Scorpyon I main warlock and the mages usually have more cards than I do and at a discount on top of that. Mages definitely need to be addressed
What draw options do you add to your deck, out of interest? And do you HP every turn? Only because I have played as Warlock countless times against Mage, and the only time they ever outdraw me is when I play some form of aggro deck. Control Warlock outmatches Mage for drawing power by miles if played correctly.
I think that there are two main problems when considering whether RSW is too powerful or not.
The first is that its power level in Wild is always going to be far different to its power level in Standard. With the wealth of cards and poptions available in Wild, it makes sense that this would amplify the power of RSW considerably because you can build around it more easily. However, this does not necessarily translate to Standard so succinctly, and I would imagine (and there is certainly historical precedent set to confirm this) that Blizzard would look to make sure that Standard is given the greater consideration in terms of balance than Wild is. That is not to say that Wild is ignored completely - and there have been plenty of times that Blizzard has addressed cards with Wild effect in mind. But more that in Standard the card certainly does not command the same regard of power level than that of Wild.
The second problem is in the requirements surrounding the card - namely in this case, the fact that a deck really requires at least a heavy amount of spells to minions (if not spells-only). Because without this restriction, the card becomes a lot weaker, and in some cases a worse Arcane Intellect (if the draw is poor). And it is this tempering of the build requirements that brings the power level of the card down into a much more balanced perspective. Again, this is also based heavily on the value of the other cards in the deck, rather than this one in particular.
It is an enabler card, not a power card. Without the means to actually challenge the opponent (essentially the power of the other cards in the deck), it becomes more and more benign.
All fair enough. Seems like its a card that is debatable in power level and usefulness, but at the same time I dont want to sidetrack the thread itself. (I think the comparison to Gadgetzan has been made and discussed and people can make their own minds on it).
and I am noting the OPs post above on his final thoughts about it, too.
I wouldnt say it is ever useless. Take worst case scenario. You and opponent are on the draw. You draw him and you have a 4/4 in play. The cost is irrelevant since you’re floating 4 mana on that turn anyway. But you are now up on tempo. Sure, its not the best use for him by a long stretch, but he is still useful in that scenario. The only time he is useless is when out of options and facing a board of minions. Even if he is the last card in your deck, he has a usefulness.
if RSF is the last card in your deck it is worse than useless.
None of this implies that RSF is any less powerful as a card than it is. Its a very strong card (in the righr situation under the right circumstances, in the right deck built around it). But in those same circumstances Gadget is much stronger.
Thats the key to this particular point. You cant really cherry pick the dream circumstances for RSF and then say it’s better than a 6 mana 4/4 because its an unfair comparison.
Let me finally just say that all of this comes off the back of the original claim that RSF lets you pretty much draw through your whole deck. My point is that no, it doesnt, but even if it did there are already cards/mechanics that do just this - and with much less set up / deck requirements - which people dont feel are a problem.
The comparison is perfectly valid. Your assertion that my example was about power levels of the cards is not. Thats the point.
Actually, that said, Gadgetzan actually dwarfs RSF’s power level considerably, so your argument would have been hopelessly incorrect in any case. Gadgetzan has use in so many more situations, AND is a neutral card AND does not have a bad downside AND actually does allow you to draw your whole deck whereas RSF draws two cards, possibly for worse cost than Arcane Intellect.
The more you consider the actual facts of the two cards, the more you would have to admit that Gadgetzan is a MUCH more powerful card overall.
Mage desperately needs a nerf in wild. My friend just told me now diamond 1-4 is almost 100% otk flamewaker mage and theres no counters. Even aggro loses to otk mage.
If a deck had no counters, as your friend claims, it would be prevalent through the entire meta, not relegated to a minor section of it. And everyone would only play that deck, knowing that there was no other deck that could beat it (barring the mirror).
I think your friend might be exaggerating a little. Maybe to impress you...?
Rogues and Druids (and to a lesser extent Warlocks) have been doing the deck cycling thing for a long time in previous expansions - Gadgetzan Auctioneer has been a central figure in that regard for a long time.
That said, the OP Post probably belongs in the Salt thread, but I'll let it be for the moment and see how this progresses.
hey guys, lets not talk about an oppressive unfun deck that ruins standard which blizzard had the opportunity to nerf but could not understand that refreshing spring water is a ridiculously OP card. Let's keep those posts in the nerd rage ghetto so people are not confronted with things like this.
Also, if you think Gadgeteer is similar to RSW in power level.......just lol.
Oh, you're saying you WANT this kind of discussion to be curtailed and ignored, and not given the reasonable benefit of the doubt - you know, like I LITERALLY just did right there? Maybe rethink your opinion on that one? You seemed to respond in haste.
Also, nobody compared power levels of anything, merely mechanics and decks that use that sort of mechanic. (Or specifically, a card that allows them to). Honestly, if you're not even going to read the posts properly.... yikes...!
Rogues and Druids (and to a lesser extent Warlocks) have been doing the deck cycling thing for a long time in previous expansions - Gadgetzan Auctioneer has been a central figure in that regard for a long time.
That said, the OP Post probably belongs in the Salt thread, but I'll let it be for the moment and see how this progresses.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
⚙
Learn More
Cosmetics
Related Cards
Card Pools
✕
×
PopCard Settings
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Elements settings
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
What draw options do you add to your deck, out of interest? And do you HP every turn?
Only because I have played as Warlock countless times against Mage, and the only time they ever outdraw me is when I play some form of aggro deck. Control Warlock outmatches Mage for drawing power by miles if played correctly.
I think that there are two main problems when considering whether RSW is too powerful or not.
The first is that its power level in Wild is always going to be far different to its power level in Standard. With the wealth of cards and poptions available in Wild, it makes sense that this would amplify the power of RSW considerably because you can build around it more easily. However, this does not necessarily translate to Standard so succinctly, and I would imagine (and there is certainly historical precedent set to confirm this) that Blizzard would look to make sure that Standard is given the greater consideration in terms of balance than Wild is. That is not to say that Wild is ignored completely - and there have been plenty of times that Blizzard has addressed cards with Wild effect in mind. But more that in Standard the card certainly does not command the same regard of power level than that of Wild.
The second problem is in the requirements surrounding the card - namely in this case, the fact that a deck really requires at least a heavy amount of spells to minions (if not spells-only). Because without this restriction, the card becomes a lot weaker, and in some cases a worse Arcane Intellect (if the draw is poor). And it is this tempering of the build requirements that brings the power level of the card down into a much more balanced perspective. Again, this is also based heavily on the value of the other cards in the deck, rather than this one in particular.
It is an enabler card, not a power card. Without the means to actually challenge the opponent (essentially the power of the other cards in the deck), it becomes more and more benign.
All fair enough. Seems like its a card that is debatable in power level and usefulness, but at the same time I dont want to sidetrack the thread itself. (I think the comparison to Gadgetzan has been made and discussed and people can make their own minds on it).
and I am noting the OPs post above on his final thoughts about it, too.
I wouldnt say it is ever useless.
Take worst case scenario. You and opponent are on the draw. You draw him and you have a 4/4 in play. The cost is irrelevant since you’re floating 4 mana on that turn anyway. But you are now up on tempo. Sure, its not the best use for him by a long stretch, but he is still useful in that scenario. The only time he is useless is when out of options and facing a board of minions. Even if he is the last card in your deck, he has a usefulness.
if RSF is the last card in your deck it is worse than useless.
None of this implies that RSF is any less powerful as a card than it is. Its a very strong card (in the righr situation under the right circumstances, in the right deck built around it). But in those same circumstances Gadget is much stronger.
Thats the key to this particular point. You cant really cherry pick the dream circumstances for RSF and then say it’s better than a 6 mana 4/4 because its an unfair comparison.
Let me finally just say that all of this comes off the back of the original claim that RSF lets you pretty much draw through your whole deck. My point is that no, it doesnt, but even if it did there are already cards/mechanics that do just this - and with much less set up / deck requirements - which people dont feel are a problem.
The comparison is perfectly valid. Your assertion that my example was about power levels of the cards is not.
Thats the point.
Actually, that said, Gadgetzan actually dwarfs RSF’s power level considerably, so your argument would have been hopelessly incorrect in any case. Gadgetzan has use in so many more situations, AND is a neutral card AND does not have a bad downside AND actually does allow you to draw your whole deck whereas RSF draws two cards, possibly for worse cost than Arcane Intellect.
The more you consider the actual facts of the two cards, the more you would have to admit that Gadgetzan is a MUCH more powerful card overall.
If a deck had no counters, as your friend claims, it would be prevalent through the entire meta, not relegated to a minor section of it. And everyone would only play that deck, knowing that there was no other deck that could beat it (barring the mirror).
I think your friend might be exaggerating a little. Maybe to impress you...?
Oh, you're saying you WANT this kind of discussion to be curtailed and ignored, and not given the reasonable benefit of the doubt - you know, like I LITERALLY just did right there?
Maybe rethink your opinion on that one? You seemed to respond in haste.
Also, nobody compared power levels of anything, merely mechanics and decks that use that sort of mechanic. (Or specifically, a card that allows them to). Honestly, if you're not even going to read the posts properly.... yikes...!
/smh
Rogues and Druids (and to a lesser extent Warlocks) have been doing the deck cycling thing for a long time in previous expansions - Gadgetzan Auctioneer has been a central figure in that regard for a long time.
That said, the OP Post probably belongs in the Salt thread, but I'll let it be for the moment and see how this progresses.