Hearthpwn

My point is more about the consistency of things. I know Doppelganger has the same issue with Shudderwock, but that's Wild. Apart from the issue in consistency, it's bad enough having to deal with 2 fully upgraded Galakrond, the Tempest, let alone a third or even fourth time.

As much as I think Shaman is in a better place, and the meta is healthier because of it, there is one inconsistency I absolutely loathe. As per title, if Shudderwock's Battlecry casts Faceless Corruptor's first, on a minion, and is then followed up by Barista Lynchen's Battlecry, it adds another Shudderwock to the player's hand. It won't cost 1 mana, but still, it's extremely inconsistent with the change to the wording on Saronite Chain Gang.

So, for consistency's sake, Blizzard should reword Faceless Corruptor to read: Battlecry: Change another friendly minion into a Faceless Corruptor. Or atleast, something like that. Would you agree? Of don't you see it as problematic?

I believe the sole reason is Priest's Galakrond. His HP is incredibly bad, but there have been a few lists that utilize Princess Talanji to have a late-game threat. But that won't make up the horrible card that is Galakrond, as most other Galakronds instantly make you gain tempo or atleast influence the board state.

It's why Quest Resurrect Priest has been slowly climbing in playrate again.

As much as it pains me to say this, because I think it's ladder's best kept secret at the moment, Dragon Handlock is amazing. Your big threats can't be answered, and I actually outsmorc half of the Hunters I meet. The other half I outheal.

I use this list:

https://hsreplay.net/decks/YlK6jnCM1yD7YVrNhdLtrh/

In short, no. It's very tricky to advice someone to craft an entire deck, this early in the meta, also remembering that HL Hunter, while incredibly fun, is no longer a tier 1 deck. 

But there's a case to be made about the Legendary cards that the deck needs to function properly, and that those cards will probably remain strong throughout the next year. So it all falls and stands with how much you like Hunter as a class. Cards like Dinotamer Brann, Zephrys the Great, Dragonqueen Alexstrasza, Siamat, Dragonbane, Veranus and, to a lesser extent, Zul'jin (he will rotate come April), are all probable safe crafts. 

So, if you're aching to play a fun and semi-competitive Highlander list, and you already have access to Highlander Mage, Hunter is the best next craft. 

I must say, this patch has done more for the meta than a lot of us care to admit. Besides that, I applaud the Hearthstone team for keeping track on things, and making grounded decisions based on data, instead of the community's opinion.

I can win with fun decks again, like Handlock, HL Hunter and Galakrond Warrior. Even had minor success with Quest Dragon Druid and Galakrond Priest. Winrates seem to showcase that, as soon as it might be to even make a conclusion about that. It's important to remember that there will always be a 'strongest class' and a 'weakest class'. Atleast the difference in WR between has been decreased heavily.

It also makes for a more fun ladder experience, as I'm seeing more decks now, and I actually think it hasn't been this diverse in a long time. There are strong aggro decks, but also strong Midrange and Control decks. Facing Shaman now doesn't mean a twitch to automatically concede now, while still being strong.

I'm really happy with today's developments on the dev team, and even though they'll won't read this, just remember: you'll hear the salty ones the most, and the positive ones the least.

I have a distinct feeling OP played Galakrond Shaman.

In any case, Face Hunter, as weird as it may seem, is a fair deck. It's a rather risky deck to play, because if you get outlasted, there's no way you to get back into the game. I also noticed they just concede at that point, which is actually sportive behavior. I'll play against a Face Hunter any day of the week, above broken decks like Galakrond Shaman or Have-Ancharr-in-Opening-Hand-And-Win-Warrior. They all rely on one or two broken combos.

Wow, you run Barista ánd Voone? That seems way too greedy in a meta defined by decks like Face Hunter and Galakrond Shaman. What rank do you play at?

Sylvanas started out as a Ranger though, so her place in the Hunter-class isn't completely as weird as some make it out to be. I'll admit that I'd rather have her be a skin for Rogue, but only because that class has the fewest skins available.

Quote from FanOfValeera >>

Quote from Nohva >>

I'm sorry, but someone has to say this: this community has been pretty awful at predicting outcomes of buffs, nerfs or even new sets. Let's just write down what we know for now.

• Shaman is no longer able to coin out Elementalist on 4, to then Dragon's Pack on 5. Those were the power plays. Granted, it's delayed with one turn, but we know from experience that that matters more than we always think beforehand. Also, keeping a 6-mana card in your hand in mulligan is quite risky. 
• People underestimate the survivability Sludge Slurper gave to Shaman in the early game. Just as an example, it no longer kills or stops a Secretkeeper.
• As someone already said, the 1-damage nerf on Faceless Corruptor will make a bigger difference on turn 5 than you think. There are many strong minions that cannot be cleared on turn 5 by one of the copies.
• I will admit the Mogu change is a bit weird, and definitely if it evolves into Colossus of the Moon, but chances of that happening are slim. I think the outcome will be the same: you need to remove the minion it evolves into, but now, you have more turns to gather your own resources to deal with it.

The one thing I will admit is weird, is that they didn't touch Necrium Apothecary. Highroll-cards like this have traditionally been extremely bad for the health of the meta, and it makes for very polarizing matchups. My frist thought was also that Dragon's Pack is still too strong, but then I reminded myself that Shaman will atleast have more trouble invoking in a timely manner.

I think the nerfs might be soft, but it is not Blizzard's intention to completely kill a deck. If you would have it your way, with your proposed nerfs, there would be no more Shaman. That's not the intent of nerfs. The intent is to dial it back a bit, to then give other decks more room to breathe, to then atleast shift the meta a little bit. Yes, Shaman will still be strong. But Warlock is strong, Rogue is strong, Warrior is strong, Mage is strong. These changes will influence the meta, mark my words.

 Well to go point-for-point;

1) That was a power play maybe, but far from being the only one. There are other ways to invoke Galakrond, so Dragon's Pack is still viable as ever. That is a card needed a nerf. Not keeping Elementalist in the mulligan is the correct play, at 5 or 6 mana. There is early game in that deck.

2) How many Secretkeepers have you seen causing trouble to shaman. Face Hunter does not play her, there is not such thing as Secret Mage or Secret Paladin. Secret Highlander Hunter is the only deck she *might* see some play. There are no early drops, except Flame Imp that it could kill before but it can't now. Maybe some treants and [card]Card NameSky Raider[/card] or Blazing Battlemage if you ever see any. How threatening are any of these, except Imp, again?

3) You are absolutely right on this.

4) Well, there is a big difference between 8-drops and 10-drops. 8-drops are build around cards in majority of the decks, they are understatted most of the time, like Tess Greymane, Hireek, the Bat, Hex Lord Malacrass, Princess Talanji, Captain Hooktusk and etc. You have a 50/50 to get something really good.

Someone has already written the 10-drops somewhere in this post. They are the late game threats. Only understatted ones are King Phaoris and Big Bad Archmage but the latter is still one of your best bets playing Mogu + Mutate. You get 16 stats on board other than these two immediately. Most of the time, you get something hard to kill at that point, Only one option is really really bad, and one of the options just wins you the game, so they even each other out. This is the difference.

You make some good points, and as someone who likes to actually converse properly on the matter, before jumping to conclusions, I appreciate that.

It's important for me to say that I never thought nerfing Galakrond himself would be the best way, but the consistency in which Shaman was able to invoke, particularly compared to all other classes that have their own Galakrond, was the problem for me. Nerfing an extremely important card like Elementalist is therefor a good call. The added bonus of Shaman being able to play Dragon's Pack later now, is even better.

My example of Secretkeeper was perhaps faulty, but I do rest my case with the fact that Shaman becomes more vulnerable to hyper-aggro decks even more. Pirate Warrior can snowball better now, with the nerf to Slurper. You can make better trades now, which shouldn't be underestimated. However, I'll give you the fact that a nerf to Dragon's Pack instead of Slurper might have been even better, but I'd just be scared that that would completely destroy Shaman on ladder.

As for Mogu, yes, 10 drops are good, but the nerf for me is more vital because of the timing in which they can play Mogu. I said the conclusion is the same before, and I stand by it: whatever Mogu evolves into, whether it'd be an 8 or 10 drop, you need to remove it. Having atleast 1 turn more before you can do, as most strong AoE's take place after turn 5, is going to be important.

As for your remark on Corrupt Elementalist in mulligan or not; the highest WR deck on HSReplay shows a whopping 65% WR when Corrupt Elementalist is in your opening hand. I highly disagree with your statement in that regard.

Honestly, and I might get hate for this, but I feel like this is the proper way to go about nerfing cards, but ONLY if they frequently apply patches to balance the game. Some of the proposed nerfs by community members (such as making Mogu not targettable by Spells) would result in the complete destruction of Shaman.

If they make patches like every 3 weeks, soft nerfs have my preference. But it's all about how quickly they're willing to react if the soft nerfs have proven to be too soft.

I'm sorry, but someone has to say this: this community has been pretty awful at predicting outcomes of buffs, nerfs or even new sets. Let's just write down what we know for now.

• Shaman is no longer able to coin out Elementalist on 4, to then Dragon's Pack on 5. Those were the power plays. Granted, it's delayed with one turn, but we know from experience that that matters more than we always think beforehand. Also, keeping a 6-mana card in your hand in mulligan is quite risky. 
• People underestimate the survivability Sludge Slurper gave to Shaman in the early game. Just as an example, it no longer kills or stops a Secretkeeper.
• As someone already said, the 1-damage nerf on Faceless Corruptor will make a bigger difference on turn 5 than you think. There are many strong minions that cannot be cleared on turn 5 by one of the copies.
• I will admit the Mogu change is a bit weird, and definitely if it evolves into Colossus of the Moon, but chances of that happening are slim. I think the outcome will be the same: you need to remove the minion it evolves into, but now, you have more turns to gather your own resources to deal with it.

The one thing I will admit is weird, is that they didn't touch Necrium Apothecary. Highroll-cards like this have traditionally been extremely bad for the health of the meta, and it makes for very polarizing matchups. My frist thought was also that Dragon's Pack is still too strong, but then I reminded myself that Shaman will atleast have more trouble invoking in a timely manner.

I think the nerfs might be soft, but it is not Blizzard's intention to completely kill a deck. If you would have it your way, with your proposed nerfs, there would be no more Shaman. That's not the intent of nerfs. The intent is to dial it back a bit, to then give other decks more room to breathe, to then atleast shift the meta a little bit. Yes, Shaman will still be strong. But Warlock is strong, Rogue is strong, Warrior is strong, Mage is strong. These changes will influence the meta, mark my words.

Once again, the Charge-mechanic delivers a problem for Blizzard. I think Apothecary needs a 1-mana bump, even if we didn't have Charge, but it's the atrocious 8/7 Southsea Deckhands and 7/7 Stonetusk Boars that make the deck scarier than it should be.

Yes, it's a Highroll-deck, but just like with all of those decks, it feels incredibly bad to lose to, since there's nothing you can do about it. If untouched, it will destroy Control decks, and that's unhealthy in its very core.

Am I the only one severely triggered by the word 'caz'?

Other than that, cool deck! ;)

In my opinion, all that needs to happen for it to still be playable, but not broken, is to make it only replay your minions' Battlecries. This would shut it down in Galakrond Shaman, but not other lists.