Hearthpwn

Zul'jin made the Boom concede baby!!! 

Quote from Nargacuga15 >>

Quote from Mohamed_Dean >>

Zul'jin is annoying to play against. Better than shudderwock, considering the hunter spells used are much stronger than battlecry effects of cards in general. I did make a thread about it on the hearthstone forums, here:  https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/hearthstone/t/zuljin-anyone-got-suggestions-on-how-to-counter-his-play/12578/4 and close to the majority of players there agree that it's broken. It offers way too big of a swing as one card. 

The main point against a Zul'jin nerf, which has been debated already is that "Zul'jin needs set-up for it to be OP" -> Well, hunter decks not running Zul'jin, run the same set of spells usually as those running him. On their own, the hunter spells are good enough. Zul'jin essentially magnifies that with his effect. I would argue that Zul'jin acts as both a tempo swing, removal tool, and a way to set up lethal for the next turn.

 

 I disagree with you. I do feel that Zul'Jin is strong, but a 10 mana play is a 10 mana play: It better be good. Zul'Jin, although not ENTIRELY randomly, still slings spells at its own face, minions, and does them in an order sometimes that is more a detrimental turn 10 play than say another copy of unleash the beast in your hand plus more removal. Hunter has weaknesses: little to no natural healing, virtually no way outside of the hero card to gain armor, minion based removal spells or random chance removal aside from Marked Shot now. You're choosing to put the blame on the card because you likely matched a Hunter and he pulled the win with Zul'jin after every spell miraculously went in order and favorably changed the board...maybe one time too many for your fortune. Shudderwock currently finishes the game in its use. It doesn't set up a lethal turn- it outright battlecries the damage where the damage needs to go thanks to doubling up on Lifedrinkers. It creates a one mana option at the very least that either finishes the job or stabilizes without fault in some cases just like Zul'Jin. The best hunter spell is a 3 mana removal and even that is random effect. Unleash for 6 is piss poor as a rushing 5/5 is usually not the most efficient answer when needed. It lives with 2-3 health on average and is easily answered the next turn. At worst, it hits divine shield as your only mechanic to open the window for a decent trade. I don't think Zul'Jin now, or ever, needs to be changed or nerfed. Hunter is right where it needs to be, and if the meta wanted to counter it then it would die off like any other deck. All of you love Mage and Warrior so face the consequence of the answer.

 I'm going to agree to disagree. I've already stated in the thread I linked about why Zul'jin is problematic, to me. Many people (most) agree, just the same way most agreed that Luna's at 5 mana was game-defining. ZUl'jin, irrespective of the mana cost to use him, is game-defining. If you can't beat the hunter before turn 10, you're most likely going to lose.
Zuljin offers, in ONE turn (i.e. when you play him):
1. Clearing your opponent's board
2. Setting up your own board
3. Refilling your own hand
4. Setting up lethal for next turn

If, me, the opponent has set-up lethal for next turn, one card being played (Zul'jin) shouldn't be able to nullify that lethal set-up while also setting up lethal for the person playing it, and also provide stability. 

Quote from GiaQuando >>

Control warrior might be good but people will find ways to beat it soon enough

 People already are countering control warrior. At least when I am playing early in the morning where I'm at (6 am EST)...I find the group of players at that time already moved on to whatever is going to be hot after the nerfs.

Just to name a few decks that have beaten my control warrior within the past morning (I mean, it's afternoon right now but earlier today this is what I faced):

Tess Rogue, Zuzu Hunter, Murloc Paladin

A weird mix between quest/cyclone mage

out of curiosity, what do you mean by "epic egyptian accent"? I'm an Egyptian raised Canadian, so I probably don't know what you mean as I personally have no accent. 

unless you mean egyptians living in egypt speaking english, in which case I'm thankful they didn't put that in bc it's annoying to my ears haha

Quote from Bee >>

You’re really bad at balancing cards op. By bad i mean trash, you’re just trying to completely obliterate warrior

 I agree with you 100% my man. Also, his change would kill all the fun from the point of Luna's... like you can do combos you never could before with malygos.

Kezan mystic isn't a good counter to secrets pally as it only steals one random secret.

Flare, on the other hand, has went up so much in value.

No. You are not entitled to a refund because the actual card itself hasn't changed. It's still the same as it was since it was released in beta. 

What you are whining about is the fact that you can no longer exploit a bug in the game.

Think of it this way, the game itself has "exploited" Nozdormu. So, in this case, the game needs to be fixed, not Nozdormu, which is what blizzard has done.

Looks like a great deck Brooklyn! I'll definitely try it out in casual for a bit.

Was a pretty nice pull (Edit: SS taken a few days ago)

Quote from kitox_me >>

try having a win condition next time.

 Is being a douche on the internet really that appealing?

Quote from Platy >>

The heal is from a deathrattle. Deathrattle effects trigger only after all dead characters are removed. Hence hero should be dead before heal can trigger.

This is correct. Uther and Khartut Defender die at the same time. The deathrattle does not trigger because the game is already over. Conc was lethal.

Dude.... Dr. Booms value doesnt change just because of the mana increase...

Quote from Mohamed_Dean >>

Luna's will definitely still see play. I will still play it in my malygos freeze OTK combo deck, but as it is played now? Most likely not. So, I would argue that those who were using Luna's to set up OTK combos, aren't really affected that much as those who would auto-cast it turn 5 or 6.

Warrior will still be extremely viable, and will remain competitive.

I bet you guys my gold collection that Zul'jin hunter will be the most dominant deck after the nerfs hit.

That's what i'm thinking too. Ecspecially the secret variants will shine. The only real problem they have with control warrior is turn 7 boom. Turn 9 will give them even more time to outshine them by tempo plays.

Yeah, I was thinking about the cycle of how...

• control preys on aggro
• aggro preys on combo
• combo preys on control

Normally, taunt warrior plays as a form of control, which makes it weak to combo decks. But with this structure, it can poach the pieces of the combos away.

Highlander Mage is not terrible without LPG. The winrate will take a slight knock but I think it will be viable. And hey, King Phaoris just got buffed. 

I think LPG still goes in the deck as well. You can cast it with a body off Pilgrim. (which is massive since 7 mana do nothing the turn you play it is a real issue.) 8 mana cast LPG and get a 5/5 is better than just playing LPG on its own.) And you can reduce it with the Naga. It's supported by the rest of the deck far better than before this expansion when it saw no play. 

CC at 4 doesn't kill the card in Highlander either. If aggro starts getting cocky then Highlander Mage is still a great choice. 

I hit 100 games since the nerfs went into effect.

50 of those games were against Hunter.

In 48 of those 50, I was playing Control Warrior.

The difference between 7-cost and 9-cost is enormous, and frequently makes the difference between a win and a loss.

Preliminary results suggest that Hunter has been catapulted into a gigantic portion of the meta space, and that it has a clear and consistent advantage in the warrior match, far beyond what it had yesterday.

I haven't won a game with mage or lost against it yet, so the mage nerfs seem to have been more than effective.

Enjoy the nerfs, folks.

I don't know why this thread is still being posted on as if we don't now know the results of the nerfs.

Play game more; post forums less.

I've got 75 games on Control Warrior today.  50% of those games have been against hunter, mostly Highlander, but with a distinct smattering of old-school mech.

The difference between a 7-cost Boom and a 9-cost Boom is ENORMOUS.  There will obviously be a material difference in win rates, and so far it looks as if both highlander and mech hunter will have the advantage in that matchup.

And no, before the pedantics descend on me, I don't think one can draw conclusions from 75 games.  I DO think, and would bet quite a bit of money, that those 75 games will turn out to be an accurate representation of the millions of games to come over the next week or so, which will bear out my conclusion.

Hunter is an overwhelmingly large amount of what is being played right now.  Mage is nearly nonexistent, and I haven't lost a game with warrior against it yet.

I thought Quest Druid would step up, but it doesn't appear to have a good match against hunter, so that won't be happening anytime soon.

i play this game drunk, so no