Yep, it is overpowered against DH and it will limit the design of the new DH cards in the future. So yeah, I think it deserves a nerf.
Limit how? Because it can destroy one of DH's minions (and not even ANY minion, but only demon)? Do you know that many other cards can do that too? So, could you please explain how e.g Shadow Word: Death or Shadow Word: Pain or Shield Slam doesn't limit the design but Sacrificial Pact does?
I should not have to explain this to you because you because the answer is obvious. But since you ask....Shadow word pain costs 2, does not heal 5 and cannot target minions under 5. Shield Slam costs 2 and requires you have enough armor.
And Sact Pact requires the minion to have a Demon tag while all these don't care about what type the minion is.
LOL
XD
It is too strong for a tech card right now. There is no problem for it being a tech card. Think over it for a while and you will understand it as well.
Remember when the only way to counter Toggwagle druid or any combo druid or Mecha'Thun in standard was play Warlock? Gnomosferatu and Demon project were the only way until Mojomaster Zihi arrived, so no, not always the tech card were avaible for everyone. And no, vs other matchups is not a 0 mana heal 5 for warlock for free always. It is in this specific deck because they generate tons of useless tokens, but before Galakrond it was worse than useless if you were not facing demons. Put this card in a zoo deck and play vs control and tell me how useful was your 0 mana heal 5.
Sac pac was a tech card to play in galakrond and wild demon decks to immediatly sac voidcaller. It had a meme quality when people found out you could never play jaraxus with it, but since no one wanted to play jaraxus, it was no big deal. If it was nerfed it would still function fine in it's old role.
Only now it is a win against DH card, it is also a card that keeps all other factions from playing demons.
You sound scared to lose your crutch.
Also your example is stupid, dirty rat is a better counter to mechathun or togglewaggle and is a nuetral that pre-existed them. So your self serving obtuse argument holds no weight.
I am not playing warlock at this moment, I am playing shaman at this moment, I posted the deck this afternoon if you want to try it :D , so no, I will lose nothing if they nerf or HoF it.
And no, dirty rat is not a better counter than demon's project to counter Mecha'Thun. And yes, toggwagle and Mech'thun are neutral, but how many classes played it? Tog was just druid, and Mechathun druid, warlock and sometimes warrior.
Btw, with sac pact you have a strong play against DH, that is true, but is just a minion kill. With those techs, played properly you destroy the entire win condition of a deck.
Yes, they will change it. The only question is when.
This card was never meant to be a removal. I mean, just look at its name: SACRIFICIAL Pact; hence, "SACRIFICE". Why else would that word be there in the first place?
It was meant to be used in friendly demons all along. The thing is that in its genesis, Hearthstone had near to zero neutral demons, the only class that had access to them was Warlock, and the mirror match wasn't so common. Plus they weren't even that game breaking to warrant you put this in your deck (Doomguard which had to be played from hand, Flame Imp, Voidwalker, etc.), so a card that would be only "decent" in a single matchup and completely dead in all the others, didn't see any play. That's the reason it was never changed: because it never came up.
Now the situation is completely different and the change is just a matter of time.
And to be honest it should have already been changed a long time ago, the moment they introduced the first neutral demons. But that's a human trait after all. Change is only called upon when something starts to bring imminent discomfort.
Yes, they will change it. The only question is when.
This card was never meant to be a removal. I mean, just look at its name: SACRIFICIAL Pact; hence, "SACRIFICE". Why else would that word be there in the first place?
It was meant to be used in friendly demons all along. The thing is that in its genesis, Hearthstone had near to zero neutral demons, the only class that had access to them was Warlock, and the mirror match wasn't so common. Plus they weren't even that game breaking to warrant you put this in your deck (Doomguard which had to be played from hand, Flame Imp, Voidwalker, etc.), so a card that would be only "decent" in a single matchup and completely dead in all the others, didn't see any play. That's the reason it was never changed: because it never came up.
Now the situation is completely different and the change is just a matter of time.
Well, ask them to change the name then, because if they don't wanted to kill enemy demons they had more than 6 years to do it, but hey! look at that! that fool played Jaraxxus and died to a 0 mana card hahahaha so funny :D
Like everyone before me mentioned, by that logic nerf or remove Hungry Crab, Dragonmaw Poacher, Bad Luck Albatross (good against highlander decks and no minion mage), etc. Everyone is like: "I'm losing because of this card. Nerf it to oblivion!!!!!!" Really don't get those people. I can understand that you are annoyed by that card, like some people are annoyed by resurrect mechanics priests are using or annoyed by mage's RNG cards or demon hunter's lifegaining at-the-same-time tempo card draw minions, but you have to accept that just because you cry about something really loudly about it doesn't mean blizzard has to nerf it. Maybe another counter to that counter is waiting to be found or meta needs to settle a little more.
So funny, people love to defend their OP bs. I have not seen one warlock player in this thread acknowledge the fact that all the other hate cards they mention are neutrals, so they help all classes. Warlock has 1 card that counters the DH class and provides them an ez climb on the ladder and they cry like little babies when there is talk of a nerf. It also prevents any other class from playing any of the new demons, because there are so many warlocks running 2x sac pac.
So much this. Other powerful tech cards in the past were A) available to all classes and B) made your deck weaker and less consistent against the classes you weren't targeting (ie Harrison Jones, Kezan Mystic). The only class-specific tech card I can think of is Flare, which was in fact nerfed!
Sac Pact is class specific and has absolutely no downside. It still functions as a free 0-mana 5 heal in any other matchup, and is particularly good against aggro and combo non-DH decks.
Sac Pact was clearly designed to be used on your own minions (hell, it has the word "Sacrifice" in it) when Warlock was the only class running demons. I'd be surprised if they leave it as it is.
How much lies in just one post bro.
Remember when the only way to counter Toggwagle druid or any combo druid or Mecha'Thun in standard was play Warlock? Gnomosferatu and Demon project were the only way until Mojomaster Zihi arrived, so no, not always the tech card were avaible for everyone. And no, vs other matchups is not a 0 mana heal 5 for warlock for free always. It is in this specific deck because they generate tons of useless tokens, but before Galakrond it was worse than useless if you were not facing demons. Put this card in a zoo deck and play vs control and tell me how useful was your 0 mana heal 5.
First of all I wasn't lying "bro", I just stopped playing just before Witchwood, so I admittedly wasn't aware of the Mechathun stuff. My point still stands that if tech cards in that era were as powerful as Sac Pact is right now AND class-specific (I'll take your word for it), it's absolutely shit design.
And who the hell cares about Zoo or other Warlock archetypes? When I said "other matchups" I obviously meant the current Galalock vs any other current deck in the current meta. In those matchups FOR GALALOCK, Sac Pact has absolutely no downside. I'm trying a fun combo Hunter deck and I just lost a game against a Galalock that healed himself out of lethal with Sac Pact.
Would you be okay if they give let's say Hunter a 0-mana card that reads: "destroy a Paladin minion. In other matchups, heal for 5"? Because that's what Sac Pact reads right now for DH.
Only now it is a win against DH card, it is also a card that keeps all other factions from playing demons.
You sound scared to lose your crutch.
Seems more like you are the one tilted that your Aggro DH isn't face rolling climbing anymore. And Warlock needs far more than just Sac Pact to win against a DH.
And Sac Pact doesn't prevent other classes from playing demons, as simply there are none worthwhile. Shaman, Rogue, Paladin didn't even receive any demon card. The neutral ones aren't appealing for them as well.
Priest, Mage, Hunter, Warrior and Druid don't want to play the ones they got either and it has nothing to do with Sac Pact.
But we know from your previous posts that you clearly want Sac Pact just so the other classes uses demons. Sure, sure...
And who the hell cares about Zoo or other Warlock archetypes? When I said "other matchups" I obviously meant the current Galalock vs any other current deck in the current meta. In those matchups FOR GALALOCK, Sac Pact has absolutely no downside. I'm trying a fun combo Hunter deck and I just lost a game against a Galalock that healed himself out of lethal with Sac Pact.
Would you be okay if they give let's say Hunter a 0-mana card that reads: "destroy a Paladin minion. In other matchups, heal for 5"? Because that's what Sac Pact reads right now for DH.
Oh no, poor Hunter couldn't lethal because the opponent used a heal card... poor little thing... imagine when he faces a Priest...
Except that Demon Hunter have more minions that don't have demon tags and that Sac Pact has zero effect. And DH also plays more demons than Warlock can have Sac Pacts.
Only now it is a win against DH card, it is also a card that keeps all other factions from playing demons.
You sound scared to lose your crutch.
Seems more like you are the one tilted that your Aggro DH isn't face rolling climbing anymore. And Warlock needs far more than just Sac Pact to win against a DH.
And Sac Pact doesn't prevent other classes from playing demons, as simply there are none worthwhile. Shaman, Rogue, Paladin didn't even receive any demon card. The neutral ones aren't appealing for them as well.
Priest, Mage, Hunter, Warrior and Druid don't want to play the ones they got either and it has nothing to do with Sac Pact.
But we know from your previous posts that you clearly want Sac Pact just so the other classes uses demons. Sure, sure...
tilted how? I already hit legend, I have 9 golden heroes and can hit legend with any deck. I am just supporting the argument that makes sense. Sure look at the history of this account. then Search 3nnui....my old account from years ago....nice try though. Glad I am so in your head that you have to make up stories about me.
So funny, people love to defend their OP bs. I have not seen one warlock player in this thread acknowledge the fact that all the other hate cards they mention are neutrals, so they help all classes. Warlock has 1 card that counters the DH class and provides them an ez climb on the ladder and they cry like little babies when there is talk of a nerf. It also prevents any other class from playing any of the new demons, because there are so many warlocks running 2x sac pac.
So much this. Other powerful tech cards in the past were A) available to all classes and B) made your deck weaker and less consistent against the classes you weren't targeting (ie Harrison Jones, Kezan Mystic). The only class-specific tech card I can think of is Flare, which was in fact nerfed!
Sac Pact is class specific and has absolutely no downside. It still functions as a free 0-mana 5 heal in any other matchup, and is particularly good against aggro and combo non-DH decks.
Sac Pact was clearly designed to be used on your own minions (hell, it has the word "Sacrifice" in it) when Warlock was the only class running demons. I'd be surprised if they leave it as it is.
How much lies in just one post bro.
Remember when the only way to counter Toggwagle druid or any combo druid or Mecha'Thun in standard was play Warlock? Gnomosferatu and Demon project were the only way until Mojomaster Zihi arrived, so no, not always the tech card were avaible for everyone. And no, vs other matchups is not a 0 mana heal 5 for warlock for free always. It is in this specific deck because they generate tons of useless tokens, but before Galakrond it was worse than useless if you were not facing demons. Put this card in a zoo deck and play vs control and tell me how useful was your 0 mana heal 5.
First of all I wasn't lying "bro", I just stopped playing just before Witchwood, so I admittedly wasn't aware of the Mechathun stuff. My point still stands that if tech cards in that era were as powerful as Sac Pact is right now AND class-specific (I'll take your word for it), it's absolutely shit design.
And who the hell cares about Zoo or other Warlock archetypes? When I said "other matchups" I obviously meant the current Galalock vs any other current deck in the current meta. In those matchups FOR GALALOCK, Sac Pact has absolutely no downside. I'm trying a fun combo Hunter deck and I just lost a game against a Galalock that healed himself out of lethal with Sac Pact.
Would you be okay if they give let's say Hunter a 0-mana card that reads: "destroy a Paladin minion. In other matchups, heal for 5"? Because that's what Sac Pact reads right now for DH.
And Purify was absolute meme until one deck did good thing with it with no downside.
Ok it has been a long time since i have written something in here, and i only came back to Hearthstone recently after years of not playing the game (last time i actively played was old gods) to check out the new class: Demon Hunters.
And i am positively suprised about how much potential and how high the potential skill ceiling with the class can be, given the new mechanic outcast. Sadly it has fallen into the same role face hunter had back in the days. I will make the comparison between face hunter and demon hunter more times.
But talking about the good old days is not the main point im trying to make, yet there are some good comparisons to make, to deepen the understanding about the issue being present, and that is that aggressive demon hunter lists are running rampant and the only counter to it is a removal spell that seems to be way to effective against it.
Back to the days when face hunter was loaded with similar opinions demon hunter is expiriencing now. The first meta that settled in Hearth Stone was a heavily control favored meta, where your main goal was to outvalue your oponents to win the game. For a month or so that was the meta and after rank 7 those were the only decks you would face. After some months the first hearthstone adventure was released in the game: Naxxramas. And everyone was hyped and spammed Naxx is Out. With the naxx the meta changed drastically and a new dominant deck took the game over almost over night. It was the birth of the first dominant, face prioritising "no brain" aggro deck also known as deathrattle facehunter.
The main reason why this version of face was so dominant the addition of mad scientist, web spinner and the strongest 1 mana card that will probably ever be designed, the infamous undertaker.
For those who don't know what undertaker did: It was a 1 mana 1 attack 2 hp minion that gained +1 on each stat, everytime a friendly deathrattle minion was played. It could snowball out of control really fast, given it synergized with the rest of your deck. Deathrattle minions that were commonly played as a follow up on the following turns were Mad scientist, (A neutral 2 2 deathrattle: put a secret out of your deck on the battlefield.) Web spinner, (a 1 mana hunter beast with 1 1 as stats with the deathrattle: add a random beast into your hand), and the pre-nerf 2 1 leper gnome.
With those cards your little undertaker on turn one could turn into a 5 6 minion on turn 3. I am explaining the card in so high detail because it fills the exact same niche as the newly released 1 mana 2 2 battlefiend in demon hunter.
So now that deathrattle face hunter obliterated the meta, and undertaker also boosting the winrate of zoolock, blizzard stepped in and changed it effect to: gain +1 health, everytime you play a deathrattle. After those changes the card was basically dead.
But even with the burial of undertaker, deathrattle facehunter was still a dominant deck in the meta. And to fix issues in the current meta the first hearthstone expansion was added: Goblins vs Gnomes. With the release of the first expansion and the arival of new decks, archetypes and cards, alot of possible counter measures were added against aggro decks for slower decks.
The card im talking about is the neutral 5 mana 3 3 mech Battlecry: restore 8 health to your hero, Ancient Healbot. It was the first card that provided major healing to all classes to make the playing field against the aggressive meta more even. Most of the classes also received class specific anti aggro cards like the 6 mana 5 5 Battlecry: gain 5 mana Shieldmaiden for warriors.
But a new threat arrived with the expansion: Secret paladin.
The new meta consisted of Secret paladin, facehunter, Handlock and control warrior. While Ancient Healbot gave control decks a real fighting chance vs the everlasting "menace" in aggro decks.
More time passed and the second adventure in Hearthstone was realeased. And with it my favourite deck in Hearth stone: Grim patron warrior.
Grim Patron warrior was and probably is the strongest deck in hearthstone that will exist in hearthstone. It was able to clear the board, gain 30 armor, and otk your oponent ALL IN A SINGLE TURN. And the interesting thing is that this ridiculous deck was heavily benefical to the meta. It was the best answer vs aggro and also the deck with the highest skill cealing, with its combo-deck-like style. (Grim Patron warrior would completely demolish demon hunter and other decks in the current meta would not have a answer against it). But how was such a deck beneficial to the meta? As i mentioned before the deck was difficult to play giving control decks a opening to beat it, when the player made a mistake. The meta flourished and was more diverse then ever before. You even saw freeze mage back in the meta trying to beat control decks.
Ok so now i will close the circle and connect the dots between and now. In the past a we had a aggro deck similar in style to the current versions of the seemingly "OP" demon hunter in face hunter, control decks that were trying to keep it in check but don't really succeeded in Handlock and Control warrior, now represented with galalock. And a OP deck, that required a good understanding in Patron warrior (to have a reference of what a truly OP deck is).
The main issue with the current situation is that only Warlock has effective answer against demon hunter (and even then it is most of the times not enough). In the past there was a good heal and other good anti-aggro cards available for all classes in Antique Healbot. Those are non-existent in the current meta, resulting in demon hunter being way to dominant.
But why is Sacrifical Pact a problem when it is the only really effective counter to demon hunter? The problem is that it practically hinders demon hunter to maybe be a control deck in the future, because all big minions are expensive demons.
So my take to fix the situation is nerf battlefiend, nerf the 7 mana 6 7, make healing available for all classes (maybe another zilliax, or antique healbot). Change sacrificial pact to give control demon hunter a chance.
Note: The way the game is designed right now control demon hunter will never be viable, reason being demon hunter cant produce cards, unlike mage, priest, druid, warrior, warlock, paladin, rogue and shaman. So it has to stick to its strength in drawing cards and outpacing the oponent.
I hope i could and make my thoughts clear and you enjoyed the history lesson in hearthstone.
TL;DR: Demon hunter is not op. There aren't good cards to counter it available to all classes. Sacrifical pact might be to restrictive for demon hunter in the future.
And who the hell cares about Zoo or other Warlock archetypes? When I said "other matchups" I obviously meant the current Galalock vs any other current deck in the current meta. In those matchups FOR GALALOCK, Sac Pact has absolutely no downside. I'm trying a fun combo Hunter deck and I just lost a game against a Galalock that healed himself out of lethal with Sac Pact.
Would you be okay if they give let's say Hunter a 0-mana card that reads: "destroy a Paladin minion. In other matchups, heal for 5"? Because that's what Sac Pact reads right now for DH.
Oh no, poor Hunter couldn't lethal because the opponent used a heal card... poor little thing... imagine when he faces a Priest...
Except that Demon Hunter have more minions that don't have demon tags and that Sac Pact has zero effect. And DH also plays more demons than Warlock can have Sac Pacts.
Kind of a poor trolling attempt completely missing the point. It was just an example with Hunter to show that Sac Pact is NOT a dead card outside of the DH matchup. I'm playing lots of different decks and classes right now, and I don't even mind Priest healing, it's his thing.
And sure, DH plays some non-demon minion, so what's your point here? The targets are obviously 5 cost ones to make a ridiculous tempo swing. Do you realize Warlock himself has another destroy+heal card and it cost SIX? And Sact Pact is acting like a better Siphon Soul against a specific class? How is this hard to understand?
But talking about the good old days is not the main point im trying to make, yet there are some good comparisons to make, to deepen the understanding about the issue being present, and that is that aggressive demon hunter lists are running rampant and the only counter to it is a removal spell that seems to be way to effective against it.
You have it backwards, the initial DH lists weren't completely aggro/face, they were more midrange-ish. Sure they had the possible Battlefiend opening because you'd be stupid not to include it in your deck, but you can't compare a Hunter deck that used to ran Leper Gnomes to one that had two 7-drops, an 8-mana spell and Antaen which was an empty turn 5 and only came online at turn 7.
There was also a pure combo/OTK variant that ran a lot of draws and no big demons.
But right now DH is turning more and more aggro (a lot of lists are removing Priestesses and Antaens for example) in response to 1) the nerfs 2) sac pact and 3) spell Druid. Basically what you predicted here:
The problem is that it practically hinders demon hunter to maybe be a control deck in the future, because all big minions are expensive demons.
But talking about the good old days is not the main point im trying to make, yet there are some good comparisons to make, to deepen the understanding about the issue being present, and that is that aggressive demon hunter lists are running rampant and the only counter to it is a removal spell that seems to be way to effective against it.
You have it backwards, the initial DH lists weren't completely aggro/face, they were more midrange-ish. Sure they had the possible Battlefiend opening because you'd be stupid not to include it in your deck, but you can't compare a Hunter deck that used to ran Leper Gnomes to one that had two 7-drops, an 8-mana spell and Antaen which was an empty turn 5 and only came online at turn 7.
There was also a pure combo/OTK variant that ran a lot of draws and no big demons.
But right now DH is turning more and more aggro (a lot of lists are removing Priestesses and Antaens for example) in response to 1) the nerfs 2) sac pact and 3) spell Druid. Basically what you predicted here:
The problem is that it practically hinders demon hunter to maybe be a control deck in the future, because all big minions are expensive demons.
is already happening / has already happened.
"All big minions" NethrandamusCoilfang Warlord. 2 of 4 DH's 7+ cost minions are not demons. You can play with neutrals too. And priest can kill those for 2 mana with no downside if they are not facing DH.
But talking about the good old days is not the main point im trying to make, yet there are some good comparisons to make, to deepen the understanding about the issue being present, and that is that aggressive demon hunter lists are running rampant and the only counter to it is a removal spell that seems to be way to effective against it.
You have it backwards, the initial DH lists weren't completely aggro/face, they were more midrange-ish. Sure they had the possible Battlefiend opening because you'd be stupid not to include it in your deck, but you can't compare a Hunter deck that used to ran Leper Gnomes to one that had two 7-drops, an 8-mana spell and Antaen which was an empty turn 5 and only came online at turn 7.
There was also a pure combo/OTK variant that ran a lot of draws and no big demons.
But right now DH is turning more and more aggro (a lot of lists are removing Priestesses and Antaens for example) in response to 1) the nerfs 2) sac pact and 3) spell Druid. Basically what you predicted here:
The problem is that it practically hinders demon hunter to maybe be a control deck in the future, because all big minions are expensive demons.
is already happening / has already happened.
yeah you brought more depth into the issue with mentioning that demon hunter was a midrange deck initially. I chose to disregard Inner demon now because on paper it is a blanced card, and is only run in more "balanced" lists like combo/kaelthas dh and highlander.
"All big minions" NethrandamusCoilfang Warlord. 2 of 4 DH's 7+ cost minions are not demons. You can play with neutrals too. And priest can kill those for 2 mana with no downside if they are not facing DH.
You cannot possibly be this stupid can you? Control DH is built on synergy, using the cost reduction to cheat out big demons early, using pit boss to pull other ones. As long as Sac pac exists in it's current state, that deck cannot be played in competitive.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It is too strong for a tech card right now. There is no problem for it being a tech card. Think over it for a while and you will understand it as well.
Hahahaha, no. That spell is the only hope in hell Warlocks have of evening the odds with DH right now.
I mean, I play DH a lot right now and I want the card to stay. It's fair.
I am not playing warlock at this moment, I am playing shaman at this moment, I posted the deck this afternoon if you want to try it :D , so no, I will lose nothing if they nerf or HoF it.
And no, dirty rat is not a better counter than demon's project to counter Mecha'Thun. And yes, toggwagle and Mech'thun are neutral, but how many classes played it? Tog was just druid, and Mechathun druid, warlock and sometimes warrior.
Btw, with sac pact you have a strong play against DH, that is true, but is just a minion kill. With those techs, played properly you destroy the entire win condition of a deck.
Yes, they will change it. The only question is when.
This card was never meant to be a removal. I mean, just look at its name: SACRIFICIAL Pact; hence, "SACRIFICE". Why else would that word be there in the first place?
It was meant to be used in friendly demons all along. The thing is that in its genesis, Hearthstone had near to zero neutral demons, the only class that had access to them was Warlock, and the mirror match wasn't so common. Plus they weren't even that game breaking to warrant you put this in your deck (Doomguard which had to be played from hand, Flame Imp, Voidwalker, etc.), so a card that would be only "decent" in a single matchup and completely dead in all the others, didn't see any play. That's the reason it was never changed: because it never came up.
Now the situation is completely different and the change is just a matter of time.
And to be honest it should have already been changed a long time ago, the moment they introduced the first neutral demons. But that's a human trait after all. Change is only called upon when something starts to bring imminent discomfort.
Well, ask them to change the name then, because if they don't wanted to kill enemy demons they had more than 6 years to do it, but hey! look at that! that fool played Jaraxxus and died to a 0 mana card hahahaha so funny :D
Like everyone before me mentioned, by that logic nerf or remove Hungry Crab, Dragonmaw Poacher, Bad Luck Albatross (good against highlander decks and no minion mage), etc. Everyone is like: "I'm losing because of this card. Nerf it to oblivion!!!!!!" Really don't get those people. I can understand that you are annoyed by that card, like some people are annoyed by resurrect mechanics priests are using or annoyed by mage's RNG cards or demon hunter's lifegaining at-the-same-time tempo card draw minions, but you have to accept that just because you cry about something really loudly about it doesn't mean blizzard has to nerf it. Maybe another counter to that counter is waiting to be found or meta needs to settle a little more.
First of all I wasn't lying "bro", I just stopped playing just before Witchwood, so I admittedly wasn't aware of the Mechathun stuff. My point still stands that if tech cards in that era were as powerful as Sac Pact is right now AND class-specific (I'll take your word for it), it's absolutely shit design.
And who the hell cares about Zoo or other Warlock archetypes? When I said "other matchups" I obviously meant the current Galalock vs any other current deck in the current meta. In those matchups FOR GALALOCK, Sac Pact has absolutely no downside. I'm trying a fun combo Hunter deck and I just lost a game against a Galalock that healed himself out of lethal with Sac Pact.
Would you be okay if they give let's say Hunter a 0-mana card that reads: "destroy a Paladin minion. In other matchups, heal for 5"? Because that's what Sac Pact reads right now for DH.
Speaking of hunters, who in standard can counter secrets these days?
Seems more like you are the one tilted that your Aggro DH isn't face rolling climbing anymore. And Warlock needs far more than just Sac Pact to win against a DH.
And Sac Pact doesn't prevent other classes from playing demons, as simply there are none worthwhile. Shaman, Rogue, Paladin didn't even receive any demon card. The neutral ones aren't appealing for them as well.
Priest, Mage, Hunter, Warrior and Druid don't want to play the ones they got either and it has nothing to do with Sac Pact.
But we know from your previous posts that you clearly want Sac Pact just so the other classes uses demons. Sure, sure...
Watch his theroy crafted decks he is f2p player and new to hs dont be to harsh on him:D
Oh no, poor Hunter couldn't lethal because the opponent used a heal card... poor little thing... imagine when he faces a Priest...
Except that Demon Hunter have more minions that don't have demon tags and that Sac Pact has zero effect. And DH also plays more demons than Warlock can have Sac Pacts.
tilted how? I already hit legend, I have 9 golden heroes and can hit legend with any deck. I am just supporting the argument that makes sense. Sure look at the history of this account. then Search 3nnui....my old account from years ago....nice try though. Glad I am so in your head that you have to make up stories about me.
And Purify was absolute meme until one deck did good thing with it with no downside.
Ok it has been a long time since i have written something in here, and i only came back to Hearthstone recently after years of not playing the game (last time i actively played was old gods) to check out the new class: Demon Hunters.
And i am positively suprised about how much potential and how high the potential skill ceiling with the class can be, given the new mechanic outcast. Sadly it has fallen into the same role face hunter had back in the days. I will make the comparison between face hunter and demon hunter more times.
But talking about the good old days is not the main point im trying to make, yet there are some good comparisons to make, to deepen the understanding about the issue being present, and that is that aggressive demon hunter lists are running rampant and the only counter to it is a removal spell that seems to be way to effective against it.
Back to the days when face hunter was loaded with similar opinions demon hunter is expiriencing now. The first meta that settled in Hearth Stone was a heavily control favored meta, where your main goal was to outvalue your oponents to win the game. For a month or so that was the meta and after rank 7 those were the only decks you would face. After some months the first hearthstone adventure was released in the game: Naxxramas. And everyone was hyped and spammed Naxx is Out. With the naxx the meta changed drastically and a new dominant deck took the game over almost over night. It was the birth of the first dominant, face prioritising "no brain" aggro deck also known as deathrattle facehunter.
The main reason why this version of face was so dominant the addition of mad scientist, web spinner and the strongest 1 mana card that will probably ever be designed, the infamous undertaker.
For those who don't know what undertaker did: It was a 1 mana 1 attack 2 hp minion that gained +1 on each stat, everytime a friendly deathrattle minion was played. It could snowball out of control really fast, given it synergized with the rest of your deck. Deathrattle minions that were commonly played as a follow up on the following turns were Mad scientist, (A neutral 2 2 deathrattle: put a secret out of your deck on the battlefield.) Web spinner, (a 1 mana hunter beast with 1 1 as stats with the deathrattle: add a random beast into your hand), and the pre-nerf 2 1 leper gnome.
With those cards your little undertaker on turn one could turn into a 5 6 minion on turn 3. I am explaining the card in so high detail because it fills the exact same niche as the newly released 1 mana 2 2 battlefiend in demon hunter.
So now that deathrattle face hunter obliterated the meta, and undertaker also boosting the winrate of zoolock, blizzard stepped in and changed it effect to: gain +1 health, everytime you play a deathrattle. After those changes the card was basically dead.
But even with the burial of undertaker, deathrattle facehunter was still a dominant deck in the meta. And to fix issues in the current meta the first hearthstone expansion was added: Goblins vs Gnomes. With the release of the first expansion and the arival of new decks, archetypes and cards, alot of possible counter measures were added against aggro decks for slower decks.
The card im talking about is the neutral 5 mana 3 3 mech Battlecry: restore 8 health to your hero, Ancient Healbot. It was the first card that provided major healing to all classes to make the playing field against the aggressive meta more even. Most of the classes also received class specific anti aggro cards like the 6 mana 5 5 Battlecry: gain 5 mana Shieldmaiden for warriors.
But a new threat arrived with the expansion: Secret paladin.
The new meta consisted of Secret paladin, facehunter, Handlock and control warrior. While Ancient Healbot gave control decks a real fighting chance vs the everlasting "menace" in aggro decks.
More time passed and the second adventure in Hearthstone was realeased. And with it my favourite deck in Hearth stone: Grim patron warrior.
Grim Patron warrior was and probably is the strongest deck in hearthstone that will exist in hearthstone. It was able to clear the board, gain 30 armor, and otk your oponent ALL IN A SINGLE TURN. And the interesting thing is that this ridiculous deck was heavily benefical to the meta. It was the best answer vs aggro and also the deck with the highest skill cealing, with its combo-deck-like style. (Grim Patron warrior would completely demolish demon hunter and other decks in the current meta would not have a answer against it). But how was such a deck beneficial to the meta? As i mentioned before the deck was difficult to play giving control decks a opening to beat it, when the player made a mistake. The meta flourished and was more diverse then ever before. You even saw freeze mage back in the meta trying to beat control decks.
Ok so now i will close the circle and connect the dots between and now. In the past a we had a aggro deck similar in style to the current versions of the seemingly "OP" demon hunter in face hunter, control decks that were trying to keep it in check but don't really succeeded in Handlock and Control warrior, now represented with galalock. And a OP deck, that required a good understanding in Patron warrior (to have a reference of what a truly OP deck is).
The main issue with the current situation is that only Warlock has effective answer against demon hunter (and even then it is most of the times not enough). In the past there was a good heal and other good anti-aggro cards available for all classes in Antique Healbot. Those are non-existent in the current meta, resulting in demon hunter being way to dominant.
But why is Sacrifical Pact a problem when it is the only really effective counter to demon hunter? The problem is that it practically hinders demon hunter to maybe be a control deck in the future, because all big minions are expensive demons.
So my take to fix the situation is nerf battlefiend, nerf the 7 mana 6 7, make healing available for all classes (maybe another zilliax, or antique healbot). Change sacrificial pact to give control demon hunter a chance.
Note: The way the game is designed right now control demon hunter will never be viable, reason being demon hunter cant produce cards, unlike mage, priest, druid, warrior, warlock, paladin, rogue and shaman. So it has to stick to its strength in drawing cards and outpacing the oponent.
I hope i could and make my thoughts clear and you enjoyed the history lesson in hearthstone.
TL;DR: Demon hunter is not op. There aren't good cards to counter it available to all classes. Sacrifical pact might be to restrictive for demon hunter in the future.
Kind of a poor trolling attempt completely missing the point. It was just an example with Hunter to show that Sac Pact is NOT a dead card outside of the DH matchup. I'm playing lots of different decks and classes right now, and I don't even mind Priest healing, it's his thing.
And sure, DH plays some non-demon minion, so what's your point here? The targets are obviously 5 cost ones to make a ridiculous tempo swing. Do you realize Warlock himself has another destroy+heal card and it cost SIX? And Sact Pact is acting like a better Siphon Soul against a specific class? How is this hard to understand?
I hope they change it asap, so it can heal 10 hp instead
You have it backwards, the initial DH lists weren't completely aggro/face, they were more midrange-ish. Sure they had the possible Battlefiend opening because you'd be stupid not to include it in your deck, but you can't compare a Hunter deck that used to ran Leper Gnomes to one that had two 7-drops, an 8-mana spell and Antaen which was an empty turn 5 and only came online at turn 7.
There was also a pure combo/OTK variant that ran a lot of draws and no big demons.
But right now DH is turning more and more aggro (a lot of lists are removing Priestesses and Antaens for example) in response to 1) the nerfs 2) sac pact and 3) spell Druid. Basically what you predicted here:
is already happening / has already happened.
"All big minions" Nethrandamus Coilfang Warlord. 2 of 4 DH's 7+ cost minions are not demons. You can play with neutrals too. And priest can kill those for 2 mana with no downside if they are not facing DH.
yeah you brought more depth into the issue with mentioning that demon hunter was a midrange deck initially. I chose to disregard Inner demon now because on paper it is a blanced card, and is only run in more "balanced" lists like combo/kaelthas dh and highlander.
You cannot possibly be this stupid can you? Control DH is built on synergy, using the cost reduction to cheat out big demons early, using pit boss to pull other ones. As long as Sac pac exists in it's current state, that deck cannot be played in competitive.