Hearthpwn

I found a response (sort of) commenting Sire by the dev team:

”Let’s address the most notable exclusion from this patch - the Brann/Kael’thas/Denathrius combo. These three Neutral legendaries have been very effective across multiple classes and are already causing some frustration among players.

These cards are very much on our radar, and I think the odds that one or more of these cards eventually gets changed is high. That said, we felt it was premature to nerf marquee cards from the new expansion which are largely accomplishing their goals (they’re exciting, and they’re ending games). That said, we’re worried about the speed at which these cards are closing out games, and the play-against frustration that is clearly present here. We’re going to wait and see how they do in the new meta before making changes.”

Underlined for emphasis. My takeaway is that they’re aware of the frustration involved but, you know, it’s their MARQUEE cards… Seems like the driving force here is marketing, not dealing with “play-against frustration”.

”Hmm i get your points in the beginning, but there is no reason to be extra polite when people claim things like aggro=stupid, control player=superior person. Since that is offensive on its own.”

Only, what I said is that aggro decks were beginner decks. Being a beginner doesn’t mean being stupid from my take on things. I do think playing a 40 card deck requires more skill as it involves dealing with all stages of the game then playing a 30 cards aggro deck like Implock. You have smart people playing aggro decks and you also have people who wouldn’t be able to win in a deck which doesn’t involve rushing your opponent asap due to their inexperience. That’s my opinion. It really can’t be disproven, that’s something that you can either agree or disagree with. 

“You make the point I am not able to formulate that well. ”
If you can’t formulate your arguments well, that’s in you, please do avoid comments like “since I have to spell it out for you” and “olol” comments, it’s up to you to develop your points in a convincing and eloquent fashion, not your readers. Just provide your argument and leave the nasty undertone, it really doesn’t do much to support your rationale and only ends up making you come across as a bit of a cunt.

To be fair, I’d say Implock is a special case in the aggroverse which makes it especially aggravating to face as it’s got almost everything:

1. Imps for aggro.
2. Curses for aoe and removal
3. card draw.
4. Denathtrius if the aggro fails

Aggro Druid doesn’t have time to run Sire and it doesn’t have efficient card draw, so when you’re done dealing with the initial wave or two, that’s it. In that sense, it’s a fair deck to face since it has a shortcoming and a downfall. Implock is relentless. 

Damage that go face is something that a slippery slope for card games like this one and should have major limitations. Bran+Denathtrius is one egregious instance. Once DK kicks in and the game start revolving about sacrificing minions, people will start to come around and Sire will get nerfed eventually.

I think the argument was : “Your opinion is invalid” followed by mock laughter. There’s nothing substantial there. 

This being said, I’d say that the more cards you deck holds, the harder it is to pilot since there’s more variety and sticking to a single wincon is harder. 
I wouldn’t say pulling a ‘Brandon+Denathtrius” is deep strategy either however. It’s about as simple as running Implock. Slightly more complex is running tons of cards with rogue to get an 18 weapon + stealth minions on turn 5. If you do manage to counter attack however, you’ve won. Aggro don’t need to know how to deal with anything besides the early game since it doesn’t get any further than that, so yes, they are aimed at people who would struggle in longer games.

Edit: Quest Priest requires more skill than Implock as you can’t just systematically vomit spells randomly to finish the quest asap. 

I’d say that playing Implock and aggro Druid requires very little skill, especially Implock. There’s no strategy involved, Implock uses the exact same strategy in every game. It doesn’t matter what they play against, which makes me wonder how it can be fun in any way. It’s like playing chess and using the exact same strategy regardless of what the other player does, which an experienced player wouldn’t do. They adapt to the board. Implock requires no adaptation of any sort. 
It’s ok, but many players who reach legend on Implock wouldn’t be able to beat silver if they had to use a 40 cards deck which requires a more diverse gameplay. It’s ok. Let’s just not pretend that playing a Implock requires deep strategy, because it doesn’t. 

“This isn't an "im salty" post, but playing against implock (for example) - you clear board after board, you finally stabilise, they're low on resources and then "boom" - game over.  Wow - much fun. ”
I wish I could upload more than once. This is so true. Aggro’s weakness should be that if you manage to push back the initial onslaught, you’re in for a victory (sort of like pushing back aggro Druid). Denathtrius provides a fail safe to what should be the downside of playing aggro (beginner decks). On the bright side, Implock players will temporarily try DK so there’ll be a window of a couple of days where that tumor inducing deck will be gone. Temporarily. As an aside, I’m not sure what fun there is to have to always follow the same strategy regardless of the opposition and go through the patterns. It really is a beginner deck.

Keep in mind that the whole Denathtrius fiasco is not an oversight as it hasn’t been fixed yet despite DK coming up which will abuse the mechanic to oblivion. This being said, with Theotar being nerfed so bad, people will likely include Patchwork or include all of them: Mutanus, Patchwork and Theotar just to make sure they deal with Denathtrius. 

As mentioned, reducing his cost and having him deal board damage would be plenty. 

I don’t know if anyone has watched the showcase for DK but if you think Denathtrius is bad now, wait until DK, it’s going to be nauseating. 

Totally agree. They could buff the initial lifesteal but have it not deal face damage. They could even lower his cost then. It could still be relevant as a life steal board clear, just enough with massive face damage already.