Yes, because of the random, like Animal Companion, you can't control the lackey you get and can't control the options you will discover, for any 1/1 giving you a dragon queen have many other situations getting useless or not that impressive lackeys too.
I am in advantage in the board, preparing to set lethal in the next turn then...
The cursed 1/1 put a f...... Doomsayer in the board and the only thing I can do is see the opponent spamming "Thank you" emote. >.<
The dragon lackey was unnecessary. I don’t have issues with any of them but that one and maybe spell lackey. Double battlecries look to be around for a while and that makes dragon lackey absurd. As much as people say the discover mechanic is unhealthy, the dragon lackey is the epitome of that. Spell lackey is almost as bad.
I think Lackeys have overstayed their welcome and wish they would go. No idea what the devs were thinking with dragon lackey. It’s ridiculous value for almost nothing and can be generated so easily. ESPECIALLY in rogue
A lot of discover effects that can be busted. But sure as hell playing rogue or warrior i wouldn't pick dragon queen as that only works for highlander decks
You know Highlander rogue is somewhat popular right? I saw while watching grandmasters. Rogue can basically vomit lackeys nonstop once Galakrond is up.
I mean, it’s one thing to have a couple discover cards and get 1-2 amazing cards from it. It’s different when you have a class like rogue who can generate tons of lackeys, and then you have 1 mana discover a dragonqueen. Or 1 mana discover a sap, eviscerate, or another spell.
There are 6 lackeys and 44 dragons in standard... So, the odds of generating Draconic Lackey, and then Dragonqueen Alex is 1 in 264. Then it's dead in your hand if you're not running Highlander until you play out duplicates.
Lackeys work in combo decks.
This is like saying Mecha'Thun is unfair, because you can be winning by a landslide, and then lose.
That's the point of combo decks. You need to save the right cards, and be lucky in draw, order and survivability to win.
Should the game just be whoever is winning, should always win? Player who hits the opponent first wins?
People have such a hard time understanding the whole aggro < control < combo loop, and that you need all 3 to have a viable meta.
If you didn't have control decks, you you would ONLY see Face Hunter
If you didn't have aggro decks, you would ONLY see Tempo Rogue
If you didn't have combo decks, you would ONLY see Rez Priest.
The meta NEEDS these archetypes, or it simply wouldn't work... Take away Rogue, and the meta will be mirror Ressurect Priest games non-stop.
Lackeys were always meant to be 1 mana OP cards, nerfing them would make no sense. The problem is that Blizzard just kept printing more and more and more of easy and even infinite ways of getting them off shit, thus completely defeating the point of them being balanced by being OP but kinda hard to get. Now they're easy to get and OP as well but it's the fault of too much card generation, something that has tilted Hearthstone into being super aggro or super cancer control, like quest priest and not much in between.
I am a rogue main (clearly), and I am enjoying secret galakrond rogue way too much at the moment.
With this being said, I can't wait for Galakronds and Lackeys to rotate out.
I am a big believer in class identities. Rogues shouldn't be outvaluing control warrior or control priest. I think playing zero mana cards is more fitting for rogue than any other class, but one third of your deck (2xStab, 3 from Wand, 4 from Galakrond) is an overkill.