See, the thing is Blizzard really let's all this "delete priest" nonsense get to them. The people who scream delete priest really are a vocal minority in the community. So blizzard feels like they have to nerf priest to satiate some of these people. Is hysteria a strong card? Undoubtedly. Is it completely op in an op class that is nerfed almost every patch? No way. People just dont want to play around it.
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 ?
Exactly. Kazakus gives you tempo, value and flexibility at the same time and there's no other card like that in Warlock's arsenal.
There are other proactive cards you know.
Nothing that Control Warlock has access to, unfortunately.
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.
Reliability beats quantity. it doesn't matter that you have 10+ fragments in your deck, when you also have 8 health and you're about to die next turn, because RNG wasn't on your side. Blademaster Samuro and Apotheosis is pro-active and reliable healing source (which can give you up to 24 HP and clear the board at the same time), fragments are not.
No swing turn and tempo you say ? Malicia that generates a full rushing board on turn 7 ?
It's single, conditional card. Pretty often you can't even play it, because it would be like plain 5/5 or with 1 soul for 7 mana - terrible tempo loss and almost no impact on the board.
Nether + Strongman on turn 8 ? Yshaarj + disaster + strongman on turn 10 ?
Strongman, Y'shaarj and Cascading Disaster are awfully slow, so I removed them in favor of Kazakus. That was the one of the biggest reasons why my Kazakus Warlock was so good against tempo and aggro decks. Lower mana curve, less dead draws, more tempo.
Nether + Jaraxxus on turn 10 ?
Jaraxxus for 2 mana?
These might not be the craziest swings but they are extremely consistent and reliable.
They are not, but you clearly don't play Control Warlock so you have no idea about that.
And what card exactly is overcosted in that deck ? Twisting nether maybe a tiny bit slow in today's power level ?
Warlock's first hard removal - Siphon Soul costs 5 mana. It's much too slow nowadays and that's exactly why Assassinate haven't seen play for years now, even after it was buffed to 4 mana. Heal for 3 means nothing, because it's way better to kill threat on turn 2-3 (like Priest), than get meaningless 3 HP on turn 5. And if you want to deal with wide boards tougher than 3 HP, then your only option is Twisting for 8 mana, or Hysteria... if you are lucky with RNG. In the past Warlock used to have Defile, Dark Skies and Plague of Flames (cheap, efficient removals), but now he didn't get any replacement.
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
So why it's considered T3/T4 deck by Vicious Syndicate, Tempo Storm or HS Replays and has win rate below 47%?
Why does it always come down to this when I'm in an argument with someone?
Because you're trying to deny reality. The numbers don't lie and no player in the world (out of several million) has managed to build an effective, at least T2 Control Warlock deck. To a sane person, this is an obvious argument that proves the weakness of the class and the archetype itself... but not for you. That's why.
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.
What data?
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.
As I said, I'm aware that 4 mana cost is more fair for this card... BUT WHY NOW?! We are weeks away from the mini-expansion, don't control players have the right to have fun during this time? T3/T4 decks are too much for us?
Out of curiosity, which matchups does Kazakus help you in as a Warlock?
It was great in all tempo matchups. Playing like 2x 5/5 with taunt, divine shield, lifesteal or stealth was huge, too much for Paladin, Hunter or Warrior to just ignire and go face. You could also have poison + damage (for instant mass removal), lifesteal + damage (for instant heal), freeze (for stale), buff for your other minions (great with taunts on board), spell damage (awesome with removals) or even card draw. Just an overall outstanding card.
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.
false. That is totally false. It matters too little. First: there is like an 80% of players in the game that dont play exactly like this people (for put a random %) Ladder always perform different in the regular ranks because legend is a place where people play in a veeery different way most of the times. They take decisions base on stuff that sometimes is not even related to the Match but external data ("i am playing with this other guy that is running that version of this deck that dont use this card so i dont need to play around it"; is a good example). You cant take decisions base on "how the best players playa against each other" when those guys literally track their decks, the most use recipes, the ones that have certain changes, etc...
Priest isn't the best performing class but it is still very powerful and one can argue that a RNG heavy deck with near infinite removal is super unhealthy for the game.
I wish they would give the class a different win condition other than "annoy your opponent into conceding" because then this nerf would not have happened
But control wincondition is always make your opponent run out of options. In this or any other game. By default That is how control work. There are some mix like Combo-Control (which is basically control buy always playing for keep the board on check until you have enough resources to combo) or "inevitability" control that is very similar but is more about one card that when you play it wins the game on the spot. Control means to counter your opponent resources until they dont have ways of keep playing/winning.
Exactly. Kazakus gives you tempo, value and flexibility at the same time and there's no other card like that in Warlock's arsenal.
There's no other card like that because it has unique effect. There are other tempo cards.
Nothing that Control Warlock has access to, unfortunately.
Because you experimented with all tempo cards in the game and can conclude they don't work.
Reliability beats quantity. it doesn't matter that you have 10+ fragments in your deck, when you also have 8 health and you're about to die next turn, because RNG wasn't on your side. Blademaster Samuro and Apotheosis is pro-active and reliable healing source (which can give you up to 24 HP and clear the board at the same time), fragments are not.
So unreliable that you had a great winrate with the deck before the nerf. Warlock both has reliable and unreliable healing. But go ahead and tell me how Drain Soul and Blood Shard Bristleback are such unreliable cards. Samuro + Apotheosis is plain OP and you should stop really stop using the best cards and best combos in the game as a reference for Warlock balance. Priest doesn't have life tap.
It's single, conditional card. Pretty often you can't even play it, because it would be like plain 5/5 or with 1 soul for 7 mana - terrible tempo loss and almost no impact on the board.
It's not the only card in the deck, man I hate this argument "but it's just one card" as if there isn't 29 other cards in your deck. Kazakus is also a single conditional card, pretty often you can't play it because it's a 4 mana 3/3 and you're dead next turn ;)
Now YOU're in denial. 99% of the time Malicia is a huge tempo gain and/or a full clear. I don't care that RNG ruined your game that one time, next time you'll save some fragment cards for the turn before Malicia to make sure Malicia has value.
Jaraxxus for 2 mana?
Hero power, pretty self evident bro, don't you play warlock ?
They are not, but you clearly don't play Control Warlock so you have no idea about that.
I clearly do play control warlock in both formats but keep being a dick if that makes you feel better.
In the past Warlock used to have Defile, Dark Skies and Plague of Flames (cheap, efficient removals), but now he didn't get any replacement.
Great, the 3 most OP board clears in existence, what a good reference. If all you want is OP cards for warlock you should've started with that.
So why it's considered T3/T4 deck by Vicious Syndicate, Tempo Storm or HS Replays and has win rate below 47%?
What is so hard to understand that a good deck can struggle in the wrong meta ? Why did you have so much success with that deck if it's considered T4 with 47% winrate ?
Try to imagine the best deck in the world. Some T0 abomination that wins on turn 3 consistently. Now picture yourself in an imaginary meta where 99% of players are playing a counter deck to this T0 abomination. What happens ? The best deck in the world gets 30% winrate and is no longer the best deck in the world. Crazy right ? It's always funny to me how some people who actively play this game still don't understand a thing about card games and feel like they've been robbed of all fun and power after a single nerf.
Because you're trying to deny reality. The numbers don't lie and no player in the world (out of several million) has managed to build an effective, at least T2 Control Warlock deck. To a sane person, this is an obvious argument that proves the weakness of the class and the archetype itself... but not for you. That's why.
Exactly, numbers don't lie and numbers said Hysteria is OP, deal with it. There is only one reality here, you are butthurt that your deck was nerfed because it was a good deck, which is understandable of course, if that was a bad deck you would'nt even care and you wouldn't be playing it. But stop acting like you know better than Blizzard, they have people whose entire jobs are to analyse data.
What data?
Blizzard data. Pretty relevant I know. More relevant than your Vicious syndicate data anyway.
As I said, I'm aware that 4 mana cost is more fair for this card... BUT WHY NOW?! We are weeks away from the mini-expansion, don't control players have the right to have fun during this time? T3/T4 decks are too much for us?
Stop whining, it's not T4, go experiment and find a f*ing replacement for your Kazakus, like you did when you replaced the corrupt package with Kazakus (you'll have to explain how you replace 5 cards with 1 though), play alexstrasza or something, and you know very well Hearthstone is an aggro driven game, it is designed that way, it is balanced that way, it has always been. Whenever there is a T1 control deck the meta gets completely weird and insane and the community outrages.
And I am with you on the control love, but it takes more than a justified nerf to stop me from having fun in this game, there are so many cards, they could literally nerf the 20 best cards of every expansion and I would still have fun playing control decks.
What is so hard to understand that a good deck can struggle in the wrong meta ?
So how to tell the difference between "good deck in the wrong meta" (whatever that means...) and "bad deck in the right meta"? I'm curious.
Good deck in the wrong meta is Control warlock in face/combo meta.
Bad deck in the right meta is Freeze shaman in any meta.
Notice the difference ? Control warlock has 30 crazy good cards in the deck that have great synergy together. Freeze shaman only has shit in the deck, no matter the context or environment.
Good decks are good, no matter the meta. Bad decks are bad, no matter the meta. The meta is just another layer that will dictate how good is your good deck, and how bad is your bad deck. Sometimes your good deck is not that good, because you face a lot of counter decks. Sometimes your bad deck is not that bad, because you get lucky matchups.
Control warlock is a good deck. Current meta dictates that it is not that good. Maybe next meta will be ruled by minion-based midrange decks and Control warlock will become God tier, while still being the exact same "good" deck in a vacuum.
Out of curiosity, which matchups does Kazakus help you in as a Warlock?
It was great in all tempo matchups. Playing like 2x 5/5 with taunt, divine shield, lifesteal or stealth was huge, too much for Paladin, Hunter or Warrior to just ignire and go face. You could also have poison + damage (for instant mass removal), lifesteal + damage (for instant heal), freeze (for stale), buff for your other minions (great with taunts on board), spell damage (awesome with removals) or even card draw. Just an overall outstanding card.
Definitely a great card. I just question whether it's really needed in those matchups. You're not using it to pressure; you're using it to heal, remove, or force trades generally. There are other cards than can serve a similar function. And with the Crabrider nerf, I think you'll generally have an easier time removing early on and have less trouble stabilizing late game.
Look, whatever, how about we just agree to disagree. In the end Blizzard makes the decision and we won't know why for sure. I tried to give you reasonable explanations and arguments as to why Hysteria was nerfed and why it didn't kill Warlock, you dismissed all of them with an emotional reaction.
Didn't you just said, that good deck is good regardless the meta?
yes, I said that, a good deck is always a good deck, but it can perform better or worse depending on the meta. I am not the best english speaker so maybe my words are contradictory, but I know you understand what I meant, I know you are just trolling me at this point, and I know you agree with most things I said, and I know you never considered Control warlock a bad deck, because you played it (with success), and nobody plays bad decks on purpose, and nobody loses their shit when a bad deck gets the tiniest nerf.
I know you are just trolling me at this point, and I know you agree with most things I said, and I know you never considered Control warlock a bad deck, because you played it (with success), and nobody plays bad decks on purpose, and nobody loses their shit when a bad deck gets the tiniest nerf.
Nah, I'm just amused at how much you deny reality, making arguments out of thin air and basing them on "because I say so".
Control Warlock wasn't T1 deck since Cube Lock... 3 years ago. So much for your argument about "good deck in the wrong meta".
You guys talk a lot of trash, they have a reason to nerf it. Its maybe because of the next mini-set maybe because of the next expansion that priest is gonna get a bit over the top with it so they change it better now then later. All in all you don't have the date they do it's like me saying ''why did they nerfe RSW mage only had 49%-50% winrate buu huu''
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.
false. That is totally false. It matters too little. First: there is like an 80% of players in the game that dont play exactly like this people (for put a random %) Ladder always perform different in the regular ranks because legend is a place where people play in a veeery different way most of the times.
That 80% is the casual player base (casuals, wild format, etc.) but they don't make a ban list based on casual players, lmao. The only things that matter for casuals are the good pack deals, cosmetics, and probably some rewards.
They take decisions base on stuff that sometimes is not even related to the Match but external data ("i am playing with this other guy that is running that version of this deck that dont use this card so i dont need to play around it"; is a good example). You cant take decisions base on "how the best players playa against each other" when those guys literally track their decks, the most use recipes, the ones that have certain changes, etc...
Exactly!! The same goes with Master Quals and Mts. That's the reason that nerfs are based on the top 1000 and Mt decklists (sometimes they want to push some pretty bad decks in order to become meta but they fail every time). I can't understand why you disagree with me while you are saying the same thing as me. Lmao😂
Which arguments are made out of thin air ? Why are you not mentionning them specifically ? As it is I have legit no idea what you're talking about and always tried to explain my thoughts, never said anything close to "because I said so". You did however, multiple times when you dismissed my arguments "because you obviously don't play warlock" and "you deny reality" this is pure sophistry.
You are still obsessed about meta tiers and butthurt about warlock not being T1 and can't even comprehend the difference between the meta viability of a deck, which is ever changing and highly dependant on the actions of other players and the matchmaking system, even the time of the day and month, and the sheer power of a deck in a vacuum, which is not dependant on the meta whatsoever. You could argue that the sheer individual power of a deck is irrelevant if it only faces bad matchups, that is true, but to argue that the current iteration of control warlock is inherently a bad deck, is simply blowing my mind, considering the power level of individual cards, card combos and access to incredibly diverse tools to deal with all archetypes, in that deck.
There are people playing that deck in Wild with only a minimal amount of actual Wild cards and winning games.
You still haven't answered why you were happily playing such a terrible T4 deck and how you perfomed so well with it before the nerf. My guess is the deck isn't as bad as you pretend, regardless of the presence of Kazakus in it, and "T1" or "T4" are just words that don't mean shit when the deck is in the proper hand. Anything that is "tier something" is inherently a good deck, compared to unplayable meme shit like freeze shaman or face murloc priest. T1 and T4 decks are roughly on the same power level, the T1 deck just has a more favorable meta. What is your guess now ? If you're going to tell me you play the deck because you enjoy it no matter how it performs, having nerfed hysteria shouldn't bother you. If you care how it performs, you shouldn't play it to begin with because this is a terrible T4 deck. So what is the source of your contradiction ?
Definitely a great card. I just question whether it's really needed in those matchups. You're not using it to pressure; you're using it to heal, remove, or force trades generally. There are other cards than can serve a similar function. And with the Crabrider nerf, I think you'll generally have an easier time removing early on and have less trouble stabilizing late game.
I was using it mostly for tempo and to take away opponent from my face for turn or two. Sometimes to heal myself, corrupt Tickatus or remove threats from the board. Sadly, I don't see any replacement for this card available for Warlock. And I wouldn't say I that removing early stuff is now easier for me. One more mana on Hysteria means that I often can't trigger Yogg and use it on the same turn, which usually translates into additional 6-8 (or more) face damage. Also playing against Face Hunter and Token Druid feels more difficult now, only Rush Warrior seems relatively the same to me. Those are my first impressions of post-nerf Warlock, but I'm not expecting they will get any better.
The issue with Hysteria is that it's a double whammy. Because if I play around Hysteria by having equalish minions so none can gobble up all the others then you get hit hard by AoE. If you play around AoE by having some stronger minions who will survive it you get hit hard by Hysteria. It is just an exceedingly annoying card to face, especially against Priest. It definitely deserved the nerf and I'd be quite happy if I never saw it again. Sadly it is too good to cut, which ofc just further shows the nerf was very much deserved.
As for the debate going on, warlock has some beyond bust cards imo. If it can't win with those then it is not warlock that is weak but everything else that is nuts. Powercreep really fucked this game hard since I left.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
See, the thing is Blizzard really let's all this "delete priest" nonsense get to them. The people who scream delete priest really are a vocal minority in the community. So blizzard feels like they have to nerf priest to satiate some of these people. Is hysteria a strong card? Undoubtedly. Is it completely op in an op class that is nerfed almost every patch? No way. People just dont want to play around it.
Exactly. Kazakus gives you tempo, value and flexibility at the same time and there's no other card like that in Warlock's arsenal.
Nothing that Control Warlock has access to, unfortunately.
Reliability beats quantity. it doesn't matter that you have 10+ fragments in your deck, when you also have 8 health and you're about to die next turn, because RNG wasn't on your side. Blademaster Samuro and Apotheosis is pro-active and reliable healing source (which can give you up to 24 HP and clear the board at the same time), fragments are not.
It's single, conditional card. Pretty often you can't even play it, because it would be like plain 5/5 or with 1 soul for 7 mana - terrible tempo loss and almost no impact on the board.
Strongman, Y'shaarj and Cascading Disaster are awfully slow, so I removed them in favor of Kazakus. That was the one of the biggest reasons why my Kazakus Warlock was so good against tempo and aggro decks. Lower mana curve, less dead draws, more tempo.
Jaraxxus for 2 mana?
They are not, but you clearly don't play Control Warlock so you have no idea about that.
Warlock's first hard removal - Siphon Soul costs 5 mana. It's much too slow nowadays and that's exactly why Assassinate haven't seen play for years now, even after it was buffed to 4 mana. Heal for 3 means nothing, because it's way better to kill threat on turn 2-3 (like Priest), than get meaningless 3 HP on turn 5. And if you want to deal with wide boards tougher than 3 HP, then your only option is Twisting for 8 mana, or Hysteria... if you are lucky with RNG. In the past Warlock used to have Defile, Dark Skies and Plague of Flames (cheap, efficient removals), but now he didn't get any replacement.
So why it's considered T3/T4 deck by Vicious Syndicate, Tempo Storm or HS Replays and has win rate below 47%?
Because you're trying to deny reality. The numbers don't lie and no player in the world (out of several million) has managed to build an effective, at least T2 Control Warlock deck. To a sane person, this is an obvious argument that proves the weakness of the class and the archetype itself... but not for you. That's why.
What data?
As I said, I'm aware that 4 mana cost is more fair for this card... BUT WHY NOW?! We are weeks away from the mini-expansion, don't control players have the right to have fun during this time? T3/T4 decks are too much for us?
Out of curiosity, which matchups does Kazakus help you in as a Warlock?
It was great in all tempo matchups. Playing like 2x 5/5 with taunt, divine shield, lifesteal or stealth was huge, too much for Paladin, Hunter or Warrior to just ignire and go face. You could also have poison + damage (for instant mass removal), lifesteal + damage (for instant heal), freeze (for stale), buff for your other minions (great with taunts on board), spell damage (awesome with removals) or even card draw. Just an overall outstanding card.
false. That is totally false. It matters too little. First: there is like an 80% of players in the game that dont play exactly like this people (for put a random %) Ladder always perform different in the regular ranks because legend is a place where people play in a veeery different way most of the times. They take decisions base on stuff that sometimes is not even related to the Match but external data ("i am playing with this other guy that is running that version of this deck that dont use this card so i dont need to play around it"; is a good example). You cant take decisions base on "how the best players playa against each other" when those guys literally track their decks, the most use recipes, the ones that have certain changes, etc...
Priest isn't the best performing class but it is still very powerful and one can argue that a RNG heavy deck with near infinite removal is super unhealthy for the game.
I wish they would give the class a different win condition other than "annoy your opponent into conceding" because then this nerf would not have happened
But control wincondition is always make your opponent run out of options. In this or any other game. By default That is how control work. There are some mix like Combo-Control (which is basically control buy always playing for keep the board on check until you have enough resources to combo) or "inevitability" control that is very similar but is more about one card that when you play it wins the game on the spot. Control means to counter your opponent resources until they dont have ways of keep playing/winning.
There's no other card like that because it has unique effect. There are other tempo cards.
Because you experimented with all tempo cards in the game and can conclude they don't work.
So unreliable that you had a great winrate with the deck before the nerf. Warlock both has reliable and unreliable healing. But go ahead and tell me how Drain Soul and Blood Shard Bristleback are such unreliable cards. Samuro + Apotheosis is plain OP and you should stop really stop using the best cards and best combos in the game as a reference for Warlock balance. Priest doesn't have life tap.
It's not the only card in the deck, man I hate this argument "but it's just one card" as if there isn't 29 other cards in your deck. Kazakus is also a single conditional card, pretty often you can't play it because it's a 4 mana 3/3 and you're dead next turn ;)
Now YOU're in denial. 99% of the time Malicia is a huge tempo gain and/or a full clear. I don't care that RNG ruined your game that one time, next time you'll save some fragment cards for the turn before Malicia to make sure Malicia has value.
Hero power, pretty self evident bro, don't you play warlock ?
I clearly do play control warlock in both formats but keep being a dick if that makes you feel better.
Great, the 3 most OP board clears in existence, what a good reference. If all you want is OP cards for warlock you should've started with that.
What is so hard to understand that a good deck can struggle in the wrong meta ? Why did you have so much success with that deck if it's considered T4 with 47% winrate ?
Try to imagine the best deck in the world. Some T0 abomination that wins on turn 3 consistently. Now picture yourself in an imaginary meta where 99% of players are playing a counter deck to this T0 abomination. What happens ? The best deck in the world gets 30% winrate and is no longer the best deck in the world. Crazy right ? It's always funny to me how some people who actively play this game still don't understand a thing about card games and feel like they've been robbed of all fun and power after a single nerf.
Exactly, numbers don't lie and numbers said Hysteria is OP, deal with it. There is only one reality here, you are butthurt that your deck was nerfed because it was a good deck, which is understandable of course, if that was a bad deck you would'nt even care and you wouldn't be playing it. But stop acting like you know better than Blizzard, they have people whose entire jobs are to analyse data.
Blizzard data. Pretty relevant I know. More relevant than your Vicious syndicate data anyway.
Stop whining, it's not T4, go experiment and find a f*ing replacement for your Kazakus, like you did when you replaced the corrupt package with Kazakus (you'll have to explain how you replace 5 cards with 1 though), play alexstrasza or something, and you know very well Hearthstone is an aggro driven game, it is designed that way, it is balanced that way, it has always been. Whenever there is a T1 control deck the meta gets completely weird and insane and the community outrages.
And I am with you on the control love, but it takes more than a justified nerf to stop me from having fun in this game, there are so many cards, they could literally nerf the 20 best cards of every expansion and I would still have fun playing control decks.
So how to tell the difference between "good deck in the wrong meta" (whatever that means...) and "bad deck in the right meta"? I'm curious.
Good deck in the wrong meta is Control warlock in face/combo meta.
Bad deck in the right meta is Freeze shaman in any meta.
Notice the difference ? Control warlock has 30 crazy good cards in the deck that have great synergy together. Freeze shaman only has shit in the deck, no matter the context or environment.
Good decks are good, no matter the meta. Bad decks are bad, no matter the meta. The meta is just another layer that will dictate how good is your good deck, and how bad is your bad deck. Sometimes your good deck is not that good, because you face a lot of counter decks. Sometimes your bad deck is not that bad, because you get lucky matchups.
Control warlock is a good deck. Current meta dictates that it is not that good. Maybe next meta will be ruled by minion-based midrange decks and Control warlock will become God tier, while still being the exact same "good" deck in a vacuum.
Definitely a great card. I just question whether it's really needed in those matchups. You're not using it to pressure; you're using it to heal, remove, or force trades generally. There are other cards than can serve a similar function. And with the Crabrider nerf, I think you'll generally have an easier time removing early on and have less trouble stabilizing late game.
Because you say so? Sure, whatever.
Exactly and by this definition Control Warlock is a bad deck. I see that we agree on that one at least.
Didn't you just said, that good deck is good regardless the meta?
Look, whatever, how about we just agree to disagree. In the end Blizzard makes the decision and we won't know why for sure. I tried to give you reasonable explanations and arguments as to why Hysteria was nerfed and why it didn't kill Warlock, you dismissed all of them with an emotional reaction.
yes, I said that, a good deck is always a good deck, but it can perform better or worse depending on the meta. I am not the best english speaker so maybe my words are contradictory, but I know you understand what I meant, I know you are just trolling me at this point, and I know you agree with most things I said, and I know you never considered Control warlock a bad deck, because you played it (with success), and nobody plays bad decks on purpose, and nobody loses their shit when a bad deck gets the tiniest nerf.
Control decks are the ones that paid the bills for Blizzard, not the F2P ones. Even if they are not Tier 1 they still need to be playable.
And the 2 decks that hard counter most of other control decks are Control Priest and Control Warlock.
With this nerf I suppose they want to make them less frecuent and allows other control decks to have chance.
If you play control decks you just love seeing in the ladder less Mindrender Illucia and Tickatus that burn your win conditions (like your C'Thun, the Shattered pieces).
Everybody knows that...
https://hearthcards.ams3.digitaloceanspaces.com/ce/c0/bc/8a/cec0bc8a.png
Nah, I'm just amused at how much you deny reality, making arguments out of thin air and basing them on "because I say so".
Control Warlock wasn't T1 deck since Cube Lock... 3 years ago. So much for your argument about "good deck in the wrong meta".
I'm done with this nonsense.
You guys talk a lot of trash, they have a reason to nerf it. Its maybe because of the next mini-set maybe because of the next expansion that priest is gonna get a bit over the top with it so they change it better now then later. All in all you don't have the date they do it's like me saying ''why did they nerfe RSW mage only had 49%-50% winrate buu huu''
That 80% is the casual player base (casuals, wild format, etc.) but they don't make a ban list based on casual players, lmao. The only things that matter for casuals are the good pack deals, cosmetics, and probably some rewards.
Exactly!! The same goes with Master Quals and Mts. That's the reason that nerfs are based on the top 1000 and Mt decklists (sometimes they want to push some pretty bad decks in order to become meta but they fail every time). I can't understand why you disagree with me while you are saying the same thing as me. Lmao😂
Which arguments are made out of thin air ? Why are you not mentionning them specifically ? As it is I have legit no idea what you're talking about and always tried to explain my thoughts, never said anything close to "because I said so". You did however, multiple times when you dismissed my arguments "because you obviously don't play warlock" and "you deny reality" this is pure sophistry.
You are still obsessed about meta tiers and butthurt about warlock not being T1 and can't even comprehend the difference between the meta viability of a deck, which is ever changing and highly dependant on the actions of other players and the matchmaking system, even the time of the day and month, and the sheer power of a deck in a vacuum, which is not dependant on the meta whatsoever. You could argue that the sheer individual power of a deck is irrelevant if it only faces bad matchups, that is true, but to argue that the current iteration of control warlock is inherently a bad deck, is simply blowing my mind, considering the power level of individual cards, card combos and access to incredibly diverse tools to deal with all archetypes, in that deck.
There are people playing that deck in Wild with only a minimal amount of actual Wild cards and winning games.
You still haven't answered why you were happily playing such a terrible T4 deck and how you perfomed so well with it before the nerf. My guess is the deck isn't as bad as you pretend, regardless of the presence of Kazakus in it, and "T1" or "T4" are just words that don't mean shit when the deck is in the proper hand. Anything that is "tier something" is inherently a good deck, compared to unplayable meme shit like freeze shaman or face murloc priest. T1 and T4 decks are roughly on the same power level, the T1 deck just has a more favorable meta. What is your guess now ? If you're going to tell me you play the deck because you enjoy it no matter how it performs, having nerfed hysteria shouldn't bother you. If you care how it performs, you shouldn't play it to begin with because this is a terrible T4 deck. So what is the source of your contradiction ?
I was using it mostly for tempo and to take away opponent from my face for turn or two. Sometimes to heal myself, corrupt Tickatus or remove threats from the board. Sadly, I don't see any replacement for this card available for Warlock. And I wouldn't say I that removing early stuff is now easier for me. One more mana on Hysteria means that I often can't trigger Yogg and use it on the same turn, which usually translates into additional 6-8 (or more) face damage. Also playing against Face Hunter and Token Druid feels more difficult now, only Rush Warrior seems relatively the same to me. Those are my first impressions of post-nerf Warlock, but I'm not expecting they will get any better.
The issue with Hysteria is that it's a double whammy. Because if I play around Hysteria by having equalish minions so none can gobble up all the others then you get hit hard by AoE. If you play around AoE by having some stronger minions who will survive it you get hit hard by Hysteria. It is just an exceedingly annoying card to face, especially against Priest. It definitely deserved the nerf and I'd be quite happy if I never saw it again. Sadly it is too good to cut, which ofc just further shows the nerf was very much deserved.
As for the debate going on, warlock has some beyond bust cards imo. If it can't win with those then it is not warlock that is weak but everything else that is nuts. Powercreep really fucked this game hard since I left.