In Wild Archmage Vargoth is problematic. Going purely off what the community has said in Youtube videos, online at forums like these, on podcasts, and the overall idea that it is further buffing long-standing top decks in the format. I haven't played a ton of Wild the past couple of seasons, but I can see how this card could be tricky.
Please elaborate. "Further buffing long-standing top decks" is the name of wild's game. That's no reason.
What I meant by that is see the value it is adding to Big Priest, Tokens, and other very popular long reigning Wild decks. What you hope for in a new set as a Wild player is a little bit of emergence/re-emergence of less present archetypes. At the very least a shift in power, however it appears that Big Priest is still as overplayed as ever and this single card has aided it significantly. After considering a variety of well-written and spoken arguments, I was simply putting here that I agree on the topic of wild and thus posted that initial feedback.
Token decks haven't been a problem in wild since forever and still aren't now. Big priest has always been, and still is, a major problem but Vargoth isn't the cause.
Don't take this as a personal attack or anything (if you even did in the first place). It's just that I've seen multiple people suggest Vargoth and I don't understand why. Card doesn't seem overly strong or anything at all.
Like I said I was iterating the words of players I listen to, watch, and follow on all forms of media. I'm not the best person to argue for this so I'll just drop it.
In Standard Format Zilliax and Edwin are problematic. An early Edwin with good stats wins the game in a lot of cases. It in its current design isn't the biggest problem. It's the fact that the current power level of standard is relatively low and pumping out a 6/6-10/10 by turns 2-4 is really difficult to manage in some cases. Not every class has targeted removal, transformation, or silence abundance, and keeping one just to anticipate this card is bad bad bad tempo for most of the Rogue match-ups. Unfortunately I don't know if there is a healthy way to adjust it, but I think it is fair to say it is an issue nonetheless. Zilliax is played in basically every top tier deck, and we are currently seeing a struggle for aggressive midranged decks to emerge because this card can shut down those games (think a more traditional Midrange Hunter, non-miracle including Rogue, or any type of "play on curve" deck type). I've made a thread about this card being problematic in this set before the set even came out, and I think there is merit to the strength of mech presence and what this card offers it. I stand by the fact that if this card DIDN'T have the "magnetic" keyword it would be balanced. It is still a mech and can be magnetized, but can't be added to a minion you stuck on the board for immediate defensive, healing, and removal capacity. People look at the stats and say it is fine but are willingly neglect that it has 6 keywords!!!!!
Edwin - silence or hard removal. Making a big Edwin early means you're kind of going all in on your resources. The counter to Edwin is relatively simple - you either have one removal for it (do I need to remind you that BGH is a thing?) or you go wide.
Zilliax - It's a completely fair card, I don't know what else to say. High inclusion rate is not indicative of it being oppressive.
Edwin- except it doesn't. That is currently the problem with Rogue is they can pretty easily pump out an 8/8 Edwin very early and NOT utilize too much of their resources. Sometimes you draw 3 cards in the combo to activate Edwin and that is a huge problem. BGH is a terrible example. That is actually the worst removal against Rogue because for 5 mana all you did was potentially kill the Edwin, and then get backstabbed for the continue'd combo. The hard removal actually available and guaranteed is transformation or silence. That means you not only have to have it in your list, but get it off early enough to not lose over half your health or more against a class that can execute you at 12-15 with an empty board. You assume that simply because an answer exists that it is practical or effective.
Zilliax- High inclusion-rate is indicative of strength. Strength is then determined for its potential to be oppressive. The card determines games. Against Mage, sometimes blocking/healing for 6 is enough to close out the game. For Warrior or Pally or Hunter, a big enough Mech removing a large opponent is game-ending or the minion is big enough to swing some massive healing. Mecha'Thun of old in Warlock was generally saved by landing the Zilliax. The card has too many keywords. No other card in the game has that many keywords, especially ones that synergize as well as these do. I think its fair to say that leaving the cost and stats alone and taking away a single keyword is fair for the card. This makes it a very viable card to run in the decks it is synergistic in, and still gives people the "potential 6 healing wall" it was apparently designed to be. Easy adjustment and likely not huge on its power level.
Your first argument is counter-play exists. Your second argument is just that you believe its a fair card and that inclusion stats don't need to be a factor in balance. You really need to get empirical with your argument because you aren't really saying anything with the factors you've put forth so far.
Thank you to all the recent commenters who actually took the time to come up with a thorough response. It's greatly appreciated and a nice change of pace.
All the cards you've listed are fine, and I doubt that at least one of them will be nerfed (maybe only Miscreant). There are plenty of others - the REAL problematic ones, such as: all 3 hero cards (Hagatha, Boom, Zul'Jin), Waggle pick, Omega assembly, Archivist Elysiana, Raiding party and a couple more.
All the cards you've listed are fine, and I doubt that at least one of them will be nerfed (maybe only Miscreant). There are plenty of others - the REAL problematic ones, such as: all 3 hero cards (Hagatha, Boom, Zul'Jin), Waggle pick, Omega assembly, Archivist Elysiana, Raiding party and a couple more.
In regards to the DKs, I think the only reasonable solution is to give them the Genn and Baku treatment. KotFT proved that Hero Cards are just too good for Standard.
Edwin- except it doesn't. That is currently the problem with Rogue is they can pretty easily pump out an 8/8 Edwin very early and NOT utilize too much of their resources. Sometimes you draw 3 cards in the combo to activate Edwin and that is a huge problem. BGH is a terrible example. That is actually the worst removal against Rogue because for 5 mana all you did was potentially kill the Edwin, and then get backstabbed for the continue'd combo. The hard removal actually available and guaranteed is transformation or silence. That means you not only have to have it in your list, but get it off early enough to not lose over half your health or more against a class that can execute you at 12-15 with an empty board. You assume that simply because an answer exists that it is practical or effective.
lol welcome to classic priest vs classic handlock. "mountain giant is broken because i didnt draw shadow word death!!!!!11" here's something that may shock you - IT'S OKAY for a card not to have an immediate and easy answer in every class. It's okay for a legendary to be powerful. yknow what sucks about edwin? not drawing it. you know what also sucks about edwin? a single taunt minion.
Zilliax- High inclusion-rate is indicative of strength. Strength is then determined for its potential to be oppressive. The card determines games. Against Mage, sometimes blocking/healing for 6 is enough to close out the game. For Warrior or Pally or Hunter, a big enough Mech removing a large opponent is game-ending or the minion is big enough to swing some massive healing. Mecha'Thun of old in Warlock was generally saved by landing the Zilliax. The card has too many keywords. No other card in the game has that many keywords, especially ones that synergize as well as these do. I think its fair to say that leaving the cost and stats alone and taking away a single keyword is fair for the card. This makes it a very viable card to run in the decks it is synergistic in, and still gives people the "potential 6 healing wall" it was apparently designed to be. Easy adjustment and likely not huge on its power level.
Al'Akir has four keywords. At least Zilliax can't go face on the turn you play it.
Your first argument is counter-play exists. Your second argument is just that you believe its a fair card and that inclusion stats don't need to be a factor in balance. You really need to get empirical with your argument because you aren't really saying anything with the factors you've put forth so far.
This discussion so far is merely opinions. If opinions are not allowed here, I will stop posting, but then so should you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
Zillax is a card meant to be versatile and powerful, but it's definitely not OP. The only deck where it is "more than powerful", if I can call it like that, is Control Warrior but it's definitely not the first card from this deck that I would nerf. For example, Brawl and Omega Devastator are far from balanced and they are the ones that make this deck a Tier 1 list. However, nerfing Control Warrior too hard would make tempo rogue beyond OP as it would have practically no counter (only 50/50s against Zoolock and Token Druid)
Conjurer's Calling -- Now makes pairs of the mana cost SPENT. Drop a 4-mana Mountain Giant, get a pair of 4-mana cards on Conjurer's Calling. I'm OK if they do this with shaman's Far SIght and the voodoo card as well (I play both decks). Add: Muckmorpher wouldn't be affected as the card already turns INTO a nerfed down version of a higher mana card already (a 4/4 Ysera).
To me, warrior hero isn't the one to look at. It's Zul'jin that needs to be addressed, as it is a one-card pre-nerfs Yogg/Shudderwock-level pull-a-victory-out-of-my-losing-arse b.s. with the twinspell wyverns, Animal Companion and the +3/+3 beast buff and make copies spell. And that's not even factoring secrets on top of that. Even the cubelock deathknight Gul'dan didn't have it this good.
Apart from the main topic, does anyone know how many legendaries have been nerfed since the end of closed beta? I don't remember more than 4 (Aviana, Raza the Chained, Patches the Pirate and Yogg's little big change)
Apart from the main topic, does anyone know how many legendaries have been nerfed since the end of closed beta? I don't remember more than 4 (Aviana, Raza the Chained, Patches the Pirate and Yogg's little big change)
Edwin- except it doesn't. That is currently the problem with Rogue is they can pretty easily pump out an 8/8 Edwin very early and NOT utilize too much of their resources. Sometimes you draw 3 cards in the combo to activate Edwin and that is a huge problem. BGH is a terrible example. That is actually the worst removal against Rogue because for 5 mana all you did was potentially kill the Edwin, and then get backstabbed for the continue'd combo. The hard removal actually available and guaranteed is transformation or silence. That means you not only have to have it in your list, but get it off early enough to not lose over half your health or more against a class that can execute you at 12-15 with an empty board. You assume that simply because an answer exists that it is practical or effective.
lol welcome to classic priest vs classic handlock. "mountain giant is broken because i didnt draw shadow word death!!!!!11" here's something that may shock you - IT'S OKAY for a card not to have an immediate and easy answer in every class. It's okay for a legendary to be powerful. yknow what sucks about edwin? not drawing it. you know what also sucks about edwin? a single taunt minion.
Zilliax- High inclusion-rate is indicative of strength. Strength is then determined for its potential to be oppressive. The card determines games. Against Mage, sometimes blocking/healing for 6 is enough to close out the game. For Warrior or Pally or Hunter, a big enough Mech removing a large opponent is game-ending or the minion is big enough to swing some massive healing. Mecha'Thun of old in Warlock was generally saved by landing the Zilliax. The card has too many keywords. No other card in the game has that many keywords, especially ones that synergize as well as these do. I think its fair to say that leaving the cost and stats alone and taking away a single keyword is fair for the card. This makes it a very viable card to run in the decks it is synergistic in, and still gives people the "potential 6 healing wall" it was apparently designed to be. Easy adjustment and likely not huge on its power level.
Al'Akir has four keywords. At least Zilliax can't go face on the turn you play it.
Your first argument is counter-play exists. Your second argument is just that you believe its a fair card and that inclusion stats don't need to be a factor in balance. You really need to get empirical with your argument because you aren't really saying anything with the factors you've put forth so far.
This discussion so far is merely opinions. If opinions are not allowed here, I will stop posting, but then so should you.
Zilliax frequently goes face the turn it gets played, and last I checked 4 is still less than 6? The mana discrepancy also makes Al'Akir weaker. Edwin is generally bigger than a giant or at least without the handsize needs. Also, in the decks that play giant they generally interact with their giant nowadays (Mage), so I don't consider it an even example. As a matter of fact taunt still usually doesn't stop either of those minions as a minion that big on turn 2-3 doesn't really get answered for another 1-2 extra turns on average anyway. They have already hit face on average twice and immediately leveled the game by turn 4 as a single card. But hey, at least you are giving an opinion backed with some information now.
Like I said I was iterating the words of players I listen to, watch, and follow on all forms of media. I'm not the best person to argue for this so I'll just drop it.
Edwin- except it doesn't. That is currently the problem with Rogue is they can pretty easily pump out an 8/8 Edwin very early and NOT utilize too much of their resources. Sometimes you draw 3 cards in the combo to activate Edwin and that is a huge problem. BGH is a terrible example. That is actually the worst removal against Rogue because for 5 mana all you did was potentially kill the Edwin, and then get backstabbed for the continue'd combo. The hard removal actually available and guaranteed is transformation or silence. That means you not only have to have it in your list, but get it off early enough to not lose over half your health or more against a class that can execute you at 12-15 with an empty board. You assume that simply because an answer exists that it is practical or effective.
Zilliax- High inclusion-rate is indicative of strength. Strength is then determined for its potential to be oppressive. The card determines games. Against Mage, sometimes blocking/healing for 6 is enough to close out the game. For Warrior or Pally or Hunter, a big enough Mech removing a large opponent is game-ending or the minion is big enough to swing some massive healing. Mecha'Thun of old in Warlock was generally saved by landing the Zilliax. The card has too many keywords. No other card in the game has that many keywords, especially ones that synergize as well as these do. I think its fair to say that leaving the cost and stats alone and taking away a single keyword is fair for the card. This makes it a very viable card to run in the decks it is synergistic in, and still gives people the "potential 6 healing wall" it was apparently designed to be. Easy adjustment and likely not huge on its power level.
Your first argument is counter-play exists. Your second argument is just that you believe its a fair card and that inclusion stats don't need to be a factor in balance. You really need to get empirical with your argument because you aren't really saying anything with the factors you've put forth so far.
Thank you to all the recent commenters who actually took the time to come up with a thorough response. It's greatly appreciated and a nice change of pace.
All the cards you've listed are fine, and I doubt that at least one of them will be nerfed (maybe only Miscreant). There are plenty of others - the REAL problematic ones, such as: all 3 hero cards (Hagatha, Boom, Zul'Jin), Waggle pick, Omega assembly, Archivist Elysiana, Raiding party and a couple more.
In regards to the DKs, I think the only reasonable solution is to give them the Genn and Baku treatment. KotFT proved that Hero Cards are just too good for Standard.
lol welcome to classic priest vs classic handlock. "mountain giant is broken because i didnt draw shadow word death!!!!!11" here's something that may shock you - IT'S OKAY for a card not to have an immediate and easy answer in every class. It's okay for a legendary to be powerful. yknow what sucks about edwin? not drawing it. you know what also sucks about edwin? a single taunt minion.
Al'Akir has four keywords. At least Zilliax can't go face on the turn you play it.
This discussion so far is merely opinions. If opinions are not allowed here, I will stop posting, but then so should you.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
Zillax is a card meant to be versatile and powerful, but it's definitely not OP. The only deck where it is "more than powerful", if I can call it like that, is Control Warrior but it's definitely not the first card from this deck that I would nerf. For example, Brawl and Omega Devastator are far from balanced and they are the ones that make this deck a Tier 1 list. However, nerfing Control Warrior too hard would make tempo rogue beyond OP as it would have practically no counter (only 50/50s against Zoolock and Token Druid)
Conjurer's Calling -- Now makes pairs of the mana cost SPENT. Drop a 4-mana Mountain Giant, get a pair of 4-mana cards on Conjurer's Calling. I'm OK if they do this with shaman's Far SIght and the voodoo card as well (I play both decks). Add: Muckmorpher wouldn't be affected as the card already turns INTO a nerfed down version of a higher mana card already (a 4/4 Ysera).
To me, warrior hero isn't the one to look at. It's Zul'jin that needs to be addressed, as it is a one-card pre-nerfs Yogg/Shudderwock-level pull-a-victory-out-of-my-losing-arse b.s. with the twinspell wyverns, Animal Companion and the +3/+3 beast buff and make copies spell. And that's not even factoring secrets on top of that. Even the cubelock deathknight Gul'dan didn't have it this good.
I agree only on Zilliax, and perhaps Walking Fountain. Perhaps Evil Miscreant as well. The rest are unnecessary.
Apart from the main topic, does anyone know how many legendaries have been nerfed since the end of closed beta? I don't remember more than 4 (Aviana, Raza the Chained, Patches the Pirate and Yogg's little big change)
The Rogue quest was nerfed multiple times.
Zilliax frequently goes face the turn it gets played, and last I checked 4 is still less than 6? The mana discrepancy also makes Al'Akir weaker. Edwin is generally bigger than a giant or at least without the handsize needs. Also, in the decks that play giant they generally interact with their giant nowadays (Mage), so I don't consider it an even example. As a matter of fact taunt still usually doesn't stop either of those minions as a minion that big on turn 2-3 doesn't really get answered for another 1-2 extra turns on average anyway. They have already hit face on average twice and immediately leveled the game by turn 4 as a single card. But hey, at least you are giving an opinion backed with some information now.
How the fuck is Zilliax going face the turn its played?
Uh, easy. Zilliax gets magnetized onto a mech from the previous turn.
Ever heard of Magnetize? Hunter and Warrior love that keyword...
Then it's the minion you buffed going face, not the Zilliax itself.
But I got ya.
sure lol
How could you be such a long time player and suggest a nerf to Edwin or Zilliax?
Omega Devastator needs to lose its mech tribe. Way too efficient removal that you can end up with 4+ of.
If only there was a way to play around a turn 5 Zilliax.
What do you mean by "4 is less than 6"? I'm actually unclear here.
What do you mean by "they have hit face on average twice already"? Where are you getting this statistic?
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!