you the game, it's how you resurrect and the fact that being able to perfectly discover an answer from your minions makes that deck work.
But how will they resurrect that minion as soon as turn 4 without Barnes pulling it out?
One extra minion either way doesn't make or break the game.
Changing Barnes would make it a little slower but they've been playing Big Priest without him in standard for months.
So for everyone saying Barnes is the issue in Big Priest in Wild is wrong. I just played 5 different Big Priests in a row and 4 of them had Barnes on turn 4. Of those 4, I only lost to one of them and it was because they happened to have Eternal Servitude to follow up with it. A 1/1 minion won't win you the game, it's how you resurrect and the fact that being able to perfectly discover an answer from your minions makes that deck work.
But how will they resurrect that minion as soon as turn 4 without Barnes pulling it out?
One extra minion either way doesn't make or break the game.
Changing Barnes would make it a little slower but they've been playing Big Priest without him in standard for months.
It's not just "one extra minion" though. It's effectively delaying their whole combo for 2 whole turns (1 with the coin) before they can cheat out something as a 5/5. Against any decent aggro turn, one extra turn is deadly to this deck.
I won't be surprised if nerfing barns increase the deck's overall win rates or only slightly decrease it. Unlike popular belief they don't always have barns on t3/4. nerfing barns take away the deck's high roll but also fix it's low roll of shadow essence into barns or Y'Shaarj into barns.
I agree. If they nerf Barnes, it can be easily replaced with Ysera which might increase the overall win rate of the deck.
What's wrong with Elysiana? So tournament games run long, big deal.
Cards shouldn't be nerfed for the sake of tournament health; they need to just ban certain cards from tournament decklists. Yogg should have never been nerfed.
Completely agree.
Banned them from Ranked too then, and i'll agree
Because, I certainly don't want to be forced to play a card just because other players want to keep playing her, and I certainly don't want to face that rng fest yogg in ranked ever again even in wild.
This reads like, "I don't want to adapt to the meta, but I expect the nerfs to cater to me instead."
I did adapt though (look at the deck in my signature). Although I wouldn't call adapting to the meta. Adapting to the meta is when you play a tech card to counter another type of card that sees play. Archivist Elysiana just requires you to play her just to have a chance against other control decks running her.
And again you didn't answer : why making elysiana 10 mana would make her any less fun?
Or why being forced to play casual with her would make her any less fun?
If the meta has control decks running Elysiana, then one way to adapt to it is to run Elysiana yourself.
Sounds like you just don't like the Baleful/Brewmaster combo? Why not?
Why would I?
Make the game last +45 minutes.
Make the game more RNG dependant as one player can get screwed by just having a better elysiana than the other.
Risk hitting the turn limit, ending the game in a tie which is a very unsatisfying conclusion. (that's the personal worse thing about it for me).
Make your deck worst against every non control deck.
And don't get me wrong, if elysiana only made the difference in winrate 5% (which is already a lot), i wouldn't mind, I wouldn't be forced to play her. But in my experience, not running elysiana and facing an elysiana control deck is pretty much a loss most of the time, as the difference in fatigue and ressources is that significant.
None of those reasons are evidence that the card is problematic.
so now : why would she less fun if you made her cost ten mana? or if you could only play her in casual?
Because it's less fun to be restricted to a certain mode in order to play a card I want. Because spending 10 mana on one minion is less fun than spending 8 mana on one minion and Brewmastering her back into hand for 2 more. Because I like long games and shuffing a bunch of random crap into my deck. Because I'm the kind of player who thinks it's hilarious to shuffle 20+ copies of Tess into my deck.
elysia isn't problematic beyond giving us amazing, long games. (which to me is "amazing", I've wanted this for ages now. had an entire 2 years almost of combo meta. we finally get a good control game and it gets ruined because of esports)
she's getting nerfed cos "esports" dude. that's wak.
f'ing fuming, mate.
what's amazing about her? she is only good in the mirrors.. and wraps the matchups really hard, control decks would do the same without her just take way less time to resolve, and it will make boom and hagatha worse since they will have less time to generate value o
HSReplays has tracked 185,000 Big Priest games since the new expansion launched. The deck has an overall win-rate of 55%. Barnes has been played in 100,000 games and has a played win-rate of 65%. The math isn't difficult - in the 85,000 games in which Barnes wasn't played, Big Priest has a win-rate of 43%.
Folks can decide for themselves if a single card introducing a win-rate differential of 22% is nerf-worthy - Blizzard has the "real" data on the card, but it seems unlikely that their data will be significantly different from the community-generated data.
The folks arguing that Barnes isn't really the problem with Big Priest would be better served providing some numbers to support their claims - Eternal Servitude also has a very high win-rate differential, for example, but importantly, the card only works after Barnes has already seeded the graveyard with a late-game minion during the early-game. The played win-rate of Eternal Servitude is 13% higher than its drawn win-rate, so while it sometimes "feels" worse than Barnes, that's because the card is only played when it works - i.e., we've all won plenty of games against Big Priest in which Eternal Servitude was simply a dead card in the opponent's hand, but we never know it since they can't play it.
Hey guys! Why the f*** when i said about Barnes too strong etc, some of you told me i was a f***tard and that Eternal Servitude is the real issue.. and once i give up and start saying that Barnes is not the problem, you actually say that i'm a f***tard and that Barnes is the real problem?
It isn’t about elysiana’s power level. Card is very balanced and interesting, but due to 8 mana cost it’s effect can be used multiple times with bounce effects. Just raise her cost to 9 mana and 99% of the problems will be fixed. It’s not like you play her on curve, elysiana will still stay viable and powerful.
Hey guys! Why the f*** when i said about Barnes too strong etc, some of you told me i was a f***tard and that Eternal Servitude is the real issue.. and once i give up and start saying that Barnes is not the problem, you actually say that i'm a f***tard and that Barnes is the real problem?
You're kidding me, right?
Welcome to a forum, in which different people have different views and opinions. Enjoy your stay.
As scorpyon said, delaying big priest's shenanigans by one or two turns even is immense for aggro and midrange decks.
And no, Barnes isn't easily replaceable, especially by just another big minion such as Ysera. People have tried running Barnes-less lists and failed. Not having Barnes means priests need to hard mulligan for Shadow essence and shadow essence only (as Shadow visions doesn't consistently give them that card). This is another big, if not massive, deal.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This isn't the salt thread. Double Ooze = no more Rogue lifesteal weapon.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
The complaint isn't about the longevity of the weapon it's about the longevity of the weapon PLUS the lifesteal, just like kingsbane, and if they nerf that into the ground it makes zero sense that this goes by unscathed.
Those who are given more in life, must not cling to it, but risk it all at every moment!
Since there are no cards that silence a weapon, Kingsbane was infinite value/lifesteal. Spectral Cutlass is not. In fact, when playing Tess Rogue you often have to play assuming they have at least ONE Ooze, and balance your weapon buffs so you're not stuck with a lousy 2-attack Cutlass later in the game.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
Outside factors, don't change base concepts.
Those who are given more in life, must not cling to it, but risk it all at every moment!
Well that is certainly another way to look at it and you are correct, "infinite value that keeps enchantments" is not the same as "limited value that doesn't keep enchantments.'
"B-b-b-b-b-but you have to actually draw your removal! If you don't, this card is just broken!"
Welcome to every control deck ever.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
In the same patch, just around-about, the same time rastakahn was out, they released a tech card against kingsbane, you probably forgot, like everyone else did about this card. Drakkari Trickster This card would enable control matchups to win late game against a kingbane deck, by taking the weapon the rogue built up until that point with zero effort. Kingsbane decks were built to draw their entire deck quickly so the kingsbane being the only weapon in the deck wasn't even a question. This was a way to out play kingsbane, similar to what you describe doing, with what i'm assuming is a deck you enjoy playing. With this tech option out there, the people still complained and bliz STILL nerfed kingsbane to what it is today. And many people think of this and say, "Oh well control can beat kingsbane but aggro can't, that's not fair, it still deserved what it got" Kingsbane rogue was a control deck back in the day it's not a full fledged aggro one like it is now, it had aggro elements like all rogue decks but with the lifesteal you got from the weapon you were allowed to play slower, and kingsbane was without a doubt a control deck, with cards like Blade Flurry and Doomerang commonly ran in two-ofs. So it's pretty common for a control deck to beat an aggro deck, it's literally nothing to get worked up about. Yet all people did what whine and moan, sort of like how they're doing with bomb warrior now, and i'm sure that'll get thanos'd too.
Those who are given more in life, must not cling to it, but risk it all at every moment!
.........so you agree with me that Spectral Cutlass is totally fine?
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
I agree with you, where you think i'm blowing it out of proportion.
But i still don't like the fact that kingsbane was nerfed into the ground to the state it's currently in where the focus is more on getting as much out of it in an aggro deck, removing the hope of a control focused rogue playstyle.
While spectral cutlass, which in essence is literally everything people saw as bad about kingsbane, but it doesn't break unless your opponent breaks it, goes unnoticed.
They could have made kingsbane a 0/3 weapon, they could have made it a 0/1 weapon and it would still work in a control type playstyle, because like you said before sometimes you don't draw the cards you need in a deck(ooze/leaching poison) when you need them.
I thought they shit on kingsbane because they hated fatigue decks, since at around the time of the patch they just got rid of coldlight oracle.
But now with elysianna being printed, i think they just caved to what people were constantly screaming at them about.
Those who are given more in life, must not cling to it, but risk it all at every moment!
I won't be surprised if nerfing barns increase the deck's overall win rates or only slightly decrease it. Unlike popular belief they don't always have barns on t3/4. nerfing barns take away the deck's high roll but also fix it's low roll of shadow essence into barns or Y'Shaarj into barns.
Trickster a tech card for Kingsbane? What? I can see your point but I doubt that it ever was intended as a techcard for Kingsbane and its a terrible tech card. For it to work you need to survive till your opponents deck is empty, otherwise its really useless. Control was able to survive against Kingsbane but it was not guaranteed imo
So for everyone saying Barnes is the issue in Big Priest in Wild is wrong. I just played 5 different Big Priests in a row and 4 of them had Barnes on turn 4. Of those 4, I only lost to one of them and it was because they happened to have Eternal Servitude to follow up with it. A 1/1 minion won't win you the game, it's how you resurrect and the fact that being able to perfectly discover an answer from your minions makes that deck work.
But how will they resurrect that minion as soon as turn 4 without Barnes pulling it out?
One extra minion either way doesn't make or break the game.
Changing Barnes would make it a little slower but they've been playing Big Priest without him in standard for months.
It's not just "one extra minion" though.
It's effectively delaying their whole combo for 2 whole turns (1 with the coin) before they can cheat out something as a 5/5.
Against any decent aggro turn, one extra turn is deadly to this deck.
I agree. If they nerf Barnes, it can be easily replaced with Ysera which might increase the overall win rate of the deck.
Dead but dreaming
what's amazing about her? she is only good in the mirrors.. and wraps the matchups really hard, control decks would do the same without her just take way less time to resolve, and it will make boom and hagatha worse since they will have less time to generate value o
HSReplays has tracked 185,000 Big Priest games since the new expansion launched. The deck has an overall win-rate of 55%. Barnes has been played in 100,000 games and has a played win-rate of 65%. The math isn't difficult - in the 85,000 games in which Barnes wasn't played, Big Priest has a win-rate of 43%.
Folks can decide for themselves if a single card introducing a win-rate differential of 22% is nerf-worthy - Blizzard has the "real" data on the card, but it seems unlikely that their data will be significantly different from the community-generated data.
The folks arguing that Barnes isn't really the problem with Big Priest would be better served providing some numbers to support their claims - Eternal Servitude also has a very high win-rate differential, for example, but importantly, the card only works after Barnes has already seeded the graveyard with a late-game minion during the early-game. The played win-rate of Eternal Servitude is 13% higher than its drawn win-rate, so while it sometimes "feels" worse than Barnes, that's because the card is only played when it works - i.e., we've all won plenty of games against Big Priest in which Eternal Servitude was simply a dead card in the opponent's hand, but we never know it since they can't play it.
Hey guys! Why the f*** when i said about Barnes too strong etc, some of you told me i was a f***tard and that Eternal Servitude is the real issue.. and once i give up and start saying that Barnes is not the problem, you actually say that i'm a f***tard and that Barnes is the real problem?
You're kidding me, right?
It isn’t about elysiana’s power level. Card is very balanced and interesting, but due to 8 mana cost it’s effect can be used multiple times with bounce effects. Just raise her cost to 9 mana and 99% of the problems will be fixed. It’s not like you play her on curve, elysiana will still stay viable and powerful.
Welcome to a forum, in which different people have different views and opinions. Enjoy your stay.
As scorpyon said, delaying big priest's shenanigans by one or two turns even is immense for aggro and midrange decks.
And no, Barnes isn't easily replaceable, especially by just another big minion such as Ysera. People have tried running Barnes-less lists and failed. Not having Barnes means priests need to hard mulligan for Shadow essence and shadow essence only (as Shadow visions doesn't consistently give them that card). This is another big, if not massive, deal.