Hearthpwn

Quote from Plattypus >>

I can't remember the last time Paladin had an even remotely competitive deck. Honestly don't think it needs to be nerfed. 

If you're sick of running into them tech in Tink Master, Owl, sap or polymorph type effects.

The card which seems really good (but not broken) is goodie two shields if they drop it on turn 2/3  as it is so hard to remove.

Even Paladin wasn't that long ago, and Mech Paladin was right after. Wasn't Murloc Paladin doing pretty well last expansion also?

You can't say a class doesn't have a competitive deck just because you might not like the archetype.

Quote from Btbbass >>

PALADIN, PRIEST & DRUID ALL NEED WORK ALL UNBALANCED.  MORE TESTING IS NEEDED BEFORE NEW SETS ARE RELEASED 

 SO glad you decided to make a new account just to tell us that!

Libram paladin is the most overrated deck of all times

I personally like pure paladin deck, its fun to play it and its also nice that its so strong that its ALMOST viable in legend ranks.

Also the fact that this deck is not popular in GMs should tell you something. It just cant deal with any top tier decks despite what all stats sites tell.

I'd say it's pretty viable in legend right now. I've managed to climb up to around rank 3k playing exclusively it. I then wanted to mess around with other decks like OTK mage, and plummeted down to around 8.5k. Granted, that was because I was playing an...interesting deck, but it's not like pure isn't performing well, at least for me in the UK legends.

It depends on what class you're playing. For example, any decent Mage deck with some good draws and discovers should reliably shut it down. And there's always the option of out-aggroing them with DH and Hunter. Or you can play OP bullshit like Druid too and hope they don't get perfect spells each turn.

But does Libram Pally feel like too much sometimes? Absolutely in my opinion. 

Hey guys just thought I’d drop my two cents. Right now I’m top 800 legend and it’s rare for me to see paladin in general. I’ve tried the deck and to me what it seems is that the deck can 

1. draw well and do decently or

2. draw poorly and have no chance at winning games.

The deck is just too inconsistent and though it has a good matchup against druids, it drops in popularity the higher you go through legend. Data seems to be very skewed recently (don’t ask me why) but the stats on libram paladin’s winrate remind me of murloc paladin last expansion which, although it showed a high winrate, was a tier three deck at best. And although tournament/gm showings have different rulesets I think it’s still good to look at the evidence that paladin has been rarely/not at all been taken up as a deck of choice.

Quote from Jdeg >>

Hey guys just thought I’d drop my two cents. Right now I’m top 800 legend and it’s rare for me to see paladin in general. I’ve tried the deck and to me what it seems is that the deck can 

1. draw well and do decently or

2. draw poorly and have no chance at winning games.

The deck is just too inconsistent and though it has a good matchup against druids, it drops in popularity the higher you go through legend. Data seems to be very skewed recently (don’t ask me why) but the stats on libram paladin’s winrate remind me of murloc paladin last expansion which, although it showed a high winrate, was a tier three deck at best. And although tournament/gm showings have different rulesets I think it’s still good to look at the evidence that paladin has been rarely/not at all been taken up as a deck of choice.

 Lots of decks can "draw badly and have no chance at winning" lol. I love the way people keep insisting "it's a tier 3 deck actually" even though the stats say otherwise. Yesterday I check high legend stats on NA and it was the best deck at 53% - it probably won't be today. I think high legend is a volatile meta and it changes ALL the time with such a small player pool. At one point tortollan mage looked viable. Would you play that at a lower rank because it eats libram paladin for breakfast? No because it has a 38% winrate at lower ranks. Btw, it doesn't just match up well against druid. That's just something people keep saying that isn't true, according to the stats.

This is how one of my matches against Paladin that I played last night.

After barely surviving early onslaught and clearing board twice, I was hoping that I finally managed to stabilize and that I may have at least some chance of winning. Then at turn five my opponent played High Abbess Alura into Coin into Argent Braggart and result can be seen on the screenshot.

I think, no matter what one thinks at what Tier this deck belongs to, Paladin could use some card rebalancing. 

yee its sort of broke for sure

Quote from Fog_za >>

Quote from Jdeg >>

Hey guys just thought I’d drop my two cents. Right now I’m top 800 legend and it’s rare for me to see paladin in general. I’ve tried the deck and to me what it seems is that the deck can 

1. draw well and do decently or

2. draw poorly and have no chance at winning games.

The deck is just too inconsistent and though it has a good matchup against druids, it drops in popularity the higher you go through legend. Data seems to be very skewed recently (don’t ask me why) but the stats on libram paladin’s winrate remind me of murloc paladin last expansion which, although it showed a high winrate, was a tier three deck at best. And although tournament/gm showings have different rulesets I think it’s still good to look at the evidence that paladin has been rarely/not at all been taken up as a deck of choice.

 Lots of decks can "draw badly and have no chance at winning" lol. I love the way people keep insisting "it's a tier 3 deck actually" even though the stats say otherwise. Yesterday I check high legend stats on NA and it was the best deck at 53% - it probably won't be today. I think high legend is a volatile meta and it changes ALL the time with such a small player pool. At one point tortollan mage looked viable. Would you play that at a lower rank because it eats libram paladin for breakfast? No because it has a 38% winrate at lower ranks. Btw, it doesn't just match up well against druid. That's just something people keep saying that isn't true, according to the stats.

 So whats your take on why GMs are not taking advantage of this powerhouse of a deck that libram paladin is? Why they are not bringing this deck to crush all other decks? I mean why take bomb warrior , tempo mage, highlander priest, guardian druid, malygos druid and endless variations of rogue when they can take the OP libram paladin and crush these decks.

Ppl outside legend pls dont comment on game balance, thanks

Libram pala is overrated

EQuote from AOFHE >>

Quote from Fog_za >>

Quote from Jdeg >>

Hey guys just thought I’d drop my two cents. Right now I’m top 800 legend and it’s rare for me to see paladin in general. I’ve tried the deck and to me what it seems is that the deck can 

1. draw well and do decently or

2. draw poorly and have no chance at winning games.

The deck is just too inconsistent and though it has a good matchup against druids, it drops in popularity the higher you go through legend. Data seems to be very skewed recently (don’t ask me why) but the stats on libram paladin’s winrate remind me of murloc paladin last expansion which, although it showed a high winrate, was a tier three deck at best. And although tournament/gm showings have different rulesets I think it’s still good to look at the evidence that paladin has been rarely/not at all been taken up as a deck of choice.

 Lots of decks can "draw badly and have no chance at winning" lol. I love the way people keep insisting "it's a tier 3 deck actually" even though the stats say otherwise. Yesterday I check high legend stats on NA and it was the best deck at 53% - it probably won't be today. I think high legend is a volatile meta and it changes ALL the time with such a small player pool. At one point tortollan mage looked viable. Would you play that at a lower rank because it eats libram paladin for breakfast? No because it has a 38% winrate at lower ranks. Btw, it doesn't just match up well against druid. That's just something people keep saying that isn't true, according to the stats.

 So whats your take on why GMs are not taking advantage of this powerhouse of a deck that libram paladin is? Why they are not bringing this deck to crush all other decks? I mean why take bomb warrior , tempo mage, highlander priest, guardian druid, malygos druid and endless variations of rogue when they can take the OP libram paladin and crush these decks.

 I don't have a take on it. You seem to feel that's absolute evidence libram paladin is tier 3. I think libram paladin is not tier 3. I choose to believe that at this point in time because the stats I can see on hsreplay back that up. I do not think libram paladin is a runaway leader the way pre nerf even paladin was, or how cubelock warped the meta. 

EDIT: As per latest VS report

Paladin

• There is a misconception about Paladin amongst the player base. It is a dominant deck on the climb to legend, and its performance declines at higher levels of play. But, its performance at higher levels of play is still very good! Pure Paladin is simply very well positioned to counter current meta trends. It’s still an effective counter to Guardian Druid, but it also counters both Bomb Warrior and Soul Demon Hunter, while providing ample resistance to Aggro Rogues and Hunters. Its poor matchups aren’t prevalent enough to cripple its win rate, even though they are more popular at top legend (Miracle Rogue, Cyclone Mage). Don’t sleep on Paladin: we expect its win rate to decline to some degree due to its low scope for improvement in its build, but it should continue to do well against some of the best decks in the format. It’s a great ladder choice.