I'm split on the issue. On the one hand, if the criteria for a nerf is that a card is too powerful then I don't think the quest should be nerfed, as the requirements to completing the quest put you far behind in the early game (most of the time) in a meta that revolves around early pressure.
If, on the other hand, the criteria for a nerf is lack of interactivity, then I could see a reasonable argument for a nerf. That said, I have played with and against the deck a lot since release, and it can still lose the value game to some of the paladin and warrior lists around, in addition to struggling early game. It might be the case that it changes the way you need to play in a way that most people don't find fun though, so there's that to consider.
The biggest problem is probably that when laddering people don't like thinking of their deck in terms of matchups. "I have a 60/40 matchup against silence priest and a 30/70 matchup against quest rogue" kind of thinking. It seems like people prefer the idea of being 50/50 in every matchup, which I suppose is fine if that's what you want, but isn't typically how meta games in card games end up working out. Quest rogue is a deck that has very favored matchups and very unfavored matchups without much in the middle, so it feels overpowered or like you can't lose, depending.
Running into your bad matchup a bunch of times does hurt though.
Region: NA Usual Play Times: I live in Asia but play on NA so I'm on at weird times. Level of Experience: Intermediate/Advanced Preferred Heroes: Warlock, Warrior, Priest I’m Looking For: Someone to spectate while I eat dinner, talk about the game, test stupid decks, etc. Tell us something about you: I like discussing lines of play a lot so if you do too then huzzah.
As much as I dislike Pirate warrior I don't think it's going anywhere. There are enough decks out there now that are good against it that in terms of the meta it's not really a problem, and Blizzard doesn't tend to make balance changes based on "But I don't like how it feeeeeels when I play against them!" (except for in arena). The only times we really see nerfs are when cards are super ubiquitous.
So if you're looking to dust something to make something else then I'd say go for it. If you're waiting for the rogue quest nerf I think you'll be waiting for a long, long time.
Speaking purely from my personal experience, I played a lot of both last season and whether or not you can hit ladder with quest rogue depends on how the meta feels. When I hit rank 5 with it last month it got really hard to climb any further, since I was seeing a ton of pirate warrior and aggro druid, which are borderline unwinnable matchups. I switched to an aggro/midrange murloc hybrid deck and was able to reach legend without too much difficulty.
Basically I'd say that if you're noticing a lot of midrange or control quest rogue should do the trick, but if there's a lot of aggro or the meta seems too diverse for you to feel confident one way or the other, the paladin deck is more well-rounded. Your matchups are a lot closer to 50/50, but there aren't any decks that slaughter you. Quest rogue is a very 70/30 30/70 kind of deck in terms of its matchups, so really what you see a lot of will determine if it's good.
Card buffs are almost certainly never going to happen. They're just a terrible idea. There are way too many moving pieces, and figuring out what would happen as the result of a buff is way harder than figuring out what will happen as a result of a nerf, which is already not easy. Besides which, buffing cards would mean the design team interfering with gameplay in a way that's way more severe than nerfing cards. When a card is nerfed, it's usually in the sights of the community and the designers (some exceptions maybe when considering the group nerfs done to classic cards). STB for example. Everyone knew that it was too strong, and eventually it got nerfed. If they're going to buff a card, which one should they buff? People here have given some examples but it's not like there's a consensus. It would just result in people going "Why did they buff this card but not this card?"
On top of that, a nerf is the design team saying "There's too much of this card going around, and we'd like to see less of it so other things get played." where a buff would be them saying "We think you should be playing with this card, specifically." That's not the kind of interference anyone really wants. The argument could be made that they do that when they print new cards, but that's sort of the point of making new cards at all.
I think warrior too. It helps that warrior eats shaman and many are playing shaman.
This may be true for aggro shaman, but when I play CW I get pretty much destroyed by totem bloodlust shaman 60% if not 80% of the time and not to sound like an ass, but I'm a fairly experienced warrior player too.
Control Warrior has always had a problem with Shaman because it's so hard for them to get board back. Tempo Warrior (or midrange warrior if you prefer) is much better against them since the minions contest their totems and can keep the board clear while you hit their face.
I have to say it's probably Warrior. They're the only calss with multiple viable top tier archetypes that play consistently well. Shaman might have the best single deck at the moment, but Warrior has multiples in the top 5 to my thinking, which makes it the strongest class post Whispers.
I've been playing N'Zoth Priest almost exclusively this season, so I thought I'd throw in my two cents.
While the games are slow I have to say it feels like a really solid choice in the current meta. It's a deck that gives you the options to fight most anything you'll encounter, and has the benefit of a lot of tech choices depending on what you're facing. Losing access to Lightbomb is not great, but the aoe the deck does have access too is still usually enough. I haven't run in to too many boards that require it over the aoe we have now.
Midrange strategies with a lot of 4 power minions and combo decks are the matchups I find to be the most difficult. Fortunately, decks like Miracle Rogue and Freeze Mage are not the easiest to play, and so make up a smaller portion of the meta than their strength would suggest they might. The popular decks tend to be 50/50 to favorable, depending on your build, so it's really up to you what you want to target. The deck has around six easily flexible slots, so work in what you need.
Among its advantages is the existence of a matchup that feels nigh unlosable in N'Zoth Paladin, though I suspect the deck will be less popular moving forward as it's more suited to tournament play than ladder given the complexity of the decision trees and time required to win. Your answers line up so efficiently with their limited threats that unless they get an early Monkey you almost can't lose. Paladin doesn't have a great way to pressure your life, and their best bet is usually just to never actually play their Tirion. Not a bad place to be.
One failing of the deck is that it can sometimes fall to the "drawing the wrong part of the deck" problem. Against Zoo and Shaman you basically must draw into two board clears (at least with the version I've been running). Sometimes you'll simply not draw those, or not draw early interaction, and lose. Remember to accept those games and just move to the next one. he deck can pretty easily maintain in the neighborhood of a 65% winrate even accounting for those games, but you have to devote the time to learning the deck and matchups.
More than most other decks I've played, N'Zoth Priest requires you to have a plan. That is, identify the matchup as soon as possible, and identify what the game is going to be about. Similar to playing Warrior against a Freeze Mage where all you really care about is generating as much armor as possible, N'Zoth Priest is at its best when you can develop a plan early and stick to it. Often this means identifying the key cards in a matchup and mulliganing aggressively for them. Look for Pain and aoe against shaman, for example, or Entomb against Paladin.
It's a fun deck, and very powerful. If the meta shifts it could be a poor choice, but as it stands I think it's a strong deck that can bring you however high you want to go on the ladder if you put in the time.
The deck looks reasonable, though I would say if you have them getting a couple of Azure Drake in there would be good. It's just a fantastic card and if you don't have them I'd recommend getting them. They go in a ton of decks and have been good since beta. Maybe cut the 1/4 taunt guy and the skeram. If you can find room for a Living Roots.
If you're looking to save up for some legends, Sylvanas Windrunner and Ragnaros the Firelord would be good to craft. They always go in and out of the meta, are strong right now, and would make this deck and many others better.
As for general play improvements, I can only really recommend playing a bunch of games with the deck and figuring out what the matchups feel like. Also, mulligan for your early ramp and cheap minions pretty much always.
This thread pops up again from time to time and it always really just boils down to the fact that some people want Casual to be something it isn't, and never really was. It's a place where you can play fun decks with no consequences, not a place where everyone has to do that. Casual is less of a "fun" mode and more of a "do whatever you want because it won't affect anyone's rank" mode.
People go there to practice decks, play weird decks, grind gold, finish quests quickly with a class they don't want to ladder with, or play games when they have a shit connection or may need to bail in the middle. The problem is that different people want it to be only one or two of those things, and you're not going to get that from a game mode where everyone who plays gets to decide what they're going to bring.
It depends on what you want to play. Lightlord is pretty great and can be played in a couple of different controlling Paladin builds. Malkarok is a little more narrow but has a place in some of the midrange Warrior builds. Both of those archetypes are performing decently well at the moment, so just go with your preference. Or craft them both, if you'd like. You've got the dust.
So I basically decided, based on your folks' feedback, this deck was just too busy and trying to do too much. Removed C'Thun and the C'Thun buffing minions. Basically just became a Reno N'Zoth deck. Which there are already a bunch of those. :(
The idea may not be bad. As built right now though there are too many cards that don't do enough (see Vajaina's post). Building a Reno deck means that you can't play multiples, and as such you don't have the luxury of playing many loose cards. You need to make sure they're all doing something. I think you could keep both the N'zoth, C'thun, and Reno packages, but you need to make sure you're able to contest the board. Rogue has plenty of good spells for killing stuff and drawing cards, so maybe try to play more of those.
I thought maintaining board control was WAY more important than card advantage. silences and removal and charge stuff is generally great. AOE is OP like holy nova and flamestrike and consec
Board control is more important, yeah. You can die with a full grip pretty easily. Of course, you want to make sure you find the plays that give you the most tempo too. Mana efficiency and sequencing are hugely important as well, as is recognizing when to play around things and when to just go for it.
1
I'm split on the issue. On the one hand, if the criteria for a nerf is that a card is too powerful then I don't think the quest should be nerfed, as the requirements to completing the quest put you far behind in the early game (most of the time) in a meta that revolves around early pressure.
If, on the other hand, the criteria for a nerf is lack of interactivity, then I could see a reasonable argument for a nerf. That said, I have played with and against the deck a lot since release, and it can still lose the value game to some of the paladin and warrior lists around, in addition to struggling early game. It might be the case that it changes the way you need to play in a way that most people don't find fun though, so there's that to consider.
The biggest problem is probably that when laddering people don't like thinking of their deck in terms of matchups. "I have a 60/40 matchup against silence priest and a 30/70 matchup against quest rogue" kind of thinking. It seems like people prefer the idea of being 50/50 in every matchup, which I suppose is fine if that's what you want, but isn't typically how meta games in card games end up working out. Quest rogue is a deck that has very favored matchups and very unfavored matchups without much in the middle, so it feels overpowered or like you can't lose, depending.
Running into your bad matchup a bunch of times does hurt though.
1
Battletag: Bandaid#1898
Region: NA
Usual Play Times: I live in Asia but play on NA so I'm on at weird times.
Level of Experience: Intermediate/Advanced
Preferred Heroes: Warlock, Warrior, Priest
I’m Looking For: Someone to spectate while I eat dinner, talk about the game, test stupid decks, etc.
Tell us something about you: I like discussing lines of play a lot so if you do too then huzzah.
0
As much as I dislike Pirate warrior I don't think it's going anywhere. There are enough decks out there now that are good against it that in terms of the meta it's not really a problem, and Blizzard doesn't tend to make balance changes based on "But I don't like how it feeeeeels when I play against them!" (except for in arena). The only times we really see nerfs are when cards are super ubiquitous.
So if you're looking to dust something to make something else then I'd say go for it. If you're waiting for the rogue quest nerf I think you'll be waiting for a long, long time.
0
Speaking purely from my personal experience, I played a lot of both last season and whether or not you can hit ladder with quest rogue depends on how the meta feels. When I hit rank 5 with it last month it got really hard to climb any further, since I was seeing a ton of pirate warrior and aggro druid, which are borderline unwinnable matchups. I switched to an aggro/midrange murloc hybrid deck and was able to reach legend without too much difficulty.
Basically I'd say that if you're noticing a lot of midrange or control quest rogue should do the trick, but if there's a lot of aggro or the meta seems too diverse for you to feel confident one way or the other, the paladin deck is more well-rounded. Your matchups are a lot closer to 50/50, but there aren't any decks that slaughter you. Quest rogue is a very 70/30 30/70 kind of deck in terms of its matchups, so really what you see a lot of will determine if it's good.
0
Card buffs are almost certainly never going to happen. They're just a terrible idea. There are way too many moving pieces, and figuring out what would happen as the result of a buff is way harder than figuring out what will happen as a result of a nerf, which is already not easy. Besides which, buffing cards would mean the design team interfering with gameplay in a way that's way more severe than nerfing cards. When a card is nerfed, it's usually in the sights of the community and the designers (some exceptions maybe when considering the group nerfs done to classic cards). STB for example. Everyone knew that it was too strong, and eventually it got nerfed. If they're going to buff a card, which one should they buff? People here have given some examples but it's not like there's a consensus. It would just result in people going "Why did they buff this card but not this card?"
On top of that, a nerf is the design team saying "There's too much of this card going around, and we'd like to see less of it so other things get played." where a buff would be them saying "We think you should be playing with this card, specifically." That's not the kind of interference anyone really wants. The argument could be made that they do that when they print new cards, but that's sort of the point of making new cards at all.
0
1
I have to say it's probably Warrior. They're the only calss with multiple viable top tier archetypes that play consistently well. Shaman might have the best single deck at the moment, but Warrior has multiples in the top 5 to my thinking, which makes it the strongest class post Whispers.
1
I've been playing N'Zoth Priest almost exclusively this season, so I thought I'd throw in my two cents.
While the games are slow I have to say it feels like a really solid choice in the current meta. It's a deck that gives you the options to fight most anything you'll encounter, and has the benefit of a lot of tech choices depending on what you're facing. Losing access to Lightbomb is not great, but the aoe the deck does have access too is still usually enough. I haven't run in to too many boards that require it over the aoe we have now.
Midrange strategies with a lot of 4 power minions and combo decks are the matchups I find to be the most difficult. Fortunately, decks like Miracle Rogue and Freeze Mage are not the easiest to play, and so make up a smaller portion of the meta than their strength would suggest they might. The popular decks tend to be 50/50 to favorable, depending on your build, so it's really up to you what you want to target. The deck has around six easily flexible slots, so work in what you need.
Among its advantages is the existence of a matchup that feels nigh unlosable in N'Zoth Paladin, though I suspect the deck will be less popular moving forward as it's more suited to tournament play than ladder given the complexity of the decision trees and time required to win. Your answers line up so efficiently with their limited threats that unless they get an early Monkey you almost can't lose. Paladin doesn't have a great way to pressure your life, and their best bet is usually just to never actually play their Tirion. Not a bad place to be.
One failing of the deck is that it can sometimes fall to the "drawing the wrong part of the deck" problem. Against Zoo and Shaman you basically must draw into two board clears (at least with the version I've been running). Sometimes you'll simply not draw those, or not draw early interaction, and lose. Remember to accept those games and just move to the next one. he deck can pretty easily maintain in the neighborhood of a 65% winrate even accounting for those games, but you have to devote the time to learning the deck and matchups.
More than most other decks I've played, N'Zoth Priest requires you to have a plan. That is, identify the matchup as soon as possible, and identify what the game is going to be about. Similar to playing Warrior against a Freeze Mage where all you really care about is generating as much armor as possible, N'Zoth Priest is at its best when you can develop a plan early and stick to it. Often this means identifying the key cards in a matchup and mulliganing aggressively for them. Look for Pain and aoe against shaman, for example, or Entomb against Paladin.
It's a fun deck, and very powerful. If the meta shifts it could be a poor choice, but as it stands I think it's a strong deck that can bring you however high you want to go on the ladder if you put in the time.
4
Ridiculous shit, I say.
1
The deck looks reasonable, though I would say if you have them getting a couple of Azure Drake in there would be good. It's just a fantastic card and if you don't have them I'd recommend getting them. They go in a ton of decks and have been good since beta. Maybe cut the 1/4 taunt guy and the skeram. If you can find room for a Living Roots.
If you're looking to save up for some legends, Sylvanas Windrunner and Ragnaros the Firelord would be good to craft. They always go in and out of the meta, are strong right now, and would make this deck and many others better.
As for general play improvements, I can only really recommend playing a bunch of games with the deck and figuring out what the matchups feel like. Also, mulligan for your early ramp and cheap minions pretty much always.
5
This thread pops up again from time to time and it always really just boils down to the fact that some people want Casual to be something it isn't, and never really was. It's a place where you can play fun decks with no consequences, not a place where everyone has to do that. Casual is less of a "fun" mode and more of a "do whatever you want because it won't affect anyone's rank" mode.
People go there to practice decks, play weird decks, grind gold, finish quests quickly with a class they don't want to ladder with, or play games when they have a shit connection or may need to bail in the middle. The problem is that different people want it to be only one or two of those things, and you're not going to get that from a game mode where everyone who plays gets to decide what they're going to bring.
0
It depends on what you want to play. Lightlord is pretty great and can be played in a couple of different controlling Paladin builds. Malkarok is a little more narrow but has a place in some of the midrange Warrior builds. Both of those archetypes are performing decently well at the moment, so just go with your preference. Or craft them both, if you'd like. You've got the dust.
0
1
0