Can we just not compare one Hero card to another for like, forever? There are some many angles how you can compare them and even then they are not comparable. For example you can take it from the perspective of 29 crappy cards+ DK, then Rexxar is obviously the king, followed by Thrall which will change your crappy cards to the ones that cost 3 more and Malfurion that has overall good heropower and battlecry. If we look at it from perspective in the decks, then obviously Kabal Hero cards are broken af. If we look at them form the angle of what only DK card does without the support, then Uther and Valeera are pretty powerfull too. You just can't compare them. Afterall, that is the reason why each of these Deathknights sees plays in one or both competitive formats.
I respectfully disagree. I think it's unreasonable to only compare cards that belong to the same exact niche. Then how would we ever compare cards?
Each DK has a battlecry. We can compare their impact and power level. Each DK has a hero power. We can compare them in terms of flexibility, value, etc. Each DK offers opportunities in terms of synergy. We can compare the potential of the synergies as well as the availability of those synergies.
For instance, are we really not allowed to compare Scourgelord Garrosh and Bloodreaver Gul'dan? I can say that demon synergy is more powerful than whirlwind synergy. I can say that 3 damage and lifestyle does much more in a game than whirlwind. I can say that creating a board that can both be offensive and defensive is often better than equipping an aoe weapon, since it catches up if you're behind and puts you further ahead if you were winning anyway. I just compared two DK'S, and sure, I can't compare them in a perfectly objective way like saying dealing 2 damage is better than dealing 1 damage for the same mana cost, but no one is going to say "Oh I can't say the warlock DK is better than the warrior DK because they cannot he compared, period." Sure, maybe the warrior DK will become better than the warlock DK in the future given new tools, but we can always look at them in perspective of the current support and what they offer.
I can see and understand the points that you are making but I'm still not convinced. While we can make an comparasment based on the current meta and synergies altogether with their battlecries and hero powers, we still cant compare them as a standalone cards. Because as a standalone cards, they are not comparable. Standalone Guldan is pretty shitty card. Standalone Anduin is pretty shitty card. Standalone Valeera is pretty shitty card. Yet all of them are see play and some of them are even the best in some categories. Guldan is obviously broken with Demons, while Valeera is powerfull with any cards. Rexxar as a standalone card can go everywhere. Then there are hero cards like Anduin and Hagatha that benefit from having cards in your deck. Then there are cards like Garosh which can be board swingy and benefit from damage synergy like Patrons. Every Hero card is powerfull and there is a reason that its played in its class. The strongest one can't be defined simply because there are too many categories and one Hero card cant be the best in all of them. Like if it's standalone card: Rexxar,Malfurion and Uther together with jaina wins. Is it card that relies around synergy and stuff? Then Guldan, Anduin and other ones. And so on and on in every category that you can possibly think of.
Can we just not compare one Hero card to another for like, forever? There are some many angles how you can compare them and even then they are not comparable. For example you can take it from the perspective of 29 crappy cards+ DK, then Rexxar is obviously the king, followed by Thrall which will change your crappy cards to the ones that cost 3 more and Malfurion that has overall good heropower and battlecry. If we look at it from perspective in the decks, then obviously Kabal Hero cards are broken af. If we look at them form the angle of what only DK card does without the support, then Uther and Valeera are pretty powerfull too. You just can't compare them. Afterall, that is the reason why each of these Deathknights sees plays in one or both competitive formats.
I can see and understand the points that you are making but I'm still not convinced. While we can make an comparasment based on the current meta and synergies altogether with their battlecries and hero powers, we still cant compare them as a standalone cards. Because as a standalone cards, they are not comparable. Standalone Guldan is pretty shitty card. Standalone Anduin is pretty shitty card. Standalone Valeera is pretty shitty card. Yet all of them are see play and some of them are even the best in some categories. Guldan is obviously broken with Demons, while Valeera is powerfull with any cards. Rexxar as a standalone card can go everywhere. Then there are hero cards like Anduin and Hagatha that benefit from having cards in your deck. Then there are cards like Garosh which can be board swingy and benefit from damage synergy like Patrons. Every Hero card is powerfull and there is a reason that its played in its class. The strongest one can't be defined simply because there are too many categories and one Hero card cant be the best in all of them. Like if it's standalone card: Rexxar,Malfurion and Uther together with jaina wins. Is it card that relies around synergy and stuff? Then Guldan, Anduin and other ones. And so on and on in every category that you can possibly think of.
Moving into https://outof.cards/members/firepaladinhs/decks
Can we just not compare one Hero card to another for like, forever? There are some many angles how you can compare them and even then they are not comparable. For example you can take it from the perspective of 29 crappy cards+ DK, then Rexxar is obviously the king, followed by Thrall which will change your crappy cards to the ones that cost 3 more and Malfurion that has overall good heropower and battlecry. If we look at it from perspective in the decks, then obviously Kabal Hero cards are broken af. If we look at them form the angle of what only DK card does without the support, then Uther and Valeera are pretty powerfull too. You just can't compare them. Afterall, that is the reason why each of these Deathknights sees plays in one or both competitive formats.
Moving into https://outof.cards/members/firepaladinhs/decks