Hearthpwn

For me it's hands down Deathstalker Rexxar. Not only is it a really strong card, which by itself can win you most control matchups, but the hero power is simply tons of fun. Mind you I haven't had a chance to play with most of the hero cards, but I maintain my vote for DK Rexxar based on the gameplay I've seen of the other hero cards.

In terms of the ones I wish I had a chance to try there are 3 actually Uther in a Horsemen OTK deck, Anduin in Razakus, and Guldan in Cubelock.

Quote from Morkimus >>

OP, I am just going to ask one question. Not to lecture you about what deck to play or what you deserve for playing that deck.

If your dust issues are as you speak, why didn't you craft a T2 deck (which would probably be safe from the nerf bat) instead of the obviously OP T1 deck that was almost certainly going to get nerfed?

I am just saying, perhaps it is wiser to pick a deck that wins a bit less and never risk losing it, than picking an overpowered one that ends up deservingly crippled.

 That is certainly an approach worth considering. That said at the time I invested into Odd Paladin it was actually considered a tier 2 deck in most classifications. And the other deck I've recently invested into namely Spell Hunter was too early of a call in terms of meta not being settled at the time I went for it. I have in the past invested into tier 2 deck and I think your advice is sound, thanks.

Quote from C_A_W >>

Quote from D00Mster >>

That said I still think the meta could be shaken up in a different more-firendly-to-f2p-players way

Please enlighten us, If there was a feasible way for Blizzard to shake meta without upsetting F2P players then they would HAVE DONE IT. Alienating a large part of community doesn't benefit Blizzard in any shape of form. 

I've already mentioned in my original post that one way to improve balance other than via nerfs is via buffs. In the end what you care about is the relative power level of cards, hence buffing some can be just as effective as nerfing some and lacks the effect of devaluing some people's investment in a particular deck. That said, the best way would be to ensure that balance issue never appear in the first place, in other words that they are addressed with the printing of new cards. Imo balance changes on Blizzard's part just a few weeks after the release of a new set of cards are either intended and aimed to make people spend more money on the game or more time playing it, or alternatively show poor design and balance testing on their part. 

Having re-read the replies and watched Trump's analysis of the balance changes I think I can finally totally understand where people who are heavily invested in the game, either financially or time-wise, come from in their appreciation of these nerfs. I can empathize how you would be bored with facing the same decks over and over again if you play the game say on average 15+ hours a week pretty much every single week. That said I still think the meta could be shaken up in a different more-firendly-to-f2p-players way and imo having such major changes introduced just a few weeks after the release of the set is either indicative of poor design and testing on Blizzard's part and/or of valuing profit ahead of player enjoyment, where player enjoyment refers to aggregate utility of all players and this group still predominantly consists of f2p players.

Quote from FeedtheEmu >>

I have been playing a free to play account in addition to my account I have most the cards on. If you do the daily challenges, even if you do not play arena you have more than 1 or 2 viable decks. You just do not realize it. If you think you need to play the best deck on HSreplay to be viable you are undervaluing skill on tier 2 or 3 decks. Look at any streamer. Most can hit legend with tier nowhere decks. You are unfairly judging the game based on an unnecessary box that you have created for yourself. 

 With a tier 2 deck in most metas, I agree that most players can hit legend. To hit legend with a tier 3 deck you imo basically need to be a pro. Lower than tier 3, then you not only need to be a pro, but also have to quite frankly get lucky. Decks such as Odd Paladin, Spell and Secret Hunter enjoy much popularity not (only) because of their power level, but also (if not primarily) because of their relative affordability at a decent power level.

Quote from YouthThunder >>

Quote from D00Mster >>

I think Blizzard should cease to nerf cards. In my opinion it disproportionately affects f2p players including yours truly, so I should probably acknowledge subjectivity at this point lol. Sure, you get a full refund on the nerfed card, but you don't get it on other cards you crafted for that particular competitive deck to which the nerfed card belongs. And this is a problem because most f2p players have only one or two viable decks at their disposal at any given time. I personally find changing the meta every time you print new cards sufficient enough. Let people have some fun and run rampant with some powerful decks for a while. What's wrong with that. Mind you, I grew up playing HoM&M 3, so I'm used to imbalanced mechanics being present, but I think they can be fun. Alternatively instead of nerfing some cards, buff some cards in order to improve the balance. It can provide the same effect without effectively removing the decks people invested in from play and as an additional bonus no need to provide refunds of any kind. What do you guys think?

 For a while??? Odd paladin is disturbingly OP for such a long time.

 At the end of Boomsday it wasn't even a tier 1 deck in most rankings, top of the second tier admittedly, but certainly not the most OP deck out there. It also had some very bad matchups, so easy to counter if you wished to farm Odd Paladins who I believe weren't actually that prevalent.

Quote from Blue_Banana_whotookthisname >>

The hell were you doing in Ranked? Casual has a neat MMR system.

 I'd have to disagree, I've tried casual and most of the time you face unrefined really more arena-like than constructed decks. It's a very different experience and to me not in a good way, even if trying to complete a quest I'd rather sacrifice some stars and do it in ranked then play casual. Not to mention the fact that some people just concede as soon as they've completed their quest.

Let me first acknowledge those of you who have provided civil and insightful replies, you validate my faith in humanity. To those who, lightly put, were not-so-civil I'd just say you might be surprised but how you treat others often ends up having an impact on how others treat you or what goes around comes around.

Just a few replies here, not gonna quote anyone in order to avoid making this post too long. While I understand that Blizzard primarily caters to paying players and find that justifiable and am also aware of the wild format, it remains the case that most of HS playerbase is f2p and that most people choose to play standard. I am also perfectly aware that one can amass a very significant portion of cards while being f2p, that said I believe it requires playing pretty much every single day for roughly 3 hours or so, which is something that many people including myself cannot do or do not wish to do. While I can see reason to argument that if you're not willing to either spend the money or invest the time, then you have no basis to complain, I do think that the game and the way the balance changes are handled could be more f2p friendly. I am also aware that it is very unlikely to happen. Finally, regarding people saying that buffs instead of nerfs couldn't accomplish the same goal I dare to disagree, the argument presented in the replies was that then everything would be overpowered... well, if everything is overpowered, then by the very definition nothing is, or in other words you actually also end up having balance.

EDIT: Just one thing I wanna come straight about. I did play Odd Paladin, it was one of my two viable decks, the other being Spell Hunter. Did I craft them because they were self-piloted tier 1 decks (on a side note I believe all decks require skill to play well)? No. I went for those because I already had the cards and they were by far the cheapest among competitive decks (i.e. tier 1 or tier 2, though could see myself giving a tier 3 deck a try too). There's a whole lot of other decks I'd love to play like Even Paladin, DK OTK Paladin, Odd Mage, just to name the few on top of my list, but I cannot and likely will not be able to afford them. It's worth keeping in mind that most people make their deck choices not based on their preferred playstyle, but based on what they can actually afford. And no, I'm not obsessed about my rank as illustrated by me having wasted dust in the past on the likes of Hemet, Hunter Quest, and Warrior Quest, but it is a reality that noone, be it an f2p or a paying player, likes to play a deck that constantly looses.

I think Blizzard should cease to nerf cards. In my opinion it disproportionately affects f2p players including yours truly, so I should probably acknowledge subjectivity at this point lol. Sure, you get a full refund on the nerfed card, but you don't get it on other cards you crafted for that particular competitive deck to which the nerfed card belongs. And this is a problem because most f2p players have only one or two viable decks at their disposal at any given time. I personally find changing the meta every time you print new cards sufficient enough. Let people have some fun and run rampant with some powerful decks for a while. What's wrong with that. Mind you, I grew up playing HoM&M 3, so I'm used to imbalanced mechanics being present, but I think they can be fun. Alternatively instead of nerfing some cards, buff some cards in order to improve the balance. It can provide the same effect without effectively removing the decks people invested in from play and as an additional bonus no need to provide refunds of any kind. What do you guys think?

Quote from MattyIce911 >>

i think because he has houndmaster, which can ruin the 3 card draw, but i was thinking the same thing.

 Agreed, if adding Master's Call, I'd consider removing all non-beasts from the deck, imo worth it though.

Quote from xGwyneth74x >>

Quote from D00Mster >>

Baited Arrow is surprisingly good in Spell Hunter, did not expect that, but actually a 5/5 for 5 mana with battlecry deal 1 or 2 damage, which can also be used as 3 damage to the face warrants an inclusion. Fun fact, if you kill your opponent with Baited Arrow, you summon a 5/5 too lol.

 I've been debating slotting this into Spellhunter. What did you take out?

 Would have to see your list to make a recommendation as what to take out in order to make room for Baited Arrow.

Why no Master's Call?

Why no Master's Call? Seems like a natural fit for this deck, though admittedly if included might push out Houndmaster to ensure 3 cards are always drawn.

Nothing's wrong with you. Pretty much any game is likely to feel stale after you put 10k hours into it. And you should probably prioritize other things over HS or any other game for that matter, the exception might be if you make a living off of playing the game, which admittedly very few people do. Take a break and then maybe check back after some time to see if you'd like to continue. Otherwise, find something else to spend your free time on, there's many other great games, as well as other great hobbies outside of gaming, many of which can also satisfy your need for competing.

I agree with the comment above. If you're looking for safe decks to craft in terms of their high performance, then just wait. Particularly given that you have some currently strong decks available to play with already.