Here's a link from a few years back where they openly discuss class identity. Now some of these things may have changed, I'm not posting this as some ultimate gotcha, just as an example of how Alex could be a problem.
Here are the class weaknesses from that time.
Paladin: Direct damage spells, destroying big minions - Alex in essence does both of these things from hand Druid:Destroying big minions, board clear - Alex allows Druids to destroy big minions from hand Warlock: Face damage spells, big healing - Alex allows Warlock both of these things from hand Warrior: Face damage spells, multi-minion buffs, minion swarms - Alex allows warrior face burst from hand
There are exceptions, cards like Big Game Hunter allows any class to deal with big minions for example, but Alex gives every class a great option for burst damage, minion removal, and healing (both to the hero and to minions).
So they should not make any neutral card that can mitigate a class weakness ? I mean that's 90% of the neutral pool gone and we're left with all the pack fillers essentially.
Class weakness is what it is, a CLASS weakness. That's the whole point of the neutral set. Or at least I think it is, I don't see any other reason for the neutral cards to exist, especially now that most expansions have good class cards with very little pack fillers. Every class could very easily build "pure" decks but that would leave very little room for experimentation and deck diversity.
And BGH is no different than Alex in that it mitagates the weakness of some classes, not sure why this is an "exception" but Alex isn't.
I can agree with that, neutral Pyroblast though weaker but cheaper with 8/8 body and option to use as a heal? This card is everywhere and this should be a red light.
Of all the cards in hearthstone, I didn't think this would be one to be complained about, to be honest.
That's nothing. In a thread a couple weeks ago, someone actually complained about Fireball. Still shaking my head at that one.
Well, at the very least that makes a lot more sense than Alex nerf. Fireball is a dangerous, polarized, scalable card, I can understand why some people think it's too powerful, especially in this standard environment where spell damage is at its best.
But, Alexstrasza... Like WTF, in what world is 9 mana deal 8 non-scalable damage problematic ?
I too was suprised when aggro (more like midrange to be fair) paladin was running it, but it makes perfect sense paladin always lacked direct damage, it's just a matter of learning the matchup, just don't be at 8 health against paladin.
Fireball is barely played and spell damage mage is a garbage deck...
A card being everywhere is not justification for making this card "dead" as the OP suggests. (That statement, in an of itself, reveals how off base he is.) I can remember when Antique Healbot, Sludge Belcher, Dr. Boom, and Ragnaros the Firelord were just about everywhere. None of them were broken and none of them needed to be nerfed. They were good cards that fit into a number of different decks.
Good lord, people will find anything to complain about.
Here's a link from a few years back where they openly discuss class identity. Now some of these things may have changed, I'm not posting this as some ultimate gotcha, just as an example of how Alex could be a problem.
Here are the class weaknesses from that time.
Paladin: Direct damage spells, destroying big minions - Alex in essence does both of these things from hand Druid:Destroying big minions, board clear - Alex allows Druids to destroy big minions from hand Warlock: Face damage spells, big healing - Alex allows Warlock both of these things from hand Warrior: Face damage spells, multi-minion buffs, minion swarms - Alex allows warrior face burst from hand
There are exceptions, cards like Big Game Hunter allows any class to deal with big minions for example, but Alex gives every class a great option for burst damage, minion removal, and healing (both to the hero and to minions).
So they should not make any neutral card that can mitigate a class weakness ? I mean that's 90% of the neutral pool gone and we're left with all the pack fillers essentially.
Class weakness is what it is, a CLASS weakness. That's the whole point of the neutral set. Or at least I think it is, I don't see any other reason for the neutral cards to exist, especially now that most expansions have good class cards with very little pack fillers. Every class could very easily build "pure" decks but that would leave very little room for experimentation and deck diversity.
And BGH is no different than Alex in that it mitagates the weakness of some classes, not sure why this is an "exception" but Alex isn't.
This is explained in the link (and I even quoted the relevant part in my post). The neutral set is meant to mitigate class weaknesses to some degree. If a card is thought to be mitigating certain class weaknesses too much then it could be nerfed.
And as for the oart about BGH, I mean BGH has been nerfed before for the exact reasons I’m talking about?
But that wasn’t even the point I was making, I was just using BGH as an example of a neutral card that mitigates class weaknesses. To show that I understand they do exist and can be powerful. Alex mitigates a lot of class weaknesses, it may be that Blizzard decides it’s too good at doing that. Or maybe they don’t. I don’t really care either way, I’m just saying I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the case.
Of all the cards in hearthstone, I didn't think this would be one to be complained about, to be honest.
That's nothing. In a thread a couple weeks ago, someone actually complained about Fireball. Still shaking my head at that one.
Well, at the very least that makes a lot more sense than Alex nerf. Fireball is a dangerous, polarized, scalable card, I can understand why some people think it's too powerful, especially in this standard environment where spell damage is at its best.
But, Alexstrasza... Like WTF, in what world is 9 mana deal 8 non-scalable damage problematic ?
I too was suprised when aggro (more like midrange to be fair) paladin was running it, but it makes perfect sense paladin always lacked direct damage, it's just a matter of learning the matchup, just don't be at 8 health against paladin.
Fireball is barely played and spell damage mage is a garbage deck...
It doesn’t need to be nerfed or removed, you’re just mad you lost to it. Move on, grow up,
It's currently the 2nd most run card in the game and is in nearly 30% or decks. It's neutral burst which is something Blizzard have repeatedly told us they don't want.
I would say it's probably a good shout for a nerf.
Zilliax was in far more decks than Alex is (or prince keleseth, for that matter). And this may be just me, but if you die to 8 damage on turn 9, then you have only yourself to blame. What do we want the game to be exactly? "Sit on your hands for 30 turns and then, and only then, you're allowed to damage my face from hand"? It's one thing for 6 damage on turn 5 (which can be bounced back by rogues and played for 4 mana on turn 6, which was basically part of the problem) but 8 damage on turn 9? You CAN and I'll go further, SHOULD very well be able to play around that and if you can't, you had bad luck, your opponent was luckier or you suck; accept it and move on to the next game.
I don't think it's too bad as a single card but when combined with stuff like Tenwu of the Red Smoke or Shadowstep it can be problematic. I know that too well because it's what I played to legend and these combos are disgusting.
Like I’ve said Zilliax is closer to Taelan, it’s just a really solid card. I would be very surprised if Taelan was nerfed.
As for the rest, I don’t care if Alex is nerfed or not, I think it’s fine given the power level of other cards we see. I just wouldn’t be surprised if Blizzard do nerf it. It’s burst, healing, removal, and a big minion in one card.
Been playing around with Secret Paladin to see what the fuss is about and this card does feel a bit too much in that deck.
I can basically go into autopilot in certain games if it’s becoming obvious I’ll get to 9 mana.
The point of the deck is to fly out the block early and maintain board presence with secrets, divine shields and buffs. Deal as much chip damage as possible and close the game out with buffed minions or the hammer. My opponents game plan is to ride the early storm and try to take over the board so nothing can stick, restricting me to weapon swings. That feels ‘fair’.
The thing is, if I have Alex in hand my opponents game plan is often nullified, once they’ve taken over the board I just equip the hammer and go face until Alex can finish the job.
Whether or not Alex needs to be nerfed is a point of opinion, but it is worth noting that neutral cards have been nerfed for being overly prevalent and mitigating class weaknesses too well. Alex is powerful, prevalent, and mitigates multiple class weaknesses.
Exactly, Alex is in too many decks right now and gives non-interactive reach to classes that aren't supposed to have (same can be said about healing). Even though I don't think it's broken, it's probably a bit too good and a bit too popular for a neutral card which are all warning signs fore a potential nerf
Whether or not Alex needs to be nerfed is a point of opinion, but it is worth noting that neutral cards have been nerfed for being overly prevalent and mitigating class weaknesses too well. Alex is powerful, prevalent, and mitigates multiple class weaknesses.
This is such a bad design choice from Blizzard. Yeah sure, class identity matters and stuff, but there have been sooooooo many people complaining about the lack of diversity in the game/meta and now we are arguing about a freaking neutral 9-mana card that could enable non-control classes to go control and have a reliable finisher/healing tool? Why? Because the card is played across multiple classes? Or because it is "broken"? Or because it is included, yet not really needed, in several good meta decks? There are at least 20 cards in standard right now, at this very point in time, that are MUCH more problematic. And don't even get me started on Wild or Duels.
I also can't stand this argument about classes and their access to certain tools. Card games are about the types of deck you play and not about the class. And the neutral cards exist specifically for giving access to tools you otherwise wouldn't have. Just because your hero power can gain 2 armor, doesn't mean you have to play control. I am sure there are many rush warrior players in standard and arrrrgh! pirate warrior players in wild who would agree. And if they ever stop with this class identity nonsense, which just limits design space and deck variety, we could even end up with a control hunter. I know, that sounds insane.
Whether or not Alex needs to be nerfed is a point of opinion, but it is worth noting that neutral cards have been nerfed for being overly prevalent and mitigating class weaknesses too well. Alex is powerful, prevalent, and mitigates multiple class weaknesses.
This is such a bad design choice from Blizzard. Yeah sure, class identity matters and stuff, but there have been sooooooo many people complaining about the lack of diversity in the game/meta and now we are arguing about a freaking neutral 9-mana card that could enable non-control classes to go control and have a reliable finisher/healing tool? Why? Because the card is played across multiple classes? Or because it is "broken"? Or because it is included, yet not really needed, in several good meta decks? There are at least 20 cards in standard right now, at this very point in time, that are MUCH more problematic. And don't even get me started on Wild or Duels.
I also can't stand this argument about classes and their access to certain tools. Card games are about the types of deck you play and not about the class. And the neutral cards exist specifically for giving access to tools you otherwise wouldn't have. Just because your hero power can gain 2 armor, doesn't mean you have to play control. I am sure there are many rush warrior players in standard and arrrrgh! pirate warrior players in wild who would agree. And if they ever stop with this class identity nonsense, which just limits design space and deck variety, we could even end up with a control hunter. I know, that sounds insane.
Alex is just one good tool.
Class identity is a very important concept in hearthstone that separates it from other TCGs, the most certainly should not give it up. They do however need to stop stating it’s important all the while crapping all over it. For example, warlock. The whole thing about warlock is power at a cost, yet the only prevalent warlock deck on ladder uses a deck list containing 25 or so warlock cards and none of them fall into the class’s identity. Giving up class identity means giving up on hearthstone.
Whether or not Alex needs to be nerfed is a point of opinion, but it is worth noting that neutral cards have been nerfed for being overly prevalent and mitigating class weaknesses too well. Alex is powerful, prevalent, and mitigates multiple class weaknesses.
This is such a bad design choice from Blizzard. Yeah sure, class identity matters and stuff, but there have been sooooooo many people complaining about the lack of diversity in the game/meta and now we are arguing about a freaking neutral 9-mana card that could enable non-control classes to go control and have a reliable finisher/healing tool? Why? Because the card is played across multiple classes? Or because it is "broken"? Or because it is included, yet not really needed, in several good meta decks? There are at least 20 cards in standard right now, at this very point in time, that are MUCH more problematic. And don't even get me started on Wild or Duels.
I also can't stand this argument about classes and their access to certain tools. Card games are about the types of deck you play and not about the class. And the neutral cards exist specifically for giving access to tools you otherwise wouldn't have. Just because your hero power can gain 2 armor, doesn't mean you have to play control. I am sure there are many rush warrior players in standard and arrrrgh! pirate warrior players in wild who would agree. And if they ever stop with this class identity nonsense, which just limits design space and deck variety, we could even end up with a control hunter. I know, that sounds insane.
Alex is just one good tool.
I sort of agree but it isn’t Alex in Control decks that’s the issue, she’s a great finisher for Tempo decks. Rogue, Paladin, and Warrior are all using her for reach.
Class diversity shouldn’t mean they are restricted from playing certain archetypes, just that each class deals with them in a different way. Hunter’s weakness in healing shouldn’t mean that they cannot get healing cards, just that they should come with an added cost, be that mana or something else.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So they should not make any neutral card that can mitigate a class weakness ? I mean that's 90% of the neutral pool gone and we're left with all the pack fillers essentially.
Class weakness is what it is, a CLASS weakness. That's the whole point of the neutral set. Or at least I think it is, I don't see any other reason for the neutral cards to exist, especially now that most expansions have good class cards with very little pack fillers. Every class could very easily build "pure" decks but that would leave very little room for experimentation and deck diversity.
And BGH is no different than Alex in that it mitagates the weakness of some classes, not sure why this is an "exception" but Alex isn't.
I can agree with that, neutral Pyroblast though weaker but cheaper with 8/8 body and option to use as a heal? This card is everywhere and this should be a red light.
Fireball is barely played and spell damage mage is a garbage deck...
A card being everywhere is not justification for making this card "dead" as the OP suggests. (That statement, in an of itself, reveals how off base he is.) I can remember when Antique Healbot, Sludge Belcher, Dr. Boom, and Ragnaros the Firelord were just about everywhere. None of them were broken and none of them needed to be nerfed. They were good cards that fit into a number of different decks.
Good lord, people will find anything to complain about.
This is explained in the link (and I even quoted the relevant part in my post). The neutral set is meant to mitigate class weaknesses to some degree. If a card is thought to be mitigating certain class weaknesses too much then it could be nerfed.
And as for the oart about BGH, I mean BGH has been nerfed before for the exact reasons I’m talking about?
But that wasn’t even the point I was making, I was just using BGH as an example of a neutral card that mitigates class weaknesses. To show that I understand they do exist and can be powerful. Alex mitigates a lot of class weaknesses, it may be that Blizzard decides it’s too good at doing that. Or maybe they don’t. I don’t really care either way, I’m just saying I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the case.
Wrong and irrelevant.
Alex isn't a problem. Stop complaining about everything you lose to. It's not the games problem, it's your problem.
Zilliax was in far more decks than Alex is (or prince keleseth, for that matter). And this may be just me, but if you die to 8 damage on turn 9, then you have only yourself to blame. What do we want the game to be exactly? "Sit on your hands for 30 turns and then, and only then, you're allowed to damage my face from hand"? It's one thing for 6 damage on turn 5 (which can be bounced back by rogues and played for 4 mana on turn 6, which was basically part of the problem) but 8 damage on turn 9? You CAN and I'll go further, SHOULD very well be able to play around that and if you can't, you had bad luck, your opponent was luckier or you suck; accept it and move on to the next game.
I don't think it's too bad as a single card but when combined with stuff like Tenwu of the Red Smoke or Shadowstep it can be problematic. I know that too well because it's what I played to legend and these combos are disgusting.
Like I’ve said Zilliax is closer to Taelan, it’s just a really solid card. I would be very surprised if Taelan was nerfed.
As for the rest, I don’t care if Alex is nerfed or not, I think it’s fine given the power level of other cards we see. I just wouldn’t be surprised if Blizzard do nerf it. It’s burst, healing, removal, and a big minion in one card.
Been playing around with Secret Paladin to see what the fuss is about and this card does feel a bit too much in that deck.
I can basically go into autopilot in certain games if it’s becoming obvious I’ll get to 9 mana.
The point of the deck is to fly out the block early and maintain board presence with secrets, divine shields and buffs. Deal as much chip damage as possible and close the game out with buffed minions or the hammer. My opponents game plan is to ride the early storm and try to take over the board so nothing can stick, restricting me to weapon swings. That feels ‘fair’.
The thing is, if I have Alex in hand my opponents game plan is often nullified, once they’ve taken over the board I just equip the hammer and go face until Alex can finish the job.
I thought it's about Flamewaker :D
I don't think the Monopoly dice bit got enough attention.
Whether or not Alex needs to be nerfed is a point of opinion, but it is worth noting that neutral cards have been nerfed for being overly prevalent and mitigating class weaknesses too well. Alex is powerful, prevalent, and mitigates multiple class weaknesses.
I will point out that since everyone has alex, it's probably more likely to get nerfed. Blizz hates giving out free dust lol
Exactly, Alex is in too many decks right now and gives non-interactive reach to classes that aren't supposed to have (same can be said about healing). Even though I don't think it's broken, it's probably a bit too good and a bit too popular for a neutral card which are all warning signs fore a potential nerf
It's a freaking 9 mana, bit stronger fireball or lol heal 8 on legs. If this is broken for you then dunno... go play Classic.
This is such a bad design choice from Blizzard. Yeah sure, class identity matters and stuff, but there have been sooooooo many people complaining about the lack of diversity in the game/meta and now we are arguing about a freaking neutral 9-mana card that could enable non-control classes to go control and have a reliable finisher/healing tool? Why? Because the card is played across multiple classes? Or because it is "broken"? Or because it is included, yet not really needed, in several good meta decks? There are at least 20 cards in standard right now, at this very point in time, that are MUCH more problematic. And don't even get me started on Wild or Duels.
I also can't stand this argument about classes and their access to certain tools. Card games are about the types of deck you play and not about the class. And the neutral cards exist specifically for giving access to tools you otherwise wouldn't have. Just because your hero power can gain 2 armor, doesn't mean you have to play control. I am sure there are many rush warrior players in standard and arrrrgh! pirate warrior players in wild who would agree. And if they ever stop with this class identity nonsense, which just limits design space and deck variety, we could even end up with a control hunter. I know, that sounds insane.
Alex is just one good tool.
Class identity is a very important concept in hearthstone that separates it from other TCGs, the most certainly should not give it up. They do however need to stop stating it’s important all the while crapping all over it. For example, warlock. The whole thing about warlock is power at a cost, yet the only prevalent warlock deck on ladder uses a deck list containing 25 or so warlock cards and none of them fall into the class’s identity. Giving up class identity means giving up on hearthstone.
I sort of agree but it isn’t Alex in Control decks that’s the issue, she’s a great finisher for Tempo decks. Rogue, Paladin, and Warrior are all using her for reach.
Class diversity shouldn’t mean they are restricted from playing certain archetypes, just that each class deals with them in a different way. Hunter’s weakness in healing shouldn’t mean that they cannot get healing cards, just that they should come with an added cost, be that mana or something else.