Honestly, I don't understand the idea behind nerfing this card right now. I agree that in the vacuum it was probably undercosted and 4 mana is much more fair for such powerful effect, but since we're not in the vacuum... what was the real purpose of doing this now?
Kazakus Priest and Kazakus Warlock (aka best performing and pro-active control decks) are dead. Regular retro-active Priest won't even feel the difference, as his good and bad matchups will remain largely the same. Regular Control Warlock will be even weaker in aggro and tempo matchups, where he was terrible already (+1 mana is huge deal for him), but pretty much the same in control matchups.
So what were they trying to achieve here?
If they wanted to get rid of Control Warlock from the meta completely, all they had to do was to kill Tickatus (by making him 8 mana or something). Why also harm Priest if he wasn't the target? But if they wanted to nerf Priest, they should have weakened his card generation or healing, because that's what makes him endure the meta so well. Why hit Warlock in that case as well?
They nerfed hysteria because Control Priest is the best performing deck and the second most popular after the mage (based on Mt's results), Control warlock was just unlucky. Control warlock was already a weak deck (probably the worst one) and now is pretty much hopeless. With those buffs, they try to bring up zoo by I don't think they are enough.
With the Mage and Paladin nerfs there was a possibility that Control Priest could become an oppressive meta-breaker that could only be countered by Control Warlock.
The Mage-Paladin meta was annoying, but a potential Priest-Warlock meta would be disgusting. This is a proactive nerf.
Master tour is really not representative for the the game. Blizzard won't nerf a card because a class is seen alot in tournaments. On ladder priest is wayyyyyyyy behind on popularity versus warlock,hunter,paladin and mage.
They nerfed hysteria because Control Priest is the best performing deck and the second most popular after the mage (based on Mt's results), Control warlock was just unlucky. Control warlock was already a weak deck (probably the worst one) and now is pretty much hopeless. With those buffs, they try to bring up zoo by I don't think they are enough.
Priest is "the best performing deck"? I don't think so. He is doing OK in higher ranks with some very favorable matchups (mostly against aggro and tempo decks like Face Hunter or Rush Warrior), but he also has couple awful ones like Control Warlock, NM Mage, Poison Rogue or OTK Demon Hunter.
At some point, Priest players thought: "Hey, if the deck is good against aggro and tempo anyway, why don't we just cut some overkill control cards and replace them with somthing to improve our worse matchups?". This is how Kazakus Priest was born, deck which much better matchups against Mage or Rogue (because of more pro-active and tempo oriented nature of the deck - Kibler explained that in his videos several times).
Now this archetype is dead though, so Priest will have to revert to his retro-active "heal and remove" style deck. He will continue stomping on aggro decks and losing hopelessly against others... Was that the goal of this change? To push control back to T3/T4?
Master tour is really not representative for the the game. Blizzard won't nerf a card because a class is seen alot in tournaments. On ladder priest is wayyyyyyyy behind on popularity versus warlock,hunter,paladin and mage.
Mts is the competitive scene and that matters more than just the ladder. Also, if you check popularity and w.r. at hsreplay's top 1000 legends, Priest is wayyyyyy😂 more popular than some of those classes. Where did you get your stats?
Priest is "the best performing deck"? I don't think so. He is doing OK in higher ranks with some very favorable matchups (mostly against aggro and tempo decks like Face Hunter or Rush Warrior), but he also has couple awful ones like Control Warlock, NM Mage, Poison Rogue or OTK Demon Hunter.
At some point, Priest players thought: "Hey, if the deck is good against aggro and tempo anyway, why don't we just cut some overkill control cards and replace them with somthing to improve our worse matchups?". This is how Kazakus Priest was born, deck which much better matchups against Mage or Rogue (because of more pro-active and tempo oriented nature of the deck - Kibler explained that in his videos several times).
Now this archetype is dead though, so Priest will have to revert to his retro-active "heal and remove" style deck. He will continue stomping on aggro decks and losing hopelessly against others... Was that the goal of this change? To push control back to T3/T4?
I am talking about Mt results, not the random ladder matches or the opinions of content creators like Kibler
And again you only look at top 1000 legend. those are approx 1000 players, have you ever done any statistics? 1000 players do not represent the 23.5 million players as of februari 11th. I got the stats from hsreplay obviously, but over all ranks not recluded to several players. Yes Priest is more popular than some classes such as shaman, but you don't nerf something because people like playing it. Also overall popularity of priest doesnt even reach 10% how can a class be labeled as most popular?
With the Mage and Paladin nerfs there was a possibility that Control Priest could become an oppressive meta-breaker (...)
Priest, with some effort, could already beat Paladin pretty consistently and in NM Mage matchup +1 mana on RSW will change absolutely nothing.
The Mage-Paladin meta was annoying, but a potential Priest-Warlock meta would be disgusting. This is a proactive nerf.
Priest-Warlock meta? Priest still has some terrible matchups and even 0 mana Hysteria wouldn't fix them. Warlock is atrocious in general, so no, that would never happen.
I am talking about Mt results, not the random ladder matches or the opinions of content creators like Kibler
Mt has nothing to do with real meta-gameplay and Kibler is not just "random content creator", he's a veteran of card games, lead designer of World of Warcraft Trading Card Game and designer of many other card games. In short, he knows the stuff.
I am talking about Mt results, not the random ladder matches or the opinions of content creators like Kibler
Mt has nothing to do with real meta-gameplay, and Kibler is not just "random content creator", he's a vteran of card games, lead designer of World of Warcraft Trading Card Game and designer of many other card games.
But who cares that you can't play kazakus and hysteria in the same deck ? How did it kill the deck exactly, do you have data to back up this claim ? What is stopping your from replacing Hysteria with a card that doesn't cost 4 mana ?
Naming those decks "kazakus decks" seems a bit of a stretch anyway, it's just one card, and it's not a win condition, it's not essential to the game plan. Like seriously before the nerf you would call this deck Tickatus warlock or Control warlock like everyone else.
If they wanted to get rid of Control Warlock from the meta completely, all they had to do was to kill Tickatus (by making him 8 mana or something). Why also harm Priest if he wasn't the target?
I think you don't get it. Warlock wasn't the target. Priest wasn't the target. Hysteria was the target. There was nothing wrong with those decks as a whole, it's just Hysteria that was a little bit too strong. But they are not going to completely destroy Hysteria and make it 5 mana just so you can have specifically Kazakus and hysteria in your deck.
And again you only look at top 1000 legend. those are approx 1000 players, have you ever done any statistics? 1000 players do not represent the 23.5 million players as of februari 11th. I got the stats from hsreplay obviously, but over all ranks not recluded to several players. Yes Priest is more popular than some classes such as shaman, but you don't nerf something because people like playing it. Also overall popularity of priest doesnt even reach 10% how can a class be labeled as most popular?
Are trolling right? The top 1000 or even better top 100 represent the current meta since those are the best players (high game knowledge). If you are taking into account every ranks in this game you get stats from bronze, silver, gold etc. At those ranks, most people are looking for fast aggro deck in order to climb faster, people usually make tons of misplay etc generally not a good statistical sample. If you are making a statistical analysis you need clear samples of data and only the top ranked players provide those. After all, there is a reason why you need to get a premium subscribtion at hsreplay in order to get stats from high ranks.
What is stopping your from replacing Hysteria with a card that doesn't cost 4 mana ?
Meta. 3-4 mana mass removal is too strong to ignore with Paladin, Hunter and Warrior around. Kazakus alone cannot compensate for it.
Naming those decks "kazakus decks" seems a bit of a stretch anyway, it's just one card, and it's not a win condition, it's not essential to the game plan.
Not a win condition, but a staple for entire deck and one of the key cards in some matchups.
Like seriously before the nerf you would call this deck Tickatus warlock or Control warlock like everyone else.
Because Kazakus Warlock wasn't official deck, yet some people (myself incuded) played it with very good results (my last record before the nerf was 31/6 vs Paladin, 16/7 vs Hunter and 11/1 vs Warrior in european Diamond 5 floor).
I think you don't get it. Warlock wasn't the target. Priest wasn't the target. Hysteria was the target.
No, you just took fragment of my comment out of context. Read the whole thing and you'll see that I considered both options, treating both Priest and Warlock as potential nerf targets.
There was nothing wrong with those decks as a whole, it's just Hysteria that was a little bit too strong. But they are not going to completely destroy Hysteria and make it 5 mana just so you can have specifically Kazakus and hysteria in your deck.
And what makes you think I wanted Hysteria to cost 5 mana (besides your imagination)?
I am talking about Mt results, not the random ladder matches or the opinions of content creators like Kibler
Mt has nothing to do with real meta-gameplay and Kibler is not just "random content creator", he's a veteran of card games, lead designer of World of Warcraft Trading Card Game and designer of many other card games. In short, he knows the stuff.
Brian Kibler is not just a veteran but a Hall of Famer at MTG and a game designer, but the last couple of years is a content creator just like Regis Killbin etc. He is making awesome streams, playing really fun decks but he is not part of the competitive scene. He is not tryharding for finishes or participate at any mts. Bans are based on the competitive scene (blizzard doesn't care if you are struggling against meme decks at low ranks) and sadly Kibler is not part of it anymore.
Meta. 3-4 mana mass removal is too strong to ignore with Paladin, Hunter and Warrior around. Kazakus alone cannot compensate for it.
Ok then don't replace hysteria, replace kazakus, what's wrong with that ?
Especially priest has a ton of good 4 mana legendary, they can play the nameless one, Xyrella, Samuro...
And for warlock I think it's only fair that they can't have hysteria+kazakus+tickatus+jaraxxus+nether+soul fragments package+corrupt package+single target removals+whatever else in the same deck. They don't have to do everything, and if your control deck is so strong that it plays like a tempo deck, maybe there's something wrong.
It is clear to me that you are only upset because they nerfed a deck you were playing, not because you feel this is bad for the game.
And what makes you think I wanted Hysteeria to cost 5 mana (besides your imagination)?
I never said you wanted that so why are you pretending that I did ? I'm just saying this was a way of nerfing Hysteria without removing the ability to play Hysteria and Kazakus in the same deck.
But you know, if you want the ability to play Kazakus and Hysteria, and you don't want Hysteria at 5 mana, and Blizzard don't want Hysteria at 3 mana, then what do you do ?
Ok then don't replace hysteria, replace kazakus, what's wrong with that ?
And as I already said, Priest will do this, reverting to his retro-active deck with Samuro and Xyrella. Warlock though can do nothing about it, he just lacks strong replacements.
And for warlock I think it's only fair that they can't have hysteria+kazakus+tickatus+jaraxxus+nether+soul fragments package+corrupt package+single target removals+whatever else in the same deck. They don't have to do everything, and if your control deck is so strong that it plays like a tempo deck, maybe there's something wrong.
This shows you have literally zero idea about Warlock and why he sucks right now. His control package is simply too weak, overcosted and 100% reactive, with no reliable healing, almost no tempo, and no cards to make significant swing turns. Kazakus fixed that issue to some extent and that's why he was soo good in Warlock.
It is clear to me that you are only upset because they nerfed a deck you were playing, not because you feel this is bad for the game.
I'm upset, because I don't understand why Blizzard nerfed card from 8th and 9th class in standard, played in T3/T4 decks. As a control player, I have no other choice (even though I don't really like Priest's playstyle) but they are taking away even that.
Warlock though can do nothing about it, he just lacks strong replacements.
What do you mean nothing ? You really believe this deck is unplayable without Kazakus and that not a single card in the game is good enough to take its place ? Isn't it one of the most flexible cards in the deck, even before the nerf ? There are other proactive cards you know. These are real questions by the way, I'm not trying to dismiss your argument, only seeking answers.
no reliable healing, almost no tempo, and no cards to make significant swing turns
Maybe not "reliable" but they have tons of healing with Drain Soul, up to 20 soul fragments, Blood Shard Bristleback, Siphon Soul, and armor from Jaraxxus, really it's more healing than most non-priest control decks I've seen in 8 years.
No swing turn and tempo you say ? Malicia that generates a full rushing board on turn 7 ? Nether + Strongman on turn 8 ? Yshaarj + disaster + strongman on turn 10 ? Nether + Jaraxxus on turn 10 ? These might not be the craziest swings but they are extremely consistent and reliable. And what card exactly is overcosted in that deck ? Twisting nether maybe a tiny bit slow in today's power level ?
I agree this is a very reactive deck, I understand why it is weak against auto-pilot combo decks that don't play minions, then again this is how control decks are supposed to work, I also understand that the deck can be difficult to pilot in a very aggressive meta, but to say this deck is weak and it sucks is a huge overreaction to me, I think this is one of the best and most fleshed out control decks I've ever seen (for the Standard power level) in an unlucky meta.
This shows you have literally zero idea about Warlock
Why does it always come down to this when I'm in an argument with someone ? This week alone I have been said that I have no clue about Warlock, Shaman, Priest, Mage and Paladin. It is true control warlock is not my most played deck at the moment, but I've played it, I've experimented with it, I've played against it a lot, and I've played HS for almost 8 years.
Am I really saying stupid things or do you just dislike my opinion ? I feel like I'm putting at least some effort into my answers and I'm not saying things that are plain wrong.
I'm upset, because I don't understand why Blizzard nerfed card from 8th and 9th class in standard, played in T3/T4 decks.
Because the card was OP in whatever data was collected. Doesn't matter if the deck is T1 or T467, I thought this was clear by now.
They almost never nerf cards based on community feelings. They did it with Barnes and a couple other cards, but most of the time they have data strongly indicating that something is wrong with a particular card. Like the watch post nerfs, it was a surprise to most of us, but they didn't nerf these at random, they were probably warping the meta way too much.
With the Mage and Paladin nerfs there was a possibility that Control Priest could become an oppressive meta-breaker (...)
Priest, with some effort, could already beat Paladin pretty consistently and in NM Mage matchup +1 mana on RSW will change absolutely nothing.
The Mage-Paladin meta was annoying, but a potential Priest-Warlock meta would be disgusting. This is a proactive nerf.
Priest-Warlock meta? Priest still has some terrible matchups and even 0 mana Hysteria wouldn't fix them. Warlock is atrocious in general, so no, that would never happen.
Priest's only really weak matchup is Warlock. The reason the class was dropping winrate against other classes was the attempt to tech against control, thus losing the edge it had against aggro and face decks.
If Priest is allowed to become strong across the board, then we might get a meta where players are either playing Priest to beat everything except Warlock, or Warlock to beat Priests.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Honestly, I don't understand the idea behind nerfing this card right now. I agree that in the vacuum it was probably undercosted and 4 mana is much more fair for such powerful effect, but since we're not in the vacuum... what was the real purpose of doing this now?
Kazakus Priest and Kazakus Warlock (aka best performing and pro-active control decks) are dead. Regular retro-active Priest won't even feel the difference, as his good and bad matchups will remain largely the same. Regular Control Warlock will be even weaker in aggro and tempo matchups, where he was terrible already (+1 mana is huge deal for him), but pretty much the same in control matchups.
So what were they trying to achieve here?
If they wanted to get rid of Control Warlock from the meta completely, all they had to do was to kill Tickatus (by making him 8 mana or something). Why also harm Priest if he wasn't the target? But if they wanted to nerf Priest, they should have weakened his card generation or healing, because that's what makes him endure the meta so well. Why hit Warlock in that case as well?
What they did instead just seems pointless to me.
They nerfed hysteria because Control Priest is the best performing deck and the second most popular after the mage (based on Mt's results), Control warlock was just unlucky. Control warlock was already a weak deck (probably the worst one) and now is pretty much hopeless. With those buffs, they try to bring up zoo by I don't think they are enough.
With the Mage and Paladin nerfs there was a possibility that Control Priest could become an oppressive meta-breaker that could only be countered by Control Warlock.
The Mage-Paladin meta was annoying, but a potential Priest-Warlock meta would be disgusting. This is a proactive nerf.
Master tour is really not representative for the the game. Blizzard won't nerf a card because a class is seen alot in tournaments. On ladder priest is wayyyyyyyy behind on popularity versus warlock,hunter,paladin and mage.
Cho me what you've learned
Priest is "the best performing deck"? I don't think so. He is doing OK in higher ranks with some very favorable matchups (mostly against aggro and tempo decks like Face Hunter or Rush Warrior), but he also has couple awful ones like Control Warlock, NM Mage, Poison Rogue or OTK Demon Hunter.
At some point, Priest players thought: "Hey, if the deck is good against aggro and tempo anyway, why don't we just cut some overkill control cards and replace them with somthing to improve our worse matchups?". This is how Kazakus Priest was born, deck which much better matchups against Mage or Rogue (because of more pro-active and tempo oriented nature of the deck - Kibler explained that in his videos several times).
Now this archetype is dead though, so Priest will have to revert to his retro-active "heal and remove" style deck. He will continue stomping on aggro decks and losing hopelessly against others... Was that the goal of this change? To push control back to T3/T4?
Mts is the competitive scene and that matters more than just the ladder. Also, if you check popularity and w.r. at hsreplay's top 1000 legends, Priest is wayyyyyy😂 more popular than some of those classes. Where did you get your stats?
I am talking about Mt results, not the random ladder matches or the opinions of content creators like Kibler
And again you only look at top 1000 legend. those are approx 1000 players, have you ever done any statistics? 1000 players do not represent the 23.5 million players as of februari 11th. I got the stats from hsreplay obviously, but over all ranks not recluded to several players. Yes Priest is more popular than some classes such as shaman, but you don't nerf something because people like playing it. Also overall popularity of priest doesnt even reach 10% how can a class be labeled as most popular?
Cho me what you've learned
Priest, with some effort, could already beat Paladin pretty consistently and in NM Mage matchup +1 mana on RSW will change absolutely nothing.
Priest-Warlock meta? Priest still has some terrible matchups and even 0 mana Hysteria wouldn't fix them. Warlock is atrocious in general, so no, that would never happen.
Mt has nothing to do with real meta-gameplay and Kibler is not just "random content creator", he's a veteran of card games, lead designer of World of Warcraft Trading Card Game and designer of many other card games. In short, he knows the stuff.
Thank you
Cho me what you've learned
But who cares that you can't play kazakus and hysteria in the same deck ? How did it kill the deck exactly, do you have data to back up this claim ? What is stopping your from replacing Hysteria with a card that doesn't cost 4 mana ?
Naming those decks "kazakus decks" seems a bit of a stretch anyway, it's just one card, and it's not a win condition, it's not essential to the game plan. Like seriously before the nerf you would call this deck Tickatus warlock or Control warlock like everyone else.
I think you don't get it. Warlock wasn't the target. Priest wasn't the target. Hysteria was the target. There was nothing wrong with those decks as a whole, it's just Hysteria that was a little bit too strong. But they are not going to completely destroy Hysteria and make it 5 mana just so you can have specifically Kazakus and hysteria in your deck.
Are trolling right? The top 1000 or even better top 100 represent the current meta since those are the best players (high game knowledge). If you are taking into account every ranks in this game you get stats from bronze, silver, gold etc. At those ranks, most people are looking for fast aggro deck in order to climb faster, people usually make tons of misplay etc generally not a good statistical sample. If you are making a statistical analysis you need clear samples of data and only the top ranked players provide those. After all, there is a reason why you need to get a premium subscribtion at hsreplay in order to get stats from high ranks.
Meta. 3-4 mana mass removal is too strong to ignore with Paladin, Hunter and Warrior around. Kazakus alone cannot compensate for it.
Not a win condition, but a staple for entire deck and one of the key cards in some matchups.
Because Kazakus Warlock wasn't official deck, yet some people (myself incuded) played it with very good results (my last record before the nerf was 31/6 vs Paladin, 16/7 vs Hunter and 11/1 vs Warrior in european Diamond 5 floor).
No, you just took fragment of my comment out of context. Read the whole thing and you'll see that I considered both options, treating both Priest and Warlock as potential nerf targets.
And what makes you think I wanted Hysteria to cost 5 mana (besides your imagination)?
Brian Kibler is not just a veteran but a Hall of Famer at MTG and a game designer, but the last couple of years is a content creator just like Regis Killbin etc. He is making awesome streams, playing really fun decks but he is not part of the competitive scene. He is not tryharding for finishes or participate at any mts. Bans are based on the competitive scene (blizzard doesn't care if you are struggling against meme decks at low ranks) and sadly Kibler is not part of it anymore.
Ok then don't replace hysteria, replace kazakus, what's wrong with that ?
Especially priest has a ton of good 4 mana legendary, they can play the nameless one, Xyrella, Samuro...
And for warlock I think it's only fair that they can't have hysteria+kazakus+tickatus+jaraxxus+nether+soul fragments package+corrupt package+single target removals+whatever else in the same deck. They don't have to do everything, and if your control deck is so strong that it plays like a tempo deck, maybe there's something wrong.
It is clear to me that you are only upset because they nerfed a deck you were playing, not because you feel this is bad for the game.
I never said you wanted that so why are you pretending that I did ? I'm just saying this was a way of nerfing Hysteria without removing the ability to play Hysteria and Kazakus in the same deck.
But you know, if you want the ability to play Kazakus and Hysteria, and you don't want Hysteria at 5 mana, and Blizzard don't want Hysteria at 3 mana, then what do you do ?
And as I already said, Priest will do this, reverting to his retro-active deck with Samuro and Xyrella. Warlock though can do nothing about it, he just lacks strong replacements.
This shows you have literally zero idea about Warlock and why he sucks right now. His control package is simply too weak, overcosted and 100% reactive, with no reliable healing, almost no tempo, and no cards to make significant swing turns. Kazakus fixed that issue to some extent and that's why he was soo good in Warlock.
I'm upset, because I don't understand why Blizzard nerfed card from 8th and 9th class in standard, played in T3/T4 decks. As a control player, I have no other choice (even though I don't really like Priest's playstyle) but they are taking away even that.
What do you mean nothing ? You really believe this deck is unplayable without Kazakus and that not a single card in the game is good enough to take its place ? Isn't it one of the most flexible cards in the deck, even before the nerf ? There are other proactive cards you know. These are real questions by the way, I'm not trying to dismiss your argument, only seeking answers.
Maybe not "reliable" but they have tons of healing with Drain Soul, up to 20 soul fragments, Blood Shard Bristleback, Siphon Soul, and armor from Jaraxxus, really it's more healing than most non-priest control decks I've seen in 8 years.
No swing turn and tempo you say ? Malicia that generates a full rushing board on turn 7 ? Nether + Strongman on turn 8 ? Yshaarj + disaster + strongman on turn 10 ? Nether + Jaraxxus on turn 10 ? These might not be the craziest swings but they are extremely consistent and reliable. And what card exactly is overcosted in that deck ? Twisting nether maybe a tiny bit slow in today's power level ?
I agree this is a very reactive deck, I understand why it is weak against auto-pilot combo decks that don't play minions, then again this is how control decks are supposed to work, I also understand that the deck can be difficult to pilot in a very aggressive meta, but to say this deck is weak and it sucks is a huge overreaction to me, I think this is one of the best and most fleshed out control decks I've ever seen (for the Standard power level) in an unlucky meta.
Why does it always come down to this when I'm in an argument with someone ? This week alone I have been said that I have no clue about Warlock, Shaman, Priest, Mage and Paladin. It is true control warlock is not my most played deck at the moment, but I've played it, I've experimented with it, I've played against it a lot, and I've played HS for almost 8 years.
Am I really saying stupid things or do you just dislike my opinion ? I feel like I'm putting at least some effort into my answers and I'm not saying things that are plain wrong.
Because the card was OP in whatever data was collected. Doesn't matter if the deck is T1 or T467, I thought this was clear by now.
They almost never nerf cards based on community feelings. They did it with Barnes and a couple other cards, but most of the time they have data strongly indicating that something is wrong with a particular card. Like the watch post nerfs, it was a surprise to most of us, but they didn't nerf these at random, they were probably warping the meta way too much.
Priest's only really weak matchup is Warlock. The reason the class was dropping winrate against other classes was the attempt to tech against control, thus losing the edge it had against aggro and face decks.
If Priest is allowed to become strong across the board, then we might get a meta where players are either playing Priest to beat everything except Warlock, or Warlock to beat Priests.