I get annoyed like that about Priest, they steal all your cards and when your a CW that really hurts cuz 90% of the time they get a legendary from you.
1) I was referring to the deck as Grim Patron, not the particular card. If I had to pick a certain card that needs a fix I would have to say the Frothing Bezerker card. Playing it as a 2 attack minion and having it buffed to a 20/4 and still having charge is just broken and needs some sort of fix. There's nothing you can do against it and it's not fun to play against at all.
2) I don't play ladder. I'm over 40 years old and I play Casual mode. If people want to be Mr. Kolento and play ladder feel free, that's what ladder is for, I do not. I want to play fun decks that are good but enjoyable for me to play and for my opponent to play against. I have done this without problem for over a year, that is until this Grim Patron Warrior deck came about. My friends list are almost all people who added me to say, "hey that's a really original cool deck!" I was a professional Magic The Gathering player from 1994 to 1999. I know how to make a good deck.
3) This is related to my previous statement. I do not want to make a deck to simply counter Grim Patron Warrior. That's not what I have invested so much money for, it's not why I play. I play for fun. This is what Casual mode is supposed to be about. Fun decks, deck testing, finishing your quests, meeting new people. It's not called Super Uber Mega Competition 5000 Mode. Casual has a meaning, it's a well defined word.
4) In the end people can and should be able to play the game they want. If they want to bully others in Casual mode with insane decks, fine. If people want to bully new players in the low ranks over and over again to farm, fine. I and many others have an opinion of those kinds of people and they know what that opinion is and they can live with that.
5) I think there is a solution and I think that solution wouldn't hurt anyone and is perfectly fair and easy (perhaps) to implement. Have a feature where you can select classes, again in Casual Mode, that you wish to exclude. For example, don't like Hunters? Click the box and in your game search you won't face Hunters (sorry lol 'face hunters'). If you're like me and you have huge problems with Grim Patron Warrior, click the box and you won't match up against any Warriors. Maybe you want to know how your Priest deck does against Rogues? Click the other 8 boxes and you'll match up against Rogues. I think this feature would be a good addition to the game and I can't come up with any reasons why it's unreasonable.
In conclusion I really would like to thank each and every one of you who have taken time out of their lives to respond and comment here, I read what everyone says and appreciate your thoughts and opinions, even though I may disagree with some. I grew up in a time when people could agree to disagree and I served half my life in the military with the philosophy that "I may disagree with what you say but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." So keep your thoughts coming!
I've played a few games today, I wanted to try the Tavern Brawl out and I decided to head into Casual Mode, as usual for me, just to test the waters. I did quite well and had fun, ran into some crazy Druid decks which I love to see and even an old school Rogue with Gazatron Engineers! I did eventually match up against 1 Grim Patron Warrior and lost to a 12/4 Frothing with the Warrior at 4 health, I was playing Priest. I had a Deathlord and 2 other minions on board, he cleared them and Frothing'd me.. This was 1 turn after I cleared a board of Warsong and Patrons with Holy Nova (had a spell damage buff). So I was close, but I've found over the last couple weeks that when I do beat Grim Patron Warrior it's almost always because the player is inexperienced playing it, I capitalize on their mistakes. This is changing, people are getting more refined decks and better at playing them, making it much more difficult to beat. How do you stop a giant one turn kill Frothing? I don't see how you can, it's not even your turn.. Maybe Freezing Trap if you're a lucky Hunter I guess or Vaporize if you're a lucky Mage. I had been playing Priest a lot as it's one of three classes I need to get to 60 and I want to make a gold Murloc deck doggone it! :D
Again thanks for reading my ramblings, opinions and frustrations. Thanks for posting your thoughts, opinions, frustrations and criticisms. Keep them coming! :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When people come to you and say everything is relative, they are not trying to liberate you, they are trying to enslave you and they are damned close to succeeding
IMO Freeze Mage should NOT exist for the exact reason listed above. It's a deck that has pretty much 0 board interaction and the entire match is determed purely by A) order of cards draw, B) Do you happen to be playing as Warrior? and C) Do you happen to have a Kezan? If the answer is yes to either of those last 2 questions, then you automatically win the game. Does that sound like good design to anyone here?
While I agree luck is an element when fighting a freeze mage, that also applies to everyone else: when I'm fighting a Handlock, and I have no choice but to bring him down to 14 health so I can threaten lethal next turn, does he just happen to have 2 Molten Giants and Protector in hand? Did that Druid draw Thaurissan and every combo card right on curve? I've played GP Warrior and it is NOT easy to hold your enemy off for 8+ turns while being unable to use your Whirlwinds (gotta save em for combo many times) and virtually having nothing on the board to defend you but some Gnomish Inventors. Sure, it's easy to remember all those games where the Warrior just happens to have a weapon at every moment he needs it, but anyone who tries to play the Warrior themselves will find the games where that doesn't happen can often be a real struggle.
Also, aren't you over-simplifying the matchup with the Warrior comment? I don't play Warrior often and I have more wins than losses against Freeze Mage, and while we can debate that perhaps the enemy Freeze Mage just wasn't skilled enough, then that implies that the deck actually requires a lot of thought to use and play against and therefore is very interactive, even if there is nothing on the board. The deck has a lot of straightforward weaknesses - silence in general just wrecks it, sticky minions tend to eat up a lot of removal that they were hoping to save for your face, and hard removal tends to only have one target - Doomsayer.
IMO Freeze Mage should NOT exist for the exact reason listed above. It's a deck that has pretty much 0 board interaction and the entire match is determed purely by A) order of cards draw, B) Do you happen to be playing as Warrior? and C) Do you happen to have a Kezan? If the answer is yes to either of those last 2 questions, then you automatically win the game. Does that sound like good design to anyone here?
While I agree luck is an element when fighting a freeze mage, that also applies to everyone else: when I'm fighting a Handlock, and I have no choice but to bring him down to 14 health so I can threaten lethal next turn, does he just happen to have 2 Molten Giants and Protector in hand? Did that Druid draw Thaurissan and every combo card right on curve? I've played GP Warrior and it is NOT easy to hold your enemy off for 8+ turns while being unable to use your Whirlwinds (gotta save em for combo many times) and virtually having nothing on the board to defend you but some Gnomish Inventors. Sure, it's easy to remember all those games where the Warrior just happens to have a weapon at every moment he needs it, but anyone who tries to play the Warrior themselves will find the games where that doesn't happen can often be a real struggle.
Also, aren't you over-simplifying the matchup with the Warrior comment? I don't play Warrior often and I have more wins than losses against Freeze Mage, and while we can debate that perhaps the enemy Freeze Mage just wasn't skilled enough, then that implies that the deck actually requires a lot of thought to use and play against and therefore is very interactive, even if there is nothing on the board. The deck has a lot of straightforward weaknesses - silence in general just wrecks it, sticky minions tend to eat up a lot of removal that they were hoping to save for your face, and hard removal tends to only have one target - Doomsayer.
Am i over-simplifying the matchup with the Warrior comment? Nope and it has nothing to do with board interaction. As soon as you hero power a couple of times the game is essentially over, since Freeze Mage has almost no win condition aside from Alex putting you at 15hp.
As a matter of fact, I wanted to test that thoery to the extreme the last time I played against Freeze Mage with Warrior. I decided to not play any minions at all or deal any face dmg whatsoever. Instead I just sat there doing nothing but hero power+removal. It was as I suspected, the Mage couldn't deal enough dmg through the use of all his cards and died solely to drawing lava lol. I'd say that's a pretty lopsided matchup, no?
As for luck being an element in other matchups, there's a key difference. There is board interaction and yes SOMETIMES draw order will decide everything, but many times the decisions you make will play a role in who wins and who loses. With Freeze mage, your decisions are almost never going to matter (from either player really), the game is going to play out based upon order of card draw. It's boring, it's non-interactive and it's exactly what Blizzard said they didn't want.
I think that if you took away charge from FB when attack goes above 3... that would fix it. Maybe partially fix that by letting FB give charge it it is put down late in the turn (ie you draw it).
Blizzard should nerf GP! I play the deck, I love it but it's kinda unfair when the opp have only one win condition against you and you have more. ^^
Haters gonna hate
Haters gonna hate?? Seriously that is the dumbest thing I have heard in decades.. You just made the entire community dumber for saying it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When people come to you and say everything is relative, they are not trying to liberate you, they are trying to enslave you and they are damned close to succeeding
I decided at this rather late hour to try to play the game again.. So here's how it went..
7 games played.
5 Grim Patron Warrior = all losses.
1 Tempo Mage = Victory
1 Freeze Mage with Deathlords = loss
I played Druid - both ramp and combo, Paladin - control, Hunter - mid range.
I've come to the conclusion that I will just call it quits until there is some fix. Again this is Casual mode, which is clearly in need of a name change to "Super Duper Ultra Uber Competitive Mode" You can disagree with me and that's fine, but in my opinion anyone who plays decks like Grim Patron Warrior or Face Hunter, decks made to ladder, in Casual mode is a douchebag. Take that nonsense to ladder and play there.
So until Blizzard fixes this game, whether we're talking about decks like Grim Patron Warrior or Face Hunter, or Casual mode by making it a fun place for new players to learn, not another cent from myself nor will I play or purchase any Activision or Blizzard games.
And just as a side note I did a rough check and it's around $2,500 on Hearthstone alone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When people come to you and say everything is relative, they are not trying to liberate you, they are trying to enslave you and they are damned close to succeeding
Seems to me people are always going to be upset about one type of deck that sucks the fun out of the game for them. But it's not the same deck that is being hated usually. I'm not a fan of playing against Patrons, but at least it's winnable for my Hunter, unlike control warrior.
Speaking for myself, I get enraged while playing against a freeze mage with their Antonidas spam. But that's no reason to nerf that deck imo, as long as it's not winning from everyone. Just one-shot tricks need to be nerfed, like the OTK warrior from the past.
Same goes for face hunter, yes they are annoying, but can you win if you want by using some taunts or heals.
Btw if you play combo druid against Patron, it's pretty obvious you will lose because it takes you too long to build a board. Hearthstone is a bit rock-paper-scissor in that way. Patrons need to be bursted down from the start.
As we all know, Blizzard buffed Warsong Commanderimmediately prior to the release of BRM.
In fact, this wasn't so much a buff as fixing a bug - Blizzard had long acknowledged that WSC wasn't functioning as was intended (played vs summoned) but had done nothing about it being, as they are (sadly), very anti-buff.
The fact that they finally addressed this issue as Grim Patron was about to be released suggests that GP was a card in which they had invested significant hopes. Warrior only really had one competitive deck which was extremely expensive in terms of dust ("Wallet Warrior") and they clearly didn't like the fact that only a small percentage of players were capable of playing Warrior in ranked play.
Thus, they designed a card for BRM to enable a much cheaper competitive deck for Warrior. Blizzard correctly identified that all of the expensive legendaries in Control Warrior were utilised within its end-game and could be replaced by a combo suite based around (mostly) Soulbound cards and a new addition, Grim Patron.
This explains why Blizzard finally buffed Warsong Commander immediately before the BRM release.
However, most of us would agree that Blizzard probably didn't realise exactly how powerful GP Warrior would become.
My view on how to resolve this is similar to the majority of views expressed in this thread.
Grim Patron isn't the problem. Although a neutral card, GP isn't causing problems elsewhere so the fault must lie within the exclusive Warrior card pool.
Grim Patron was designed in order to enable a whole new archetype so he should be protected since this is a very worthy goal.
Frothing Berserker isn't the problem per se. Frothing has existed in its current form since the game's inception and he hasn't been considered to be broken (or even used much by most players) during all this time. If Grim Patron were banned, I would imagine that most players would mothball Frothing pretty quickly.
Similarly, Battle Rage was rarely utilised prior to GP Warrior becoming a thing. The card itself is a little worrying as it will always be either unplayable or broken, but I'm not convinced that nerfing it is the best solution to the GP Warrior issue.
Warsong Commander is the issue here. However, I don't think that the buff from Played to Summoned is the issue. Good card design should see each card acting as one would expect from a first reading. This is a theory heavily espoused by Mark Rosewater, M:tG's design guru, and makes a lot of sense. For me, the pre-BRM buff just made the card act in a more intuitive manner. However, I don't feel that it is intuitive that it should be granting Charge to cards with greater than 3 Attack.
The text on Warsong Commander currently reads, "Whenever you summon a minion with 3 or less Attack, give it Charge." so it is currently acting in accordance with the exact wording but wouldn't the card be more eloquent (and the metagame be more attractive) if it instead read :
"Your minions with 3 or less attack have Charge."
This wording would avoid any confusion between Summoning and Playing a minion and would also get around the issue with Frothing Berserker.
It is also shorter, simpler and more intuitive.
As mentioned above, I do also feel that Battle Rage is a slightly unhealthy card but would hold fire on it for now. The card design is a lovely idea, giving Warrior some thematic card draw. However, it will always be either largely unplayed or totally broken - drawing 2 cards for 2 mana, but with a fairly strict condition to be met first, is fine, but whenever a certain deck can consistently draw 3 - 5+ cards for 2 mana then the card will become a problem. This is even more of an issue for combo decks and even worse when Emperor Thaurissan is included.
Personally, I would like for GP Warrior to remain within the competitive metagame, so any nerf should be very gentle. I feel that a rewording of the WSC text would achieve this while forcing the deck to focus more upon the Grim Patron combo itself, rather than the Frothing Berserker angle. I even suspect that Frothing Berserker would probably still be played within the deck, so this suggestion seems to be the gentlest intervention which would satisfy the requirements of today's metagame.
Gentle? it needs the bejaysis nerfed out of it. It's ruined the game IMO. Every streamer these days is running it, which in turn makes it more popular and more cancerous. What makes me laugh are warrior players who defend it, yet moan about Hunters. GP warrior is WORSE! than any Hunter I've faced. And I'm playing since Beta. I could join in and play it myself I guess, but I'd actually be ashamed ... I'd rather play face Hunter, I'd feel better about myself. Just my tu'pence on it.
Hooded Claw, you are right on. A small change to Warsong will fix the one turn kill problem while letting the deck still be useful. As a reward, I would let it give charge to minion on the board instead of summoned only. That would let you play it after calling up the Grim's and get an extra turn of life out of the Warsong.
Thanks for your 2k. I hope you quit knowing that it was your own money that made the development of BRM possible. You are kinda responsible for Patrons running the show.
well its not the grim its frothing+warsong what is unbalanced as shit.
i had 27 with my mage, had next turn lethal with only antonidas+ mana wryn and boom bot on board.
he play warsong+ grim+1 fuckin frothing( he had 1 turn emperor !) inner range had deathbite+ 1 whirlewind, and i died from a fucking 20 dmg from frothing, and pattrons didnt even had to attack all of them.
and this happend 2 times in a row.
i did clear his board before with flamestrike ( had patron without warsong on board.)
I agree that none of Patron, Frothing or Battle Rage is a problem.
Specially for Battle Rage, many professional players have developed a countermeasure against this card, just like the way they play around Molten Giant. If you play heavy control decks it's very often that the Warrior remain uninjured before turn 6. One cannot perform this strategy if playing any current cancer decks, that's the gimmick.
Besides. It is the first Battle Rage, that one without injured Patrons, that tells whether it's balanced or not. There is nothing wrong with Battle Rage without Patrons because Warrior is a class with fewer minions IN THE DECK than average, where Battle Rage can't have many minions. With Patrons you pay 5+2 plus whatever you need to spawn and injure the Patrons, and then draw 3 to 5 cards, which is only as problematic as things like Ancient of Lore.
They can nerf Battle Rage like, the Warrior can only draw one additional card when below X health, instead of just being injured. Such nerf will be bad because both '12 health or less' Warrior spells have not been good enough. I don't think they will do this because that would fall very badly against combo Druid and whatever Rogue.
Warsong Commander isn't an easy pick to nerf. When a new player joins Hearthstone, he can use Warsong Commander plus Gurubashi Berserker, both free and basic, to have a charger with relatively high attack. As he proceeds, Warsong Commander works with Raging Worgen and that 2-drop female Pirate too. So it seems that's how the commander should be working, giving minions with 3 or less attack charge, then throw in other resource to increase their attack for a higher charge blow. This goes even the same for Frothing.
GPW is hated because it can be easily constructed to counter cancer decks in the games. It will take too long to have everyone playing enough control decks to counter it. It is not an aggro deck itself so I doubt any incoming nerf against with the reason of being too fast.
I hate the interaction with Warsong and Frothing. I hate it hate it hate it. I do not like it when I get OTK'ed from an empty board and I didn't have a chance to make any reaction plays at all. I thought Blizzard nerfed down Miracle Rogue to stop this shit. STOP MAKING MECHANICS THAT CAN WIPE OUT 100% HP FROM AN EMPTY BOARD, YOU CUNTS.
I get annoyed like that about Priest, they steal all your cards and when your a CW that really hurts cuz 90% of the time they get a legendary from you.
I've read through what everyone has said.
A few additional points.
1) I was referring to the deck as Grim Patron, not the particular card. If I had to pick a certain card that needs a fix I would have to say the Frothing Bezerker card. Playing it as a 2 attack minion and having it buffed to a 20/4 and still having charge is just broken and needs some sort of fix. There's nothing you can do against it and it's not fun to play against at all.
2) I don't play ladder. I'm over 40 years old and I play Casual mode. If people want to be Mr. Kolento and play ladder feel free, that's what ladder is for, I do not. I want to play fun decks that are good but enjoyable for me to play and for my opponent to play against. I have done this without problem for over a year, that is until this Grim Patron Warrior deck came about. My friends list are almost all people who added me to say, "hey that's a really original cool deck!" I was a professional Magic The Gathering player from 1994 to 1999. I know how to make a good deck.
3) This is related to my previous statement. I do not want to make a deck to simply counter Grim Patron Warrior. That's not what I have invested so much money for, it's not why I play. I play for fun. This is what Casual mode is supposed to be about. Fun decks, deck testing, finishing your quests, meeting new people. It's not called Super Uber Mega Competition 5000 Mode. Casual has a meaning, it's a well defined word.
4) In the end people can and should be able to play the game they want. If they want to bully others in Casual mode with insane decks, fine. If people want to bully new players in the low ranks over and over again to farm, fine. I and many others have an opinion of those kinds of people and they know what that opinion is and they can live with that.
5) I think there is a solution and I think that solution wouldn't hurt anyone and is perfectly fair and easy (perhaps) to implement. Have a feature where you can select classes, again in Casual Mode, that you wish to exclude. For example, don't like Hunters? Click the box and in your game search you won't face Hunters (sorry lol 'face hunters'). If you're like me and you have huge problems with Grim Patron Warrior, click the box and you won't match up against any Warriors. Maybe you want to know how your Priest deck does against Rogues? Click the other 8 boxes and you'll match up against Rogues. I think this feature would be a good addition to the game and I can't come up with any reasons why it's unreasonable.
In conclusion I really would like to thank each and every one of you who have taken time out of their lives to respond and comment here, I read what everyone says and appreciate your thoughts and opinions, even though I may disagree with some. I grew up in a time when people could agree to disagree and I served half my life in the military with the philosophy that "I may disagree with what you say but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." So keep your thoughts coming!
I've played a few games today, I wanted to try the Tavern Brawl out and I decided to head into Casual Mode, as usual for me, just to test the waters. I did quite well and had fun, ran into some crazy Druid decks which I love to see and even an old school Rogue with Gazatron Engineers! I did eventually match up against 1 Grim Patron Warrior and lost to a 12/4 Frothing with the Warrior at 4 health, I was playing Priest. I had a Deathlord and 2 other minions on board, he cleared them and Frothing'd me.. This was 1 turn after I cleared a board of Warsong and Patrons with Holy Nova (had a spell damage buff). So I was close, but I've found over the last couple weeks that when I do beat Grim Patron Warrior it's almost always because the player is inexperienced playing it, I capitalize on their mistakes. This is changing, people are getting more refined decks and better at playing them, making it much more difficult to beat. How do you stop a giant one turn kill Frothing? I don't see how you can, it's not even your turn.. Maybe Freezing Trap if you're a lucky Hunter I guess or Vaporize if you're a lucky Mage. I had been playing Priest a lot as it's one of three classes I need to get to 60 and I want to make a gold Murloc deck doggone it! :D
Again thanks for reading my ramblings, opinions and frustrations. Thanks for posting your thoughts, opinions, frustrations and criticisms. Keep them coming! :)
When people come to you and say everything is relative, they are not trying to liberate you, they are trying to enslave you and they are damned close to succeeding
While I agree luck is an element when fighting a freeze mage, that also applies to everyone else: when I'm fighting a Handlock, and I have no choice but to bring him down to 14 health so I can threaten lethal next turn, does he just happen to have 2 Molten Giants and Protector in hand? Did that Druid draw Thaurissan and every combo card right on curve? I've played GP Warrior and it is NOT easy to hold your enemy off for 8+ turns while being unable to use your Whirlwinds (gotta save em for combo many times) and virtually having nothing on the board to defend you but some Gnomish Inventors. Sure, it's easy to remember all those games where the Warrior just happens to have a weapon at every moment he needs it, but anyone who tries to play the Warrior themselves will find the games where that doesn't happen can often be a real struggle.
Also, aren't you over-simplifying the matchup with the Warrior comment? I don't play Warrior often and I have more wins than losses against Freeze Mage, and while we can debate that perhaps the enemy Freeze Mage just wasn't skilled enough, then that implies that the deck actually requires a lot of thought to use and play against and therefore is very interactive, even if there is nothing on the board. The deck has a lot of straightforward weaknesses - silence in general just wrecks it, sticky minions tend to eat up a lot of removal that they were hoping to save for your face, and hard removal tends to only have one target - Doomsayer.
Am i over-simplifying the matchup with the Warrior comment? Nope and it has nothing to do with board interaction. As soon as you hero power a couple of times the game is essentially over, since Freeze Mage has almost no win condition aside from Alex putting you at 15hp.
As a matter of fact, I wanted to test that thoery to the extreme the last time I played against Freeze Mage with Warrior. I decided to not play any minions at all or deal any face dmg whatsoever. Instead I just sat there doing nothing but hero power+removal. It was as I suspected, the Mage couldn't deal enough dmg through the use of all his cards and died solely to drawing lava lol. I'd say that's a pretty lopsided matchup, no?
As for luck being an element in other matchups, there's a key difference. There is board interaction and yes SOMETIMES draw order will decide everything, but many times the decisions you make will play a role in who wins and who loses. With Freeze mage, your decisions are almost never going to matter (from either player really), the game is going to play out based upon order of card draw. It's boring, it's non-interactive and it's exactly what Blizzard said they didn't want.
I think that if you took away charge from FB when attack goes above 3... that would fix it. Maybe partially fix that by letting FB give charge it it is put down late in the turn (ie you draw it).
I would somehow agree with that. But it's also unlikely Blizzard would nerf it soon, or maybe even not nerfing at all.
A Priest Main since March 2014.
Blizzard should nerf GP! I play the deck, I love it but it's kinda unfair when the opp have only one win condition against you and you have more. ^^
Haters gonna hate
Haters gonna hate?? Seriously that is the dumbest thing I have heard in decades.. You just made the entire community dumber for saying it.
When people come to you and say everything is relative, they are not trying to liberate you, they are trying to enslave you and they are damned close to succeeding
I decided at this rather late hour to try to play the game again.. So here's how it went..
7 games played.
5 Grim Patron Warrior = all losses.
1 Tempo Mage = Victory
1 Freeze Mage with Deathlords = loss
I played Druid - both ramp and combo, Paladin - control, Hunter - mid range.
I've come to the conclusion that I will just call it quits until there is some fix. Again this is Casual mode, which is clearly in need of a name change to "Super Duper Ultra Uber Competitive Mode" You can disagree with me and that's fine, but in my opinion anyone who plays decks like Grim Patron Warrior or Face Hunter, decks made to ladder, in Casual mode is a douchebag. Take that nonsense to ladder and play there.
So until Blizzard fixes this game, whether we're talking about decks like Grim Patron Warrior or Face Hunter, or Casual mode by making it a fun place for new players to learn, not another cent from myself nor will I play or purchase any Activision or Blizzard games.
And just as a side note I did a rough check and it's around $2,500 on Hearthstone alone.
When people come to you and say everything is relative, they are not trying to liberate you, they are trying to enslave you and they are damned close to succeeding
Seems to me people are always going to be upset about one type of deck that sucks the fun out of the game for them. But it's not the same deck that is being hated usually. I'm not a fan of playing against Patrons, but at least it's winnable for my Hunter, unlike control warrior.
Speaking for myself, I get enraged while playing against a freeze mage with their Antonidas spam. But that's no reason to nerf that deck imo, as long as it's not winning from everyone. Just one-shot tricks need to be nerfed, like the OTK warrior from the past.
Same goes for face hunter, yes they are annoying, but can you win if you want by using some taunts or heals.
Btw if you play combo druid against Patron, it's pretty obvious you will lose because it takes you too long to build a board. Hearthstone is a bit rock-paper-scissor in that way. Patrons need to be bursted down from the start.
If Dr. Balanced is staying balanced, this deck isn't going anywhere
As we all know, Blizzard buffed Warsong Commander immediately prior to the release of BRM.
In fact, this wasn't so much a buff as fixing a bug - Blizzard had long acknowledged that WSC wasn't functioning as was intended (played vs summoned) but had done nothing about it being, as they are (sadly), very anti-buff.
The fact that they finally addressed this issue as Grim Patron was about to be released suggests that GP was a card in which they had invested significant hopes. Warrior only really had one competitive deck which was extremely expensive in terms of dust ("Wallet Warrior") and they clearly didn't like the fact that only a small percentage of players were capable of playing Warrior in ranked play.
Thus, they designed a card for BRM to enable a much cheaper competitive deck for Warrior. Blizzard correctly identified that all of the expensive legendaries in Control Warrior were utilised within its end-game and could be replaced by a combo suite based around (mostly) Soulbound cards and a new addition, Grim Patron.
This explains why Blizzard finally buffed Warsong Commander immediately before the BRM release.
However, most of us would agree that Blizzard probably didn't realise exactly how powerful GP Warrior would become.
My view on how to resolve this is similar to the majority of views expressed in this thread.
The text on Warsong Commander currently reads, "Whenever you summon a minion with 3 or less Attack, give it Charge." so it is currently acting in accordance with the exact wording but wouldn't the card be more eloquent (and the metagame be more attractive) if it instead read :
"Your minions with 3 or less attack have Charge."
This wording would avoid any confusion between Summoning and Playing a minion and would also get around the issue with Frothing Berserker.
It is also shorter, simpler and more intuitive.
As mentioned above, I do also feel that Battle Rage is a slightly unhealthy card but would hold fire on it for now. The card design is a lovely idea, giving Warrior some thematic card draw. However, it will always be either largely unplayed or totally broken - drawing 2 cards for 2 mana, but with a fairly strict condition to be met first, is fine, but whenever a certain deck can consistently draw 3 - 5+ cards for 2 mana then the card will become a problem. This is even more of an issue for combo decks and even worse when Emperor Thaurissan is included.
Personally, I would like for GP Warrior to remain within the competitive metagame, so any nerf should be very gentle. I feel that a rewording of the WSC text would achieve this while forcing the deck to focus more upon the Grim Patron combo itself, rather than the Frothing Berserker angle. I even suspect that Frothing Berserker would probably still be played within the deck, so this suggestion seems to be the gentlest intervention which would satisfy the requirements of today's metagame.
Gentle? it needs the bejaysis nerfed out of it. It's ruined the game IMO. Every streamer these days is running it, which in turn makes it more popular and more cancerous. What makes me laugh are warrior players who defend it, yet moan about Hunters. GP warrior is WORSE! than any Hunter I've faced. And I'm playing since Beta. I could join in and play it myself I guess, but I'd actually be ashamed ... I'd rather play face Hunter, I'd feel better about myself. Just my tu'pence on it.
Hooded Claw, you are right on. A small change to Warsong will fix the one turn kill problem while letting the deck still be useful. As a reward, I would let it give charge to minion on the board instead of summoned only. That would let you play it after calling up the Grim's and get an extra turn of life out of the Warsong.
Thanks for your 2k. I hope you quit knowing that it was your own money that made the development of BRM possible. You are kinda responsible for Patrons running the show.
"Put your face in the light!" - Tirion Fordring
well its not the grim its frothing+warsong what is unbalanced as shit.
i had 27 with my mage, had next turn lethal with only antonidas+ mana wryn and boom bot on board.
he play warsong+ grim+1 fuckin frothing( he had 1 turn emperor !) inner range had deathbite+ 1 whirlewind, and i died from a fucking 20 dmg from frothing, and pattrons didnt even had to attack all of them.
and this happend 2 times in a row.
i did clear his board before with flamestrike ( had patron without warsong on board.)
I agree that none of Patron, Frothing or Battle Rage is a problem.
Specially for Battle Rage, many professional players have developed a countermeasure against this card, just like the way they play around Molten Giant. If you play heavy control decks it's very often that the Warrior remain uninjured before turn 6. One cannot perform this strategy if playing any current cancer decks, that's the gimmick.
Besides. It is the first Battle Rage, that one without injured Patrons, that tells whether it's balanced or not. There is nothing wrong with Battle Rage without Patrons because Warrior is a class with fewer minions IN THE DECK than average, where Battle Rage can't have many minions. With Patrons you pay 5+2 plus whatever you need to spawn and injure the Patrons, and then draw 3 to 5 cards, which is only as problematic as things like Ancient of Lore.
They can nerf Battle Rage like, the Warrior can only draw one additional card when below X health, instead of just being injured. Such nerf will be bad because both '12 health or less' Warrior spells have not been good enough. I don't think they will do this because that would fall very badly against combo Druid and whatever Rogue.
Warsong Commander isn't an easy pick to nerf. When a new player joins Hearthstone, he can use Warsong Commander plus Gurubashi Berserker, both free and basic, to have a charger with relatively high attack. As he proceeds, Warsong Commander works with Raging Worgen and that 2-drop female Pirate too. So it seems that's how the commander should be working, giving minions with 3 or less attack charge, then throw in other resource to increase their attack for a higher charge blow. This goes even the same for Frothing.
GPW is hated because it can be easily constructed to counter cancer decks in the games. It will take too long to have everyone playing enough control decks to counter it. It is not an aggro deck itself so I doubt any incoming nerf against with the reason of being too fast.
Feel the fury of the mountain.
I hate the interaction with Warsong and Frothing. I hate it hate it hate it. I do not like it when I get OTK'ed from an empty board and I didn't have a chance to make any reaction plays at all. I thought Blizzard nerfed down Miracle Rogue to stop this shit. STOP MAKING MECHANICS THAT CAN WIPE OUT 100% HP FROM AN EMPTY BOARD, YOU CUNTS.
I've never paid any money on this game and rarely lose to patrons maybe you just suck