Hearthpwn

Quote from Lyra_Silvertongue >>

Outside of the classic Doomsayer + Frost Nova combination the card is perhaps one of the most skilled 2 mana minions in the game. When played by other classes you have to have a fairly good understanding of your opponents' classes, and take the risk of whether or not they can kill your Doomsayer when you're needing to play it to take back tempo. If the opponent kills it then the risk you took playing the card actually causes you to lose even more tempo. The card is far from broken or skill less.

Quote from MeganPearl >>

I hope they don't target Dark Pact (by making it 2 mana as an example) otherwise we will find the same issue but with the use of Sacrificial Pactinstead, and this one won't be targeted by Skulking Geist.  In my opinion the problem is not one specific card in this deck, and certainly nothing to do with void lord/doom-guard themselves. I think it's more  with the recruitment mechanic within warlock (druid and warriors recruit mechanic takes much more "setting up.") I can't think of a solution to warlocks recruitment interactions, but I can only suggest that it was given too many tools to recruit a demon that cost the same mana. (Both the weapon and the minion are mid range.) Where as warrior's recruit feature, although it is not exclusive to one "type" of card like demon seem to work much better. ) 

I agree cube is a great card for other classes and when used it's not as over powered as it is with warlock. While I know cube lock can easily be countered, the simple fact is other decks have to go out their way to put these counters in place. (The amount of silence/geist has increased.)

Don't get me wrong I love having a slower paced meta, but for me there is no skill in waiting for one particular combination in your hand without having to struggle for survival. (Warlock has too many board clears and heals to struggle, same with priest - exodia mages I have a bit more respect for!) 

I don't really have the solution for cubelock as such to me it is the only deck that really needs looked into as it won't loose any significant cards in the April rotation. 

 

Quote from FTPhack >>

Take Jade Chieftain out and put in Bonemare... 8 burst damage!

Woe Cleaver indeed.

I can't wait to pull out an Armorsmith, Ravaging Ghoul, or Acolyte of Pain on turn 8!

Not sure if I'd include this card in a control/handlock type deck, don't think I'd run it over Mortal Coil. This will definitely be great in Zoo though, since they don't like to lose tempo by hero powering as much.

If I see that Mage quest icon go off, I'm gone. (I play control decks mainly.)

As for single player RPGS; Bloodborne, Dark Souls 3, and The Witcher 3 are all must-plays. If you haven't played the earlier Witcher games, it includes a story recap, while Dark Souls is more about gameplay/atmosphere so playing the first two isn't really necessary (although I'd still recommend those if you don't care about graphics.)

Last of Us and the Uncharted series are worth checking out, as well as Until Dawn and Heavy Rain if you're looking for an interactive movie type game to experience with the wife.

Resident Evil 7 is great if you're into horror games, it's a massive improvement over 5 and 6.

Horizon Zero Dawn and Nioh are good, but not on the same level as the aforementioned titles.

Like others have mentioned, Rocket League is probably the best sports game on PS4.

Who knows, definitely my least favorite art of the expansion.

A Hugh overhaul?

Quote from kindapowerfulwizard >>

I went into that video prepared to puke, but fell in love instead.  Thanks OP!

IMO, Ozruk's fine as is.  But that's just me.  If he were any more powerful, he'd be an auto-include and there'd only be elemental decks everywhere.  Could he have been 8-mana instead?  Maybe?  But fine as is.

Quote from kindapowerfulwizard >>

 Also RIP, I just went to add a The Black Knight to my hand-buff elemental deck and... I DE'd him at some point long ago... :(

Can we nerf hunter and rogue in standard yet?  Like holy shit.. 

well, its a little more than a tech card. It give your opponent two dead draws regardless if they are highlander/pure decks or not.

When a Card sees a ton of Play in wild - then it is probably among the strongest of Cards. That is true for Albatross without the shadow of a doubt. The card has a deck winrate and played winrate of 59% in wild and is among the top 20 Cards played there Right now. 

In Standard the numbers for this card are not so much different - 58%. And OP is Right: The popularity of this Card makes certain decks Pretty much unplayable.

Now does this mean it should be nerfed? People are Right in calling it a tech-card. My guess is that the Card is WAY too universally strong for a tech Card. I am guessing that it outperformes most other tech Cards in Terms of winrate. A tech Card should be somethign that you put into your deck to counter specific strategys, not to be just a superstar-Card no matter what. I'll go check some other tech Cards now...

Ok lol. The next best tech card in Terms of winrate is sacrificial pact. And that one is WAAAAAAAAAY more narrow. Looking at the numbers for Albatross is actually pretty ridiculous… The guy has a higer deck and even PLAYED winrate than Zephrys the Great. 

Albatross should probably just be a 3/3 to make it more of a sacrifice to run the card in your deck.

Quote from Ilyanthiel >>

Quote from sPacEtiMe19 >>

People are funny how they define tech cards. And it clearly shows that most people don't know what a tech card should be.

Albatross is not a tech card, because it doesn't really have a downside. 3 4/3 is a fair body, and puts 2 dead draws into the enemy deck. That is it's absolutely worst case scenario. Against spell mage, Reno, etc. it adds those same dead draws while also shutting down more cards in their deck. It is not a tech card.

Hungry crab is a tech card. It's an absolutely abysmal card unless it hits a murloc. 

Ooze and Harrison are tech cards. They have 0 upside, unlike albatross, unless their effect goes off. These are tech cards.

Black knight is a tech card. Very strong if it hits a big taunt, absolutely terrible if not. 

When a cards worse case scenario is an amazing case scenario, it is not tech. 

 People salutes you: Tech card

Thank you for YOUR definition of tech cards. I don't see any reason a card should be underwhelming (if not fulfilling its tech effect) to be defined as tech... A tech card is simply a card that has no specific role in your deck but may have an important role on your opponent's deck.

Tech cards, in all of history in most card games, are supposed to be weaker than comparably costed cards when not fulfilling their effects. All tech cards in hearthstone, other than albatross, have followed this rule. 

And the "examples" list on that link proves my point by including Kayne on it. A 4 mana 3/5 charge is just good by itself. The taunt bypass is just extra. And when we look at what a tech card really should be, it should be specific. 90% of decks are going to have some taunt or another, so if the 10% absence is enough to define a card as "tech," then yes I do disagree with that definition. There is not one single decent player that would look at kayne and think "that's a tech card I should include because lots of people run taunts." That is ludicrous, and no one thinks "tech" when looking a kayne. He is absolutely not a tech card. If only 10% of played decks ran taunts aggro DH would still play him because his stats with charge for his cost are good. Which can absolutely not be said about ANY card on that list other than albatross, kayne, and loatheb. 

Loatheb was also not a tech card, because other than zoo specifically he had an effect on the opponent, regardless of what they are playing. 

Every single other card on that list is an example of my point that the body/effect do not warrant the cost unless their effects come to fruition. Albatross' ability literally has an upside against EVERY playable deck if they draw even 1 bird, whereas something like crab or platebreaker would not.

But again, Kayne being on that list discredits it, because he is absolutely not a tech card. 

People are funny how they define tech cards. And it clearly shows that most people don't know what a tech card should be.

Albatross is not a tech card, because it doesn't really have a downside. 3 4/3 is a fair body, and puts 2 dead draws into the enemy deck. That is it's absolutely worst case scenario. Against spell mage, Reno, etc. it adds those same dead draws while also shutting down more cards in their deck. It is not a tech card.

Hungry crab is a tech card. It's an absolutely abysmal card unless it hits a murloc. 

Ooze and Harrison are tech cards. They have 0 upside, unlike albatross, unless their effect goes off. These are tech cards.

Black knight is a tech card. Very strong if it hits a big taunt, absolutely terrible if not. 

When a cards worse case scenario is an amazing case scenario, it is not tech. 

I miss the Day 1 feeling we had back in the day. Nobody knew what could work. Everyone was experimenting. Fun times. Nowadays it's just super competitive from day 1. 

absolutely broken card. who the hell thought this was a good idea? it's a rare card that has legendary-level effects for 3 mana. and as if that wasn't enough, it's twin-spell too. awful, awful, awful.

It might be enough to simply change all Charge effects to "Battlecry: Charge."

That would force you to play cards from the hand if you want to benefit from their ability to Charge (so Doomguard would either Charge and Discard, or get cheated out and wait a turn), which I think is an interesting decision. It weakens things like Gelatinous Cube and the Recruit mechanic, but I think those could stand to lose Charge without completely removing the concept of first-turn-attack from the game.

There will still be instances of explosive charge turns, but it will require a comparatively larger chunk of mana and/or setup (Druid Quest completion, mana-reduction effects, etc.), and those sorts of things tend to balance themselves out.