Hearthpwn

You are insulting an inanimate fucking object [sic]. I don’t think it offends people but it makes you look childish and people are less likely to take your points seriously as it comes across like some petty school yard stuff.

In a perfect world people are supposed to read something and only focus on WHAT is written instead of HOW  and NOT care about the language/form used but rather focus on the concepts expressed. (Of course by HOW I mean in terms of form , obviously what you say still needs to be understandable but that should be the only requirement)

Naturally said concept needs to not be "hidden/implied" as that would defeat the purpose.

I understand that this is likely even beyond wishful thinking as we are "trained" by...everything and everyone to apply this wrong concept of "how it looks/sounds > what it's saying" and as sad as it may be that's the truth...people prefer better form to better concepts and this will forever bug me

That being said, the only person I saw addressing me directly, Carfusso, you're alright. I do wish you'd refrain from using some specific words when you make jabs at Tick, but I'll also say be as unkind to him as you want, he's a playing card. Just please be a little gentler for your readers, you never know who'll see that.

As I told the other guy that responded, I am aware of the fact that my "form" is quite rough because of...let's just say... "philosophical" takes on the matter... so I'm sorry if anyone got offended, my point was not to insult anyone but rather to get my point across on my distaste for specific things.
Even though I can't see how me insulting a card (that deserves all the hate it can get) could ever offend actual people I will consider starting to use [REDACTEDTUS] to try to get my points across (I refuse to address that abomination as a card in this game)

Okay! I certainly agree that Fatigue is a great mechanic, and I do really fondly remember the card draw decision points back when it was more relevant to me as a player, it really felt skill intensive when I was making decisions. The more cards they make that cause Fatigue to matter less, the slightly crankier I get that a cool and skill challenging mechanic is being overwritten. I will say however that there does appear to be a huge bias against mill as a concept/mechanic that you have, that would make this conversation more difficult.

Well, you said it yourself...you are trying to defend a very widely hated playstyle so...

I simply don't have the power or time to convince anybody to change their minds about anything, I simply have my opinions and like to share them.

Just like you are never going to convince me, I'm not going to convince you and I'll never have anything against sharing an opinion if backed up by arguments (like you did).

Perhaps Tickatus being a card that packs as much power as it does is an issue, and the cards that exist around Tick certainly offer to pull or push him to a greater power level. But is there really no salvation for this?

Yes, the salvation is making him always discard from your deck anyway, he wouldn't lose that much power as he could still disrupt combos (you know...these decks are SO much fun that you don't even need your deck to beat them) AND you could still play him after you emptied your deck in control mirrors (since, as a warlock, you WILL be deeper in fatigue than your average control deck) to equalize fatigue in an unfair way (you know...you PLAYED your cards and they did not) so the powerlevel would only change in the sense that he would no longer be an autowin vs control decks that just gets played whenever it's purple 

I don't want to tell anybody to do anything, and I refuse to glean any judgements about skill because of negative reactions to a card. Highlander Druid can shuffle what, 14? 18? Cards into your deck by playing and copying Ysera Unleashed. So there's at least 1 deck you can pick if you like control and hate Tick.

Fair point in standard, still the card ULTRALIMITS the options available to 2 decks (prime warlock is another one) anything else gets run over. (I will limit my assumptions to this since I play wild so I'm not too well versed in the standard meta, I am open to admit a mistake if this is incorrect)

We'll be seeing the biggest changes in Hearthstone at the end of the month. I don't really feel Tick is a problem enough card that they'd change him until after Forged in the Barrens comes out if he continues posing an issue, though that's the real crux of my problem with stat-based arguments in this discussion; Tickatus isn't a problem in the case of win rates. He's played in a low tier-2 deck, sitting with all of the other control decks in that tier. The reason this is isn't even really related to Tick at all, it's because aggro (and one midrange list) decks are all at the tip-top, and speed shuts down greedy Galakrond Warlock.

This is exactly my problem/fear I don't think the card is OP I do not think it will ever break the "OP level winrates" but there IS a reason for it...aggro decks kind of destroy it, however this only encourages polarizing cards like this where playing the game in certain matchups becomes almost a formality

There's an undeniable feelbad about losing cards in your deck, and I understand better that a larger part of the issue is that it's sourced from one card. I do feel that it's polarized when we get to this point, because it's either 1 card, multiple cards, or no cards. I'm sure most people who hate Tick would advocate for their being no cards that do this, which I understand. In my opinion, as someone who wants mill as an answer to control decks, it's probably better if it's just Tickatus. It would be way worse if a person was running anywhere from 2 to 5 mill cards in their deck, assuming Blizzard wanted it so bad they made a few cards to support it.

There are WAY healthier ways than mill to keep control decks in check, your cube hunter is one of the best examples of that, this way you have a CLEARLY winning matchup BUT it's not a basically automatic win

And as a final aside about LoR, a game I absolutely adore; currently a control deck is running around being very successful, using Lissandra and Trundle to generate multiple 8+ cost units to either threaten lethal with powerful trample/overwhelm units, or beat control matchups by cheating the Watcher out of their hand somehow. It uses board wipes and attack reduction effects to stay alive and control the board in the mean time. It's about as controlly as the game gets, in my opinion, and I also play casually. If anybody's curious, I play Deep Sea Monsters with Nautilus because big numbers make me smile.

This is not meant to criticize you so dw, I'm just sharing (again) my opinion
This is exactly the reason I don't play much LoR, all the lategame winconditions in that game are "fk you, I win" style cards with the only way to beat them being getting YOUR bs to work first and NO true way to react to it

Alright alright so:

Do I really need to explain how calling Tick a variety of childish names makes your post look cringey? Or making a statement like "this is the only good point you made", "this is just good ol' plain wrong" or calling people idiots and illiterate does nothing for your argument. It looks completely ridiculous to anyone who might actually be willing to take your arguments seriously and only, ironically, appeals to "idiotic and illiterate" fools who get a kick out of acting like edgy children on the internet.

Ok so I do see your point and honestly I kind of understand it, I seem to be the only person on the planet who believes the only "proper form" when writing/speaking and even acting (to an extent) is to be as clear to understand as possible, and DO NOT get me started on my opinion on the so called "dress code" as this is neither the place nor the time.

(now I'm afraid I sometimes miss the mark on the "clarity" part since,even with all the exams I passed I've never been that good at writing an essay,it actually costed me an A by 1 point on the most important one but that's besides the point)

the "different names" part is meant to be nothing but a throwaway thing to be completely ignored by anyone that's not me, sorry it bothered you but (as I expressed before) my opinion on form is VERY peculiar, the rest was just a way to express my distaste towards people that (e.g.) use words I never wrote/said to discredit my points

I'm telling you this because you actually spent a lot of time formatting and formulating a decent post, you can ignore the advice by all means but I can guarantee that it will only make your efforts to create such a post wasted, with comments like Chewmass' (and I really cannot blame him for replying to you the way he did).

He would have had the right to do so IF he had brought actual arguments like I did, the fact that he didn't means that he lost every right to respond that way

I only read beyond the fourth or fifth line due to the formatting, indicating that you weren't, as you say, an idiot, and I'm glad I did because the post was good.

I'm afraid I don't quite understand what you mean but...thanks...I guess

What is incorrect? I haven't claimed that cards should not be able to create medium to huge boards. I'm saying that there is no reason for Blizzard to go so over the top with the power level of these cards that the only way to counter them is with mass board wipes or with generating huge boards yourself.

So we'll start with an extreme case, a 1-mana card that reads "Summon 7 8/8 Clowns. Can only be played if you have 10 mana." can only be played in the late game but obviously would not be fine, it would be broken beyond belief, and that's where the power of the card is relative, and where trying to find the sweet spot between what is OP and what amount of stats a card like that could generate while still being relatively comparable to the rest of the card set.

Malicia, for 7-mana and 1 card, can easily generate 23/23 worth of stats, 18/18 of which have rush. The condition is that she must be played in a Soul Fragment deck. There is absolutely no way you will ever convince me that the card is 'balanced', the only way I can see that argument working out is the consideration that there are countless other cards in the game which are equally as broken.

This, I'm saying, creates a game where the average power level of cards that aren't completely broken is significantly lowered, meaning fewer decks are viable, especially control decks.

ok I think I now understand what you mean, the powerlevel of the game (some cards exopecially) has gone up dramatically and we could argue for long on wether that is a good or a bad thing.

one small thing you said though:
So we'll start with an extreme case, a 1-mana card that reads "Summon 7 8/8 Clowns. Can only be played if you have 10 mana." can only be played in the late game but obviously would not be fine, it would be broken beyond belief.
I may have expressed this poorly but I did say that you'd ALSO have to think about WHEN the card is playable in order to detemine if it's a bad idea or not. To try to explain my point: Bloodreaver Gul'dan (one of my favourite cards): his battlecry is obviously insane and he can "technically" only be played way late into the game when you have ammassed an insane pool of demons and your opponent has the mana AND (supposedly) the resources in the form of removal/healing/armor or a "counterboard" that he needs to deal with it.
Your card would be ultrabroken anyway I know but I still hope you see what I meant now.

My point however was about the fact that these cards are all things that (unlike my LoR examples) can be dealt with in ways that are different from "kill the opponent". Yes it IS true that it can be quite to incredibly hard to do so but still cards like these need to exist as good ways to close out games for control decks (as long as they don't become unreactable) 

I don't think he's OP either, at least not in the context of the meta he is in at the moment. My issue with him is exactly the same as yours. But even without Tickatus many potential control decks will suffer because Blizzards' card design generally funnels us down specific paths for deck creation.

I'm fine with blizzard printing better aggro cards, I'm not fine with them printing "fk you, I win" cards

 Priest's only board clear spell in classic HS was a 5-mana Holy Nova and they were one of the main control classes alongside Mage and Warrior, nowadays if a class doesn't have absurdly powerful board wipes they will get run over by shit like Ysera, Clowns, or Malicia, unless they cannot create large boards themselves and utilise broken shit like Animated Broomstick.

And here we go back to the powerlevel and that is not a discussion I want to start rn as I don't have a fully formed opinion on that one 

Quote from Kinkyjohnfowler >>

 

 

 Carfusso, the childishness and pointless digs ("This is the only good point you made") really take away from the obvious effort you put into that post, and I agree with it for the most part. It was equal parts "I agree with this" and cringe.

childishness for? arguing for my points? showing the parts I agree with him?

It's interesting you mention LoR (I haven't played it) and "whoever gets his BS to work first wins" because that's exactly how I feel about HS at the moment, Standard at least (I've never payed Wild). As it's not just dogshitus alone which stifles control decks. There are numerous incredibly powerful cards which, unless you have the correct answer, require numerous resources (and often life points) to deal with.

Soulciologist Malicia is one of the main offenders due to her just straight up ending the game more often than not if you're not playing a class with great board clears*. Carnival Clown is another obvious example as is Blastmaster Boom and to an extent Jandice Barov.

This is usually fine for 'Meta Decks', but it lowers the value of anything outside of these, overall decreasing the amount of decks which are possible viable. There's really no need for the power level of these cards to be as they are, other than to compete with other overstated and undercosted cards and to push certain archetypes that Blizzard want to push.

this is simply incorrect, cards that can create medium to huge boards are only a problem relative to how early they can do that, any huge board that drops in the lategame (there ARE exeptions obviously and obviously it also depends on HOW late we're talking...turn 10 or deep into the deck) is, in general, perfectly fine since if you are playing an aggressive deck you aim to finish the game before they are played and if you are playing a deck that goes for the long game you need to either have big boards of your own or good removal and healing...otherwise your deck is not good enough to play for the lategame (the key part is that these boards are handlable in ways that are not limited to "kill the opponent" unlike fuckfacetus or any of the LoR winconditions I mentioned)

*And before people say "just play a class with good board clears" that isn't the point. A deck making an overwhelming board state that something like Rogue cannot deal with is absolutely fine, just not when it's achieved by 1 extremely overstated card or easily achievable combo. 

your point here is more relative to the powerlevel while mine was never about that...I know it sounds wierd but I do not even think shitpiletus is overpowered, it is just stupidly polarizing as it HARD loses to aggression/pressure while winning vs reactive decks 

anyway, of course obviously broken cards  should be nerfed, my point was not game balance but rather letting someone play the game they like

Quote from Chewmass >>

Quote from Carfusso >>

 

 Making people like you more angry and prone to write such huge complaints on a forum for some pixels they paid, is what drives me to play Mill decks and fuckheadtus decks.

 nice arguments, you sure are someone whose opinion needs to be taken seriously

Edit: wow this has got to be the longest post I made...sry I guess

This is just good ol' plain wrong but let's get into it in more detail:

Angry or not, it's awful and reprehensible to say things like that to people because you're mad about a card game.  Please get some perspective and take a break if Hearthstone is making you that angry.

This is the only good point you made

Shitheadtus threads are becoming really grating to me, honestly.  Control decks having a win condition against other control decks is GOOD and NECESSARY for the game. 

While I do agree that most control decks should have a wincondition other than "grind the opponent out in fatigue" removing that option entirely is less healthy than making it extremely prevalent (with the exeption of the "ignore fatigue" cards, those are almost as toxic as retardtus).

Fatigue is easily the best "end of deck" feature ever created and DEFINETLY the best part of Hearthstone in terms of "interesting decisions it forces" and ignoring it is the biggest waste this game can do. The fact that you have (well...you no longer have it anymore but it WAS a relevant consideration ) every turn to think about "I could draw cards....but if I'm not careful I may lose in fatigue...or maybe I think I have better healing/threats than him so maybe I can afford to do it...and so on" has always been to me the most interesting and fun part of control mirrors.

The fact that we've gone for like 3 years with control decks only winning through attrition is not a good thing, and has lead to a weird sense of entitlement in control players, who expect that every game the play lasts for 40 minutes and drags to 10 fatigue AT LEAST (I'm projecting here, this obviously isn't true).

You say that but you'd be surprised at how many control decks have run actual winconditions relatively recently, control priest in ....it was Rashtakan I believe... going for the 3/4 mind blasts dealing around 18/20 dmg burst in a turn with Shadowreaper Anduin is one such "winconditioned" control deck, cubelock and hadronox druid are other ones .... while they are WAY more like (super)heavy midrange decks they still have a controlly feel to them and...well..they very obviously ran winconditions, then you got Luna's Pocket Galaxy, I don't think you can say making a fkton of 7/10 drops cost 1 isn't a good wincondition. We could go on and we could even get into the fact that the "no wincon" decks were only popular in rise of shadows because of Archivist Elysiana allowing it but let's not go TOO much in depth.

The only superlong and toxic games are the ones with stuff like Archivist Elysiana to enable them and I DO agree these ones (in any form...be it Dead Man's Hand warrior, Archbishop Benedictus priest, Academic Espionage rogue and similar BS) are toxic as they either give a free fatigue win if the game gets there or they make games unbearably long. (I play ODD warrior and deathrattle quest priest  btw, if I think a game is going too long it must mean something)

Decks having bad/polarizing matchups is also a normal and healthy thing for card games. 

Normal...maybe, I do not have enough info on that one...healthy...FK NO. Now: good and bad matchups? yes 100% , if you go down my thread history you'll see that deathrattle hunter (eggs/cubes/recruit you name it...the more recent tonk one in wild is a bit more toxic with its near OTK levels of burst but still...) is one of my favourite decks to play AGAINST of all time AND I HAD A NEGATIVE WR AGAINST IT...it was a really bad matchup for any of my "no wincondition" decks, same with cubelock and hadronox druid...THESE are the good/bad matchups that are healthy for the game...the "realistically winnable" ones, not the "if I get lucky enough maybe I can bullshit myself out of this one"  games...aka the ones like inbredtus (mainly talking about wild where Brann Bronzebeard is a card renolock seems to always have on turn 9)

cancertus Warlock is good against Control decks.  Control decks are bad against Tickatus Warlock.  The Earth spins on its axis and plants photosynthesize to make oxygen. 

Ok man, I thought I was on the internet, not in a poetry class...anyway refer to my previous point.

There's apparently now a deck, which is a control deck, and has a favorable matchup against Tickatus Warlock.  You can choose to play that if you're desperately attached to playing Control Decks,

I honestly do not know which deck you are talikng about but since it beats tumortus it is likely a "control" burn deck maybe kind of like the y'shharj (spelled wrong...DO NOT care) higlander druid that can deal 16 burst...TWICE or maybe a "virtually" infinite one (aka...the game is goint to end...one way or another b4 it runs out of cards) like "prime gaming" (as Kibler calls it) which I also dislike since it also ignores any possibilty of fatigue making it almost as toxic as the deck it beats.

or you can change pace entirely and play aggro (God forbid) to just bully greedy control/combo decks (which is something Tickatus was designed to do).

So basically "don't play what's fun to you" VERY nice design I must say.

I would almost agree with you if """"""""normal"""""""" midrange was an existing archetype in wild I'd play elemental shaman which is one of my favourite decks of all time to have a decent wr vs them...but that STILL would mean I was forced away from something I enjoy making this card (amd similar) STILL 100% toxic

I understand the frustration of getting milled.  It's a bad feeling, and it's the reason that Pot of Desires is such a polarizing subject in YuGiOh to this day.  Magic players also hate being milled. 

And that is exacly why mill should disappear as a concept from human memory..moving on.

Legends of Runeterra recently has had very grindy control decks pop up recently (with a win condition other than attrition, please take notes Hearthstone)

That is precisely why I haven't swhitched to LoR (and believe me...with all the ultra toxic OTK/mill/infinite BS they keep printing AND EVEN SUPPORTING here...I came quite close) :

there is NO SUCH THING as a grindy reactive deck there AND all of the "winconditions" they run are unstoppable once they go off making them unfun, just to name a few you have aurelion who has "Level up: your opponent surrenders" as his effect, or Nasus being Nasus the way he is in LoL (although LoL can afford an infinite scaling champ because there are 4 other idiots with him), or even just Fiora.

Stuff like that may be more handlable there given the "fk you, I win" nature of all the winconditions AND given that your health is low but being allowed to play in the way I find fun (REACTABLE threats on both parts) is more important to me.

and hey, it has a hard matchup against the one champion that can mill their deck from X to 4.  Maybe Tick should have his stats toned down, but ultimately I think his effect is important for the game.

Maokai uh? I can't really say much here since the only LoR I play is VERY casual and I never meet actually good decks but given what I know about the game it is probably fine given the already discussed "fk you, I win" nature of the cards making toxic cards like him not stand out TOO much because the design philosphy is "whoever draws his BS first wins" (now obviously there is a lot more to that and the more correct way to phrase it would be "whoever gets his BS to work first wins" and even then I still don't like it)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since I already have had this happen here are a few clarifications to avoid idiots inventing stupid points out of thin air like the illitterate guy that, just because I complained about cancertus he thought I was ok with clown druid summoning a board full of 12/12s on turn 10:

• I will agree with you if you want to bring up the fact that (e.g.) cubelock was a problematic deck as its insane earlygame manacheating and it's good healing options allowed it to stand a good chance against aggressive decks while it's great doomgard burst gave him a really good matchup vs control decks as well. Still it doesn't change the fact that I enjoyed playing against it WAY more than (e.g.) the arguably worse mecha'thun warlock that came up a couple expantions later

• I'm not saying all decks should include "winning the fatigue attrition war" as a wincondition but it SHOULD be an option for those that want to do it WITHOUT AUTOWINNING IT WITH STUPID "ADD  A FKTON OF CARDS TO YOUR DECK" OR "REMOVE FROM THE OPPONENT'S DECK"

Quote from Carfusso >>

"Seems like a thread for sadists and masochists. I would suggest getting some dust and crafting fun decks - Limecracker Druid, Star Aligner Priest, Reno Warlock, Mechathun Rogue, Tess Rogue, DMH Warrior, Luna Pocket Galaxy Mage etc. etc. Otherwise how about going outside and running or riding a bike? Getting nervous with this stupid game is pointless."

 

Gotta love how yout idea of "fun decks" is exactly what I hate the most, you are suggesting that the 3 step program simulators of: 1)powerdraw like an idiot (no punish for it since you either get an infinite deck or win as soon as you hit your exodialike BS) --->2)play the exact same shit in the exact same order every time---->3)win because I'm a bitch" is fun.....VERY interesting decks lol. I made this thread exactly because I want to make sure those decks suffer as much as possible against me, I'm not going to have fun either since I don't enjoy aggro decks but at least I'll get to be on the OTHER end of the polarizing spectrum for once, also no matter how hard SMORC my deck will be I'll ALWAYS be less of a degenerate than the decks I want to destroy.

The only...not too toxic deck you listed was tess rogue (which can be BS too at times if it runs stuff like Gang Up or Togwaggle's Scheme). Renolock would be the only other one if it didn't run Gnomeferatu, Dirty Rat and tumortus and sometimes lol I get 3 primes and delay fatigue

 I assumed your Luna's Pocket Galaxy mage deck includes at least 1 of the 87 possible OTKs it can include, if it didn't then I'm inclined to agree with you calling it a fun deck

"Seems like a thread for sadists and masochists. I would suggest getting some dust and crafting fun decks - Limecracker Druid, Star Aligner Priest, Reno Warlock, Mechathun Rogue, Tess Rogue, DMH Warrior, Luna Pocket Galaxy Mage etc. etc. Otherwise how about going outside and running or riding a bike? Getting nervous with this stupid game is pointless."

Gotta love how yout idea of "fun decks" is exactly what I hate the most, you are suggesting that the 3 step program simulators of: 1)powerdraw like an idiot (no punish for it since you either get an infinite deck or win as soon as you hit your exodialike BS) --->2)play the exact same shit in the exact same order every time---->3)win because I'm a bitch" is fun.....VERY interesting decks lol. I made this thread exactly because I want to make sure those decks suffer as much as possible against me, I'm not going to have fun either since I don't enjoy aggro decks but at least I'll get to be on the OTHER end of the polarizing spectrum for once, also no matter how hard SMORC my deck will be I'll ALWAYS be less of a degenerate than the decks I want to destroy.

The only...not too toxic deck you listed was tess rogue (which can be BS too at times if it runs stuff like Gang Up or Togwaggle's Scheme). Renolock would be the only other one if it didn't run Gnomeferatu, Dirty Rat and tumortus and sometimes lol I get 3 primes and delay fatigue

Thx everyone, I'll see what I can do/craft :)

this card is cool but I don't feel like it's enough...it could definitely help though..expecially since a great part of what makes secrets strong is that you don't know what they are

I need your help, what's the strongest cheap aggressive deck around in wild?

My idea was token/spell druid, do you have better suggestions? 

FEEL FREE TO IGNORE THIS PARAGRAPH IF YOU ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THE REASON WHY

I have played against 1 too many bullshit OTK/mill decks expecially now that any fuckfacetus warlock variant (from reno to play 56 tumortus ) and razanduin are making the real control decks obsolete as these fucknuggets can afford to play with a slightly controlly shell but BS OTK/mill winconditions so I decided to make them suffer as hard as possible,by giving them a taste of their own polarizing medicine. I just want to kill any deck that doesn't kill me first by turn 4

Quote from TheGentleman99 >>

For some this is probably obvious, but I'd like to point out that all of these are herbs you can collect in World of Warcraft. I know a lot of people who play Hearthstone don't play WoW so I just thought I'd explain the weird names.

 ye I figured it was something like that, since I never played WoW I was thinking maybe someone who played/playes it would have had better ideas than me

so a developer shared the name of the "herbs" you give to the golem from kasakus and I wanted to do a bit of speculation before we get the effects fully revealed: care to share what you think they could be?

here are my guesses:

Well there's Swiftthistle this is very likely rush

, and Earthroot I'm gonna guess...taunt?

, and Sungrass this is likely related to damage in some way but it also could be the card draw one

… Liferoot this is either battlecry healing or the lifesteal keyword

and Fadeleaf stealth maybe?

… Oh, and Grave Moss I mean...this is a deathrattle...can't guess what it could do tho

… Of course you can't forget Wildvine no idea on this one

. Gromsblood! wtf does Grom have to do with this? I have no idea here either

And Icecap my money is on battlecry freeze...likely the same numbers as the potions do

and Firebloom too! damage ez..if the sun one is AOE this is single target and viceversa

And Mageroyal wtf? spell damage maybe? or add a random/discover a spell??

… aaaaannnnd… Kingsblood! nope no idea...one of these has to draw cards but I don't think it's this one

What control in wild? I don't see any... the closest things are raza priest (which is an OTK deck) and whatever non aggressive warlock which is either a midrange control hybrid (cubelock) or a mill deck (all the retardtus variants) and I would very much love to see raza/cancertus smashed by quest rogue...even if it were to cost me A LOT of losses vs rogue.

Are stonetusk/bluegill getting reverted? where did you see that? I must have missed it

I don't really see lore problems with  "exept Ysera" expecially since it can't target her regardeless now

As you said "not strictly the best course of action, but an acceptable one" and I am inclined to agree, I wrote my post since a better course of action seemed quite obvious and the fact that they didn't take it when "updating" one of my favourite cards rubbed me the wrong way 

I know new Ysera is likely quite strong however there still was no reason to make Dream less versatile and Awakens less valuable, i am happy about the new Ysera's design I just wanted her to be more fun than what she is with these changes (also with the bounce effect being 1 mana and "exept Ysera" there are no OP shenanigans to be found while Awakens is just a mana cost nerf for the fk of it)

thx for being an actual person and giving arguments to discuss :)