Hearthpwn

This isn't my thread, but the first poll is my poll (it was merged from another thread by an admin), so I'll explain the nuance associated with some of the choices. It should also be noted that my original thread DID have multiple polls, including one polling the preferred method of a nerf if there were to be one.

I have no idea where the second poll in this thread came from.

The first and last choices are the only absolutes. The last choice is based on a Star Wars quote to inject levity into an otherwise heated topic.

"Dr. Boom is probably overtuned, but not enough to warrant a nerf." represents two opinions that are similar enough to be the same option. One is that you feel the card is abnormally strong, but not to the point that the "drastic" action of a card nerf is necessary. This represents a thinking that card nerfs are a greater evil than slightly imbalanced cards, and that a nerf should only be an option if you feel the card is game-breaking, thus this can be an option for those who agree the card is OP, but not -game-breakingly- OP. The other line of thought associated with this option is that one may not necessarily think this specific card is OP, but may be concerned about the power creep it represents.

Quote from HomerRupaul jump

Quote from Bellumvinco jump

But what would a nerf look like?  a 6/6 with two 1/1 boom bots for Seven mana is still in my opinion a pretty good card.

Why do the stats need to be nerfed symmetrically? 7/5 would be nice, maybe even 7/4 at a stretch, maybe reducing the Boom Bots' Deathrattle maximum damage to 3. All these are realistic, keeping the card competitive, but increasing the possible answers to it (for example at 7/5 Loatheb can remove the main body, Swipe + Shapeshift clear the entire thing at a big health cost, etc).

Boom bots are capable of friendly fire. Only change needed and it just absolutely makes the most sense.

-It fits thematically; so much so that this is what everyone already assumed happened when the card was first announced.

-It doesn't decrease the "max power" of the card; the best result now will still be the best result then. It does change the worst result from "still pretty good" to "potentially bad"

-"But no one will ever play it again!" Bull.. unless you mean it's no longer an auto-include or people who don't like deckbuilding or in-game strategy will no longer have their easy button. Even with "bad results", it'll still be a powerful card, it'll still have its mech and deathrattle synergies, it'll still have three bodies to content with, one of which being a hulking 7/7.

I LONG for the day where I can see Boom being used in a deck creatively and not just because it's the no-brainer it currently is and say "huh, neat trick/nice play" instead of "ugh, not THIS shit again for the tenth time today".

Quote from ShadowOfFate jump

Quote from kwikill jump

Quote from ShadowOfFate jump

It's a 7/7 for 7 cost. The stats are average. 

It's a War Golem + 2x Wisp + 1.33X Crackle .. for 7 mana

Except that War Golem is fairly bad in constructed, Wisps are free, and Crackle is better. So crackle costs 2, and you add that to a powered 7 cost and it becomes op? Crackle has a higher top ceiling and floor damage then a boom bot and can be boosted by spell power. The boom bots do 2-4 each. 2-5 each if you count their attack which doesn't come into play if they are destroyed by something like a spell, AoE, or hero power. And unlike crackle, the targeting is random so you can't control it. 

 

You're going through gymnastics in your rebuttal. Just because wisps cost 0 mana doesn't make them "free"; those are two card slots. That war golem is "bad in constructed" is irrelevant; it's still the baseline for stat comparison. The explosion damage is 1.33x that of crackle.. to say crackle has a "higher floor and ceiling" is pretending there's only one boom bot, not two.. You lose control, but gain efficiency when comparing bots to crackle (given that it's two targets) so the comparison is still apt.

Quote from ShadowOfFate jump

Quote from kwikill jump

Quote from ShadowOfFate jump

I don't think he needs a nerf. It is rng after all. Certainly it is strong, but I don't think it crosses the line.

The problem is that RNG cards generally are supposed to have a range of "bad result to good result" (like Mad and Madder Bombers) or "inefficient result to super efficient result" (like Crackle).

Boom's range is "good result to LOLIWIN result", and that even at its lowest result, is -still- mathematically overvalued.

It's a 7/7 for 7 cost. The stats are average. 

It's a War Golem + 2x Wisp + 1.33X Crackle .. for 7 mana

Quote from ShadowOfFate jump

I don't think he needs a nerf. It is rng after all. Certainly it is strong, but I don't think it crosses the line.

The problem is that RNG cards generally are supposed to have a range of "bad result to good result" (like Mad and Madder Bombers) or "inefficient result to super efficient result" (like Crackle).

Boom's range is "good result to LOLIWIN result", and that even at its lowest result, is -still- mathematically overvalued.

Quote from Pennywise37 jump

Third question was added when you couldn't deal anymore with rational arguments from people who opposed your subjective behavior. So again your argument is hit and a miss :) Even still if I were to let slide your ignorance I would say that the way you phrased the only negative option is highly subjective. You just couldn't stop yourself from having another go at people who accept the reality of dr boom and had to have a bit of laugh by childishly phrasing of that answer. And yet you call yourself a researcher. Researcher is neutral above everything else. And you sir are not neutral. 

You can surely change your question, but right now it is irrelevant. I can ask you if oranges are pink or purple, but how it contributes to discussion?

 

The third question was added to mollify those that didn't understand the purpose of the first two, or perhaps felt they were being excluded. It originally wasn't included because it wasn't part of the original purpose, as there is already a massive thread about that, and this one was intended to focus on a singular aspect without cross-talk and muddied waters, but given that this was apparently going to happen anyway, and there weren't any other polls on -that- matter to my satisfaction, I may as well have included it.

I never claimed to be a researcher, I said this was data collection. As for the phrasing of the last option on the third question, it's a pop-culture reference intended to inject levity.

Quote from RDIFB jump

Changing Dr. Boom's stats wouldn't make that card much weaker. The Boom Bots are the actual problem. They should only do 1-3 damage, instead of 1-4. I honestly think that 1-2 damage might be too much of a nerf.

Softening the body would open him up to a few more removal options. Part of what makes him so effective is that while many hands may have a way to remove Boom OR neutralize/mitigate the bombs on the next turn, very few have a way to do both.

It's not what -I- would do, but its one of the options I always see bandied around.

Quote from Pennywise37 jump

And that is exactly the problem with your thread. You say that you are looking to collect opinions on the dr balanced, but at the same time you state that everyone who doesn't believe it should be amended, should frankly piss off. In case you are not aware, this is prime example of bias. So in fact, you are not looking for opinions, you are looking to reach out to the bunch of similarly unhappy players so you can bitch out together at unfairness of this world. This is a forum, you are free to do so, but please drop the act of researcher, as what you are doing here is not even remotely close to data collection.

As for your favorite argument about not asking AA people of their beers, this is just as wrong as this thread. Why exactly you don't ask them those questions? It's not like they will spend the rest of their life in a bubble and not be exposed to view/thought of beer. Therapy they undergo does not teach them to avoid the problem they have, but rather to deal with it, as situations arise. This is fundamental difference and I don't think you understand it.

 

 

Fine, I'll phrase it another way: you don't ask people in Chicago how they like living in Atlanta.

Do you feel the third question is inadequate and why?

Quote from Pennywise37 jump

Why all those threads are not simply trashed is beyond me. OP is simply angry kid who asks for the same debate that already happened, giving the very same arguments, while ignoring anyone who does not agree. That survey above the thread is just atrocity, it's more biased than mainstream media of this world. I don't really know what are you guys doing here, we should just ignore this thread and move on.

The purpose of this is mainly data collection on opinions. This isn't "OMG, NERF BOOMz NOW!1", this is asking detailed opinions, and presenting the data of those that respond.

The first two questions do not ignore people of a certain opinion; it is specifically not FOR them in the first place. Again, you don't go to an AA meeting and ask people there what their favorite beer is. The third question, however, IS specifically a place where they can be counted.

Quote from XunTsun jump

Why isn't there the option leave boom as he is in this poll? You deny the people who are ok with boom the way he is to cast a vote, which is basically just blatant bias and also admitting this very fact.

That option is very intentionally excluded from the first two questions because that is not what the questions are asking. You don't ask non-drinkers what kind of beer they like.

Alright, may as well make this a survey... added a third question; one even Boom lovers can answer.

Quote from zammE jump

You should have had an option in the poll that bombs deal damage to a random character, so that there's a chance to hit your own. Still a strong play vs a large board but doesnt guarantee to decimate a small board like it is today

That's exactly what the first option of the first poll is.

Alright, added a supplemental poll.. again, this is only for those that feel Dr. Boom is unbalanced. If you think Dr. Boom is fine, no need to comment.

What is your single biggest complaint about Dr. Boom? Which issue do you have about it that supersedes the others?

-Is your main issue that it has no clean counter or removal without taking damage? (there are a couple of combos that can do this, [such as Mass Dispel + Lightbomb]but only available to a handful of classes)

-Is it simply a math/powercreep issue? (in regards to how much value you get, in terms of raw stats and effect compared to its mana cost)

-It is too much of a tempo swing from behind and too much of a burial while ahead

A preface, this poll is specifically for those that think Dr. Boom needs an adjustment. If you think Dr. Boom is just fine, you need not apply.

Among the suggestions I've seen include:

-Have the damage from Boom Bot explosions be truly random, in that they can potentially damage the minions and face of the one who played him.

-Make the Boom Bots 0/1

-Reduce the maximum damage from boom Bot explosions to 2 or 3

-Reduce Dr. Boom's body to 7/5 or 7/4 to make him easier to remove.

-Increase Dr. Boom's mana cost to 8 or 9

One I haven't seen mentioned, but has precedent is to give Dr. Boom a detrimental deathrattle, such as the player losing a mana crystal or taking damage.

Quote from MisterQuick jump

 

 

 

Making bots deal damage to any random character is the most stupidest thing that I've ever heard. This make Dr.Boom unplayable.

It fits thematically (so much so that this is pretty much how everyone assumed it would work when it was first announced) and it doesn't make him unplayable at all. You still have a chance to get exactly the same result you would now. What is does is make him no longer be the way under-costed, never-the-wrong-answer, guaranteed instant value, often a sure tempo swing, ubiquitous OP monster he currently is.