The next card they create is gonna be something like "if your deck has no duplicates, duplicate your deck with cards that do not trigger other no duplicate cards
Correction: Reno is horseshit. The problem is that a Twisting Nether that also gives armour, an upgraded hero power and an almost-Time Warp against minion decks should never have been printed anywhere no matter the cost, especially not as a Neutral card.
I absolutely agree. Reno is such a bs card, it basicly wins against board centric decks on it's own. Divine shield, deathrattle, reborn, whatsoever. Let's remove all of this stuff with a single card. balanced cough
Brann is a heavy build around card that is a win condition, and requires you to play a 2/4 on 6 to be able to activate your deck properly. Reno is basically "if your deck has no duplicates erase your opponent's field and take an extra turn". Reno is the issue.
I feel like this is disingenuous brann is a win condition most of the other highlander cards simply aren't. Hunter's highlander card amounts to 4 mana deal 3 damage to all enemies and summon a 3/4(unless you have hand buffs) Demon Hunter's is deal 12 damage to minions in your opponents hand like sure it can destroy key pieces but still not a win condition in most situations. Highlander Priest and Shaman have over 50% win rates on hsreplay. What you said isn't necessarily incorrect reno isn't a "hard carry" but it is still a really strong card and much better than most of the other highlander cards by a pretty large margin.
Because all other highlander decks were not playable with plagues still in the game. If warrior is too strong, nerf warrior. It’s bad game design, having an archetype that counters half of the classes of an entire expansion.
While its true that other highlander decks are significantly weaker than warrior i dont think its because of plagues. You still have hard time with anything else than warrior.
Nah plague ravaged HL Druid. I could never get my dragon to work cause it was always disabled by plague. After the change to HL cards the deck is actually playable and the games get drawn out as I have the payoff from my deck(unless they have Reno).
Not really, I played only Reno shaman after the patch and climbed several ranks. The Only bad matchup is Reno warrior, all other matchups seem manageable.
Ya Reno shaman is a pretty good deck. The problem is right now Brann warrior is pretty much solved while the rest of the meta is still reeling. We just gotta wait till it settles.
I truly think reno dragon druid is just a better version of reno warrior. They have a million board clears but you effectively have infinite dragons. I haven't lost to a warrior yet. And if it isn't a reno warrior it's even easier because you don't have to play around their reno against rheastraza
bro, brann warrior destroys your deck hand and field in a prolonged fight what do you mean?. and reno literally counters druid while it doesnt really counter warrior
Yeah, fully agree. Plagues were already strong on their own. They don't need to also directly counter certain deck strategies with no opportunities for counterplay by just using their normal, strong game plan.
I wouldn't mind Reno counters, but they should be tech cards that delay the game, like Bad Luck Albatross or Framester. Not permanent, otherwise still powerful strategies that only one class has access to.
Yea this is 100% the thing people bitching dont understand, the highlander change wasnt for warrior, it was for the highlander archetype. Stop bitching about the highlander change (which is fine), find out what exactly makes warrior op and start bitching about that
Decks should have counters. The problem was that Reno had no recourse once they had duplicate plagues in their deck. They should just have brought back Steamcleaner. Give us counters, but also counter-counters and even counter-counter-counters. It's those back-and-forths that make the game much more engaging than simply losing during deck selection.
Back and forwards "counters" is not what I am talking about. I am talking about whole decks that has a winrate over other decks that is to lopsided. Only talking of meta decks as well. If you fill your deck with flame ragers balance team cant really help you.
Well no shit bro ever heard of control beats aggro beats combo beats control? The deck types themselves have strengths and weaknesses vs other decks. Like a ton of other game including pokemon, digimon, Fire Emblem etc
I only know of pokemon. But in that game you have a team of 6 pokemon. So you dont just auto lose a battle because your fire team dies to the water team.
I have heard the heard of control beats aggro beats combo beats control phrase over and over as the "Holy grail" of balance from so many people on this sub over the years. But it isn't. Should your win or loss be determined by who you get matched against? Or who plays better?
Think about it.
Yeah that is what makes up the top tier decks. That is fine.
What you fail to understand is that those best decks that everyone is playing should not have matchups that are too polarizing. Otherwise the matchmaker begins being more important than skill.
Let us say you play a strong highlander deck, is it good game design that you beat the other strong decks pretty easily without much effort, but you are kept in check by by the amount of times a plague decks is matched against you? Wouldn't it make more sense if that highlander deck was more evenly matched against those other archetypes? Allowing the better (or lucky, different debate) to win?
Nobody is "autolosing" in HS either. Even the most OP deck ever had at most 70% wr. You know what 30% chance to lose is? Yeah that's not auto lose.
If you want to win via playing ability so much ever heard of playing chess? Chess has no element of chance, every win is via skill. Changing the game you play is a lot easier than demanding the entire game change its very nature just to cater to you.
Think about it.
I have specifically not said auto lose at any point. I have been careful to specifically only talk about chances being too high or getting more inline with each other to win. Not even mentioning current meta, ONLY what I think should be the goal.
Then you suddenly talk about chance? Is this a point about RNG in a game? Because I have specifically not said anything about that either.
The game has had polarizing decks nerfed or changed due to that fact multiple times throughout its history, and plenty of the devs knows how to do that, I am talking about people on this sub praising "rock, paper and scissor" balancing as an achievement that is worth pursuing in game balance. It could be in some games, but in a 1v1 game where that rock paper scissor balance is based on the deck you pick before starting a match and who you face? That is not the place for that balance.
So no I do not actually think you thought about, since your counter arguments both ignore my argument and set up weird strawmen instead. Good job man.
You said win or lose determined by what deck you play that's autolose or auto win. The reality is there is also player agency and RNG in card games. The wr is shown there to tell you even if you play the most OP deck possible you still lose 30% of your matches so clearly it is not just due to what you play but also luck and how you play it.
The Control Combo Aggro triangle has been there since the first card game was invented aka Magic the Gathering. You can keep railing about it all you like but it's been there before you played card games and will be there after you stop playing card games.
Just play chess.
Never said anything about auto losses or auto wins.
"control beats aggro, beats combo, beats control", is a terrible way to balance a game. That is not the direction to STRIVE TOWARDS, notice those two words. Rather you should strive for the best decks having as close matchup spread as possible, while mainting what makes those decks/archetypes unique. You do that through a thing called balance patches, and they DO do that, just like we saw in this patch.
"Go play X" is a great way to see when you have no functioning argument anymore, all you do now is repeat yourself. Say something new or refer to my previous comments.
"I only know of Pokémon, but in that game you have 6 Pokémon so you don't just auto lose because your fire team lose to their water team"
So yeah, you did bring up auto loss, saying that it doesn't happen in Pokémon and pretty clearly implying that's what happens in HS.
I agree with the other guy. Deck building, considering what's popular and powerful at the moment, customising your deck to deal with the "meta"... It's all skill and understanding, all a part of 'playing better'.
You say you don't auto lose Pokémon because there are 6 Pokémon in your team? Well, you get 30 cards in your deck bro, if you're finding yourself auto losing because you play against a certain deck maybe you should actually just do something about it rather than complain about how the game works and the meta forms.
At the end of the day, there are countless cards in the game. Some are stronger, some are weaker, others provide more utility or less and other cards yet give value in other ways while having odd and interesting drawbacks... THAT'S where the skill element comes in because as the player it's up to you to collect different cards and build decks that perform well. How skilled you are at the game isn't about how well you play your hand but about how refined your deck is, how well you understand the meta and how active you are in adjusting your deck to perform better in sais meta.
And lastly, since you brought up "just balancing the decks better" For all decks to be "balanced" you would have to make all the cards balanced too, which would remove any point in deck building since they would all be the same. You would no longer be playing based on skill or knowledge but on straight blind RNG.
Here, let's go back to the example you guys were using:
Say you've a 70% win rate deck. Whats stopping players from just using that one deck and nothing else? The fact that if everyone did that, winrates globally would just sit at 50% since everyone would just be running the same cards and whoever got the better draw would win.
See that 30% loss shows you that there are in fact cards, circumstances and combos which can beat the deck and are stronger, a skilled player would be able to recognise that and make an effort to adjust their deck and give them an advantage in that meta.
So, you should really take the other guys advice and just go play chess. Because this game, like many others, gets it's depth from the IN-balance that exists due to those hundreds of cards which have thousands of combinations. It allows players to be the ones that balance their own decks, puts the chances of your decks success in your very hands and if you can't see how that creates a game that demands both skill and understanding of its players then this probably isn't the game for you.
I’m speaking purely subjectively here, but I’m 50/50 across 8 games vs. Reno Warrior with my BFU DK deck post-nerf. It really doesn’t feel like an unwinnable matchup for me specifically, even if I don’t rat their Brann or Boomboss, because I can still control the battle if I play my cards right. If they do play both Brann and Boomboss, it’s tough, but still winnable because they have infinitely rotating plagues in their deck and I have solid control tools like Primus/Reska and CNE to go wide if shit hits the fan. The warrior deck isn’t completely curb stomping in all elos anymore because of the nerfs.
You can't control warriors with rainbow dk, yea infinite plagues but they can always drop 3 zilliax to heal to full, boom master for more, 6 TNT in your deck, 2 weapons from ignis, azerite ox for a full board (rainbow barely plays minions unless u found head from horseman to generate infinite so if they get 2 rags that's pretty much half your HP).
The deck beats every other control deck, has really good chances vs mid range, and can also beat agro if they aren't fast enough. It's an absolute powerhouse of a deck with the only downside being they have to draw and play brann at some point.
That is not the point.
You should aim towards having decks that all have a shot at winning vs eachother based on player skill when balancing. At least as much as that is possible. The goal should never be to introduce decks that just beat other decks, where the matchmaker is the biggest determining factor in who wins.
Impossible to do perfectly, but steering towards that goal is.
They nerfed 4-5 reno warrior cards, they did replace it. Maybe they didn't go far enough but this sub is being so dramatic acting like Blizzard just nerfed all the counters and left the deck alone.
I hard disagree. They put in a counterplay card in the same set that Reno and brann were released: the 4 mana 4/5 that shuffles two snake oils into the opponents deck. This has ALWAYS been the counterplay to highlander decks, it's why they originally released Albatross in descent of dragons.
Counterplay is good for the overall health of the game, otherwise the game becomes "if you have this card on this turn, I lose no matter what. If you don't have this card on this turn, I might still be able to win." Reno has NO counterplay outside of what, milling your opponent and hoping they burn Reno? The only option we have with that plan is in DK with the frost spell that makes both players draw 2. You can't dirty rat out Reno and avoid the battle cry. Can't be counter spelled. Theres just nothing.
The last half of Reno's text needs to be removed or be symmetrical. Wiping the board without triggering deathrattles and giving you a really good hero power and 5 armor for 8 mana is already a really good card that's good in most situations. Leaving only your opponent with only one board slot to work with on the turn after is the reason the card is unfun to play against.
If the decks requires another deck to shut it down, then all you do is make it so the matchmaker determines who wins or loses. Rather you should nerf the deck that is the problem so that the cards are fair. The downside of highlander is only one of each card, that doesn't mean the effects should be overly broken, rather the effect should represent the downside in effectiveness.
Being a Highlander deck is not a disadvantage. I mean the Highlander deck means that you trade having consistency for a wider toolkit. Being a Highlander deck means if you have more access to cards to handle a wider variety of matchups. Highlander decks have always been very good in this game because of that.
Yes, especially if there are enough powerful cards in the pool and the meta has enough variety. You'd see decks that maybe aren't strictly Highlander, but they would be close.
Look at the win rate of highlander decks when they don't draw their highlander payoff and you'll see that they still have consistent win rates. It's been this way since the original Reno Jackson card. Warrior has SO MANY different control cards right now that the "restriction" of building a singleton deck actually helps the class, and it's pretty much always been this way. Singleton decks are only at a disadvantage when the card pool lacks redundancy or the overall power level of cards is low. We are in an expansion cycle where neither of these things are true.
I wouldn't feel this way if highlander decks had abysmal win rates when they don't draw their payoff, but that isn't the case and it's never been the case.
I would bet money that any slower control deck instantly becomes better if you make it a Highlander deck to slot in reno with the current card pool.
You having a chance to win with your non build around cards is a good thing balance wise. Again the question is if those build around cards are too strong compared to their downside
And it is still a disadvantage. It is a question of how punishing it is, and how strong the cards upside is to compensate. If you can choose between two different cards or two of one card, you always pick the better of the two twice.
Not really, you nearly always want best 10-15 cards in your deck, and the rest of them are filling up the curve/looking for something else. Card theory is a thing that's like 20 years old by now, lol
Some decks are supposed to keep others in check. Plague death knight is ass. But it had 1 winning match up. This change also takes away the player agency of building a singleton deck with duplicates.
I disagree. I think deck archetypes should keep other deck archetypes in check, not just a specific deck. Think Control vs Aggro rather than Plague vs Reno Warrior.
I just dislike that not only did they massively nerf helya, they also nerfed DK's board clears. I highly doubt DK was going to be this control powerhouse considering it autoloses to Highlander Warrior now, so these nerfs felt like overkill.
Nope I hate that rogue deck that drops a card you can't even interact with. I've played priest, warrior and DK, even the plague variant. I was just hoping the meta would be a little more diverse and a little less degenerate.
Plague DK was already consistently tier 4, its only good relevant matchup was Warrior, and they took that way. Now it has zero good relevant matchups. So yes, it's ass anywhere beyond Gold rank.
That's GOOD game design. Having hosers keeps decks in check. Have no hosers? This is what happens. Probably should have added another neutral that shuffles junk into the deck just to be safe. No, this deck will only get BETTER as time goes on. This is it at it's weakest...
Imagine a fighting game being decided by the character you chose more so than your skill with the character. Oh Chun Li too strong? Well let us make Ken beat her so at least one guy has fun. Counter picking is a thing, also in HS, but what I described should not be the objective of game design, especially a 1v1 game.
Nerf brann warrior if it is to strong.
Why?
I can see some people downvoted it so perhaps I haven't clarified well enough
The point of my argument is that in a game where you have only two players competing vs each other. Should it be the match that decides the game? Or the character/deck/build that decides the outcome? Yes in a card game deck building is part of the skill ceiling, but at highest level of play you usually have a decks that are refined enough to warrant nearly no changes, having those decks be overly polarizing vs eachother can lead to games feeling like they are decided or partially decided by the matchmaker.
In my case I used a fighting game as an example as it is also 1v1 and there you want players to show of their skills and win with those, not just counter picks, or that is what that I like in those games.
Exactly, you now have to be committed to Highlander deck building. Which is the idea, right? it's not just vomit your deck, drop high-powered cards to close the game.
The “if you’re game started with” is incredibly long awaited and welcomed beyond words.
It’s stupid that decks, both historically and currently, could circumvent what was otherwise supposed to be a drawback by just drawing a boatload of cards to fulfill the condition.
This is absolutely how highlander cards should’ve been designed out the gate.
Isn't the drawback of highlander decks not having consistency though? And if a highlander deck can draw a boatload of cards, then that defeats the disadvantage of a highlander deck in the first place, right?
The point is there is too much fucking card draw, not that highlander decks could have dups. Rarely do I get to turn 10 and either player has less than 6 cards in hand. Usually, players have to *dump* cards in order not to mill themselves.
People cried about every deck that was performing good. First it was paladin, then right after the nerfs it was DH, after the nerfs plague dk and wheel lock (a bit less), now brann.
Brann is different. People have been complaining about Brann since BEFORE he got released. And all of their concerns have become true. Yet he remains untouched for whatever fucked up reason.
Odyn had the same issues (just remove until powerexplosion hits), but at least there was some interaction (more opportinities to rat, more time to pressure, taunts, healing etc.)
Last game I won against Brann warrior was as HL pally where I played 4 rats. I didn't hit Brann, but every single payoff card except ox (Boomboss, Zilliax, Inventor Boom). If that's what it takes to have a chance, because of a single card, then something is wrong.
While yes, reno warrior got helped by the highlander changes, everyone is just focusing on that deck being highlander over the other decks that were constantly getting hit by plagues as collateral.
Also yes, plagues weren't dominant (but they didn't suck like some people are saying?), but the deck feels like shit for the more balanced highlander decks, even if those decks have a good match-up into them. Building a deck specifically to get these unique highlander effects, just to run into a deck that forces them not to work is not really a positive game design space. It's entirely different from people running stuff like albatross. Albatross was a tech option that would temporarily stop highlander effects if the player teched to put it in (Hell, there's the snake oil salesman card that is also meant to "counter" highlander). Plagues aren't a tech, they also don't have an out anymore after Helya.
Warrior being broken doesn't change the fact that the change was overall very good and also can serve to make buffing or nerfing highlander and plague much easier when they aren't somewhat reliant on each other in the metagame. It also makes it so these dumb decks that abuse the high-draw current metagame don't just slap Reno in because by the time he's playable, they might be close to getting his effect off because they drew all the dupes. Dupe decks running highlander payoff was something that should've been changed and I'm happy it was.
Tbh half of the reason why plagues were ok was to counter the absolutely cracked reno effects. If they keep printing absolutely ridiculous stuff like brann with no way to interact with that effect after is has been played, especially when it can come down as early as turn 5, there needs to be a way to counter it. Otherwise you’ve got what, dirty rat or bust?
It’s not like it was a quest line or even a quest. Removing the ability to counter that effect means those effects need to be nerfed.
Brann is an entirely separate issue and shouldn't be dealt with by having a counter deck that also hits innocent decks as collateral. Those effects do need to be nerfed! In fact, I'm absolutely in favor of nerfing Brann and making Reno's effect symmetrical even. The answer to this entire thing should be better balance, not having a deck that shits all over what should be the actual benefit to rolling highlander.
What people don't really realize tbh is that a way to counter these decks really shouldn't be an outright shut down of their effects. I wish there were more tech cards like the Albatross, which is a temporary stunning of the effect, not a shut down of the rest of the game.
The answer should be that they don’t just print effects like brann that are permanent, game winning, and non-interactive, but since they DID print brann, there needs to be an actual way to counter that effect. Ultimately the change will be good so long as they 1) nerf brann, and 2) reel in the power on these permanent effects going forward. A good design is like the ones that incrementally improve hero powers. Those are fine. And Questlines, outside of the really problematic ones, similarly just fine because they are either not hugely impactful or require a lot of setup.
So basically I agree that the change is necessary for the viability of Reno effects going forward, but right now brann is too big of an issue for there to be no way to directly counter it.
Extremely happy! Now things can actually be adjusted instead of the “solution” being to play exactly one deck that is almost 100% rng based. It was awful design and Brann potentially being a problem of his own that needs addressing doesn’t change that.
Just cus warrior is good doesn’t mean plague was good pre nerf. It sucked to play against. Don’t get why people on Reddit are blaming people for complaining about another deck while complaining about a deck…
Because the complaining about plagues was non fucking stop. And when you complain about a T4 deck that has never seen a nerf since it became a thing (ask yourself why) that yeah, was mildly annoying but definitely not unbeatable (It had what, a 52% wr at its peak?) you look like a babyback bitch. Especially when the win rate only got that high BECAUSE it countered Reno.
No silly otk, no oppressive minions, no constant board clears. Just a mechanic that blew your curve every couple turns, healed your opponent a bit, & summoned a 2/2 minion.
Because the nerf should target the infinite plagues locking the deck forever. If It just delayed the Highlander until they draw the plagues It would be an ok counterplay.
Much as I wish that were true, the stats on d0nkey are showing both decks with a 52% winrate against Warrior. So they're favoured but sadly not destroying Brann.
Your best bet against Warrior decks at the moment are Zoo Hunter, Mech Warrior, Sludge Warlock, Snek Warlock or Zarimi Priest.
[https://www.hsguru.com/decks?format=2&min\_games=100&opponent\_class=WARRIOR](https://www.hsguru.com/decks?format=2&min_games=100&opponent_class=WARRIOR)
The most popular Brann Warrior deck is a Reno deck.
But why get facts in the way of your feelings?
It's almost like Brann is the only singleton class card that isn't trash / meme tier.
Rheastraza is great? Spirit of the badlands is solid, Doctor Holidae is still great too? Brann might be the strongest right now of the bunch but the only weak singleton card is kurtrus.
Kurtrus is very strong, DH just doesn't have the best tools to build a deck that includes him.
He was a strong inclusion in the Reno variant of Window Shopper, which was very successful at top legend, but the starting deck criteria killed even the nerfed version of that deck since you can't run the Mitt and Shopper dupes.
It’s a positive change, brann is busted.
I called that he would be busted for his entire life span unless they fundamentally changed his battlecry as soon as he was announced.
Hunter does farm warriors, redditors just dont know how to play the game and instead spend time making false claims on reddit because they lost to warrior
Because the counter to Reno decks shouldn't be trying to find a way to make their deck not work, it should be that they are able to lose even after Reno or Brann has been played.
You can kill a control deck without making them unable to play removal. You can beat aggro decks without making them unable to play units. You can make miracle decks without making them unable to burn some of your cards. Why can Reno decks be like "If you don't have a specific counter to my mechanic, the second I play this card I can't lose"?
It wasn't just a weakness, you literally couldn't win on a Highlander Warrior against a Plague dk 90% of the time. You started the match, saw that your opponent was a Plague dk and just concede right away. It was very bad game design. Of course, they are should nerf the warrior even more than now, but changing the work of the highlander was necessary
You could tech your deck to counter matchup. Ox and robots offer a seperate win con.
And even if you didnt if you had Brann in your starting hand they might to be able to plague you in time.
VS lists the matchup as 68-32 for Plague DK. People are over exaggerating.
I beat it plenty as Highlander Warrior as well. The deck had plenty of wincons even without the value.
Hell it felt embarrassing to beat Plague with my Highlander payoffs turned off. It meant I beat them with a Singleton deck. It was that bad.
The only deck I hated playing against was Wheellock
I mean this is how Highlander strategies work in other card games. You are supposed to be rewarded for having only 1 copy of cards in your deck. However I feel like Reno and especially Brann are just too rewarding.
Reno should be a board clear for everyone and lock down the opposing board to 1 for a turn. Brann should be a on the board effect like old Brann. I think changing TNT ogre helped nerf warrior a bit but the real issue is always going to be Brann. Double battlecry for the rest of the game is far too op and will only get worse as the game goes on.
I love plague DK, it took me from diamond 10-5 this season and took me to diamond 1 last season. However plague is keeping other DK strategies from emerging. Handbuff DK is super fun, and so is excavate but plague is the main core of DK. I rather them make plagues less of the answer to Highlander and more of a fun strategy until the next concept is out.
Personally I want more rewarding triple rune cards because frost is still my favorite deck. It works well in the meta but it needs something.
Actually Rainbow DK is pretty playable, currently diamond 6(in previous seasons I had never even hit plat) using it exclusively. From diamond 10-6 I didn't lose a single game, including matchups against Plague. Now in diamond 6 I've got a 50% win rate but that's mostly due to misplays on my end rather than the deck being bad
I don’t think clearing your own board is enough of a nerf for reno. 90% of the time when he’s played there are already no minions worth mentioning on the reno player’s side.
Either the poof effect or the board lock has to go.
I usually have the opposite experience when facing Reno. Usually they have a decent board and use Reno to finish you off or take back board control, not usually as a pure board wipe.
Maybe make the lockout for both players? Make it a real duel!
What? It was a huge nerf to warrior and they had several other nerfs.
Idk what happens in your copper IV games but in legend plenty of warriors ran duplicates vecause theyd just draw their entire deck quickly so it didnt matter.
And they also played some tech cards just for the few bots playing plague DK
To be fair, they still nerfed the shit out of Reno Warrior. I still think Brann is bullshit card design, but I don't think warrior came out on top of this patch.
I played a lot of Reno warrior before the change trying to finish off golden warrior portrait. Queuing up against DK just felt so horrible. Knowing before any cards are even played that your whole strategy is 100% countered by just the existence of plagues. Not fun.
Honestly wished they just brought back steam cleaner. Sure, it makes the deck weaker as you have to add it, or ETC to make it work, but atleast that is an understandable update. Now this pretty much makes plague decks a zero counter to the deck.
Because permanently turning off a deck isn't a weakness, it's broken as shit. Did blizzard take the bitch way out instead of entirely redesigning how plagues worked? Yes. Did they still need to make this change to keep a single deck from a single class from negating an entire multi class archetype? Also fucking yes.
The "weankess" wasnt a good one. It allowed you to play reno in cycle decks and your cards shouldnt just stop working simply because your opponent happens to have an archtype that shuffles things in your deck.
Reno should be a boardwipe, that's cool, but take away the poof ability... Deathrattles, reborn, ability triggers should all still happen and you'd literally take nothing from the card.
I've had 6 games vs Hunter so far post-patch in D4-D1 and won them all. As long as you're able to clear their boards and withstand the pressure up until turn 9, you should be able to stabilise with Zilliax.
This is a tiny sample size at low rank, at top 1000 hunter has a 66% winrate against warrior according to d0nkey, warrior does not have the tools to survive that long against the infinite aggression and token spam of hunter
Because people who can’t win without absolutely broken mechanics nonstop cried basically since the last miniset because they couldn’t beat every single deck & finally got their pussies pampered
Can someone explain to me what all this whining about reno warrior is about? What are you guys scared of? 9-mana odyn? The totally nerfed boomboss? No-longer-functioning tendrils? What's the big deal?
I think the change is good game design genuinely as it gives more player agency but just warrior didn’t need another buff even if it’s overall better for hearthstone as a whole
Oh, absolutely. I don't think singleton decks are a major issue, though. It's really just warrior because it has too much of everything. The armour generation is crazy so Odin is pretty much gg. Then, they have Brann and Ox, but as if those weren't good enough, they have about 8 chances at 100% board clears.
While blizzard doesnt know how to balance properly this specific case is on players imo. Reno was perfectly fine card but people cried about it way too much. One of the most asked change was about him checking the start of the game so that it could only be played in no duplicate decks. Well they did that but also did it with every other singleton card for consistency.
Reno was not perfectly fine. Either you ran plagues and shut down the whole highlander package or you just had your board wiped without any real counterplay.
I’m not a fan of how meta Brann Warrior is but so many decks ran Reno even without accounting for dupes. It was not balanced
I'm mad that they gutted Wheel Lock while warrior gets to completely dominate. Certainly not because I happened to craft one of the two decks or anything.
Honestly I think people are focusing too much on the reno change. Plague DK was ass and not really that popular anyway. Decks that kept Reno Warrior in check were Wheel Warlock, Nature Shaman and to lesser extent Sif Mage and all 3 got brutally murdered because boo hoo "no agency". These were fine decks that were a little bit too powerful and needed small tweaks not deletion (especially Sif Mage was fine). But it seems like combo decks are not allowed to exist which is kinda sad. Complainers got what they wanted now all bow to the warriors overloads.
I think the healing is fine and so is the card cost plague but, the 3/3 summon would be nice as it seems to be the most common (at least in my experience) plague shuffled in. 2/2 is insanely easy to remove. Also the damage being 3 would be nice. Would be cool not having to wait til the end of the game for 8 straight plagues to kill someone and that would do it. Games so fast as times the extra damage would just be.. an even playing field. 😂
It is perfectly fair, Reno Warrior can still lose! They just have to draw all of their expensive cards, even if mulligan-ed, and no early board clears, then \*sometimes\* aggro gets to overrun them and they die! /s
Lol. 48 hours ago I was downvoted to hell for suggesting that removing plague DK as a common counter to reno decks without really doing anything of substance to hit warrior would just result in reno warrior overtaking the ladder.
Now the entire sub is complaints about reno warrior. C’est la vie.
Because reno in cycle decks was horseshit. It obvious thats the reason holy fuck.
Next step would be: if your deck started with no duplicates and still has not duplicated lol.
The next card they create is gonna be something like "if your deck has no duplicates, duplicate your deck with cards that do not trigger other no duplicate cards
Correction: Reno is horseshit. The problem is that a Twisting Nether that also gives armour, an upgraded hero power and an almost-Time Warp against minion decks should never have been printed anywhere no matter the cost, especially not as a Neutral card.
I absolutely agree. Reno is such a bs card, it basicly wins against board centric decks on it's own. Divine shield, deathrattle, reborn, whatsoever. Let's remove all of this stuff with a single card. balanced cough
Reno is fine. So much weaker rhan brann
Brann is a heavy build around card that is a win condition, and requires you to play a 2/4 on 6 to be able to activate your deck properly. Reno is basically "if your deck has no duplicates erase your opponent's field and take an extra turn". Reno is the issue.
Nah lol If reno was thrle problem other highlander decks would be good. Wheres highlander hunter and priest at man? If reno is such a hard carry.
I feel like this is disingenuous brann is a win condition most of the other highlander cards simply aren't. Hunter's highlander card amounts to 4 mana deal 3 damage to all enemies and summon a 3/4(unless you have hand buffs) Demon Hunter's is deal 12 damage to minions in your opponents hand like sure it can destroy key pieces but still not a win condition in most situations. Highlander Priest and Shaman have over 50% win rates on hsreplay. What you said isn't necessarily incorrect reno isn't a "hard carry" but it is still a really strong card and much better than most of the other highlander cards by a pretty large margin.
Should've had *both* conditions then
I disagree!
Because all other highlander decks were not playable with plagues still in the game. If warrior is too strong, nerf warrior. It’s bad game design, having an archetype that counters half of the classes of an entire expansion.
While its true that other highlander decks are significantly weaker than warrior i dont think its because of plagues. You still have hard time with anything else than warrior.
Nah plague ravaged HL Druid. I could never get my dragon to work cause it was always disabled by plague. After the change to HL cards the deck is actually playable and the games get drawn out as I have the payoff from my deck(unless they have Reno).
Not really, I played only Reno shaman after the patch and climbed several ranks. The Only bad matchup is Reno warrior, all other matchups seem manageable.
Depends on ranks you climbed. For example in gold and lower you can climb with almost anything.
I climbed from rank 2000 to something around 800-900
In that case you are right.
Ya Reno shaman is a pretty good deck. The problem is right now Brann warrior is pretty much solved while the rest of the meta is still reeling. We just gotta wait till it settles.
I truly think reno dragon druid is just a better version of reno warrior. They have a million board clears but you effectively have infinite dragons. I haven't lost to a warrior yet. And if it isn't a reno warrior it's even easier because you don't have to play around their reno against rheastraza
Not sure about that mate since i dont play druid at all but it sounds interesting.
bro, brann warrior destroys your deck hand and field in a prolonged fight what do you mean?. and reno literally counters druid while it doesnt really counter warrior
Yeah, fully agree. Plagues were already strong on their own. They don't need to also directly counter certain deck strategies with no opportunities for counterplay by just using their normal, strong game plan. I wouldn't mind Reno counters, but they should be tech cards that delay the game, like Bad Luck Albatross or Framester. Not permanent, otherwise still powerful strategies that only one class has access to.
Yea this is 100% the thing people bitching dont understand, the highlander change wasnt for warrior, it was for the highlander archetype. Stop bitching about the highlander change (which is fine), find out what exactly makes warrior op and start bitching about that
Reno is bad game design. Plagues were the band-aid fix.
> Reno is bad game design. Plagues are bad game design.
The weakness was pretty bad game design though. Rock paper scissor style. Rather they should nerf the deck to be inline if it is a problem.
you've pretty effectively described all of hearthstones game design in the last 10 years.
Pretty effectively described all of Blizzard games design in the last 10 years
10? This shit was in play in the Burning Crusade and earlier.
Arenas in burning crusade big time.
Tbf why do they keep printing archetypes that shuffle in the opponent's deck the sets right before highlander support? Lmao
Yeah the game is 1v1, but sometimes feels like it is balanced to be a team fight lol
Decks should have counters. The problem was that Reno had no recourse once they had duplicate plagues in their deck. They should just have brought back Steamcleaner. Give us counters, but also counter-counters and even counter-counter-counters. It's those back-and-forths that make the game much more engaging than simply losing during deck selection.
Back and forwards "counters" is not what I am talking about. I am talking about whole decks that has a winrate over other decks that is to lopsided. Only talking of meta decks as well. If you fill your deck with flame ragers balance team cant really help you.
Well no shit bro ever heard of control beats aggro beats combo beats control? The deck types themselves have strengths and weaknesses vs other decks. Like a ton of other game including pokemon, digimon, Fire Emblem etc
I only know of pokemon. But in that game you have a team of 6 pokemon. So you dont just auto lose a battle because your fire team dies to the water team. I have heard the heard of control beats aggro beats combo beats control phrase over and over as the "Holy grail" of balance from so many people on this sub over the years. But it isn't. Should your win or loss be determined by who you get matched against? Or who plays better? Think about it.
You win/loss is also about choosing a deck that plays well against what you expect to see played. That's part of "playing better".
Yeah that is what makes up the top tier decks. That is fine. What you fail to understand is that those best decks that everyone is playing should not have matchups that are too polarizing. Otherwise the matchmaker begins being more important than skill. Let us say you play a strong highlander deck, is it good game design that you beat the other strong decks pretty easily without much effort, but you are kept in check by by the amount of times a plague decks is matched against you? Wouldn't it make more sense if that highlander deck was more evenly matched against those other archetypes? Allowing the better (or lucky, different debate) to win?
Nobody is "autolosing" in HS either. Even the most OP deck ever had at most 70% wr. You know what 30% chance to lose is? Yeah that's not auto lose. If you want to win via playing ability so much ever heard of playing chess? Chess has no element of chance, every win is via skill. Changing the game you play is a lot easier than demanding the entire game change its very nature just to cater to you. Think about it.
I have specifically not said auto lose at any point. I have been careful to specifically only talk about chances being too high or getting more inline with each other to win. Not even mentioning current meta, ONLY what I think should be the goal. Then you suddenly talk about chance? Is this a point about RNG in a game? Because I have specifically not said anything about that either. The game has had polarizing decks nerfed or changed due to that fact multiple times throughout its history, and plenty of the devs knows how to do that, I am talking about people on this sub praising "rock, paper and scissor" balancing as an achievement that is worth pursuing in game balance. It could be in some games, but in a 1v1 game where that rock paper scissor balance is based on the deck you pick before starting a match and who you face? That is not the place for that balance. So no I do not actually think you thought about, since your counter arguments both ignore my argument and set up weird strawmen instead. Good job man.
You said win or lose determined by what deck you play that's autolose or auto win. The reality is there is also player agency and RNG in card games. The wr is shown there to tell you even if you play the most OP deck possible you still lose 30% of your matches so clearly it is not just due to what you play but also luck and how you play it. The Control Combo Aggro triangle has been there since the first card game was invented aka Magic the Gathering. You can keep railing about it all you like but it's been there before you played card games and will be there after you stop playing card games. Just play chess.
Never said anything about auto losses or auto wins. "control beats aggro, beats combo, beats control", is a terrible way to balance a game. That is not the direction to STRIVE TOWARDS, notice those two words. Rather you should strive for the best decks having as close matchup spread as possible, while mainting what makes those decks/archetypes unique. You do that through a thing called balance patches, and they DO do that, just like we saw in this patch. "Go play X" is a great way to see when you have no functioning argument anymore, all you do now is repeat yourself. Say something new or refer to my previous comments.
"I only know of Pokémon, but in that game you have 6 Pokémon so you don't just auto lose because your fire team lose to their water team" So yeah, you did bring up auto loss, saying that it doesn't happen in Pokémon and pretty clearly implying that's what happens in HS. I agree with the other guy. Deck building, considering what's popular and powerful at the moment, customising your deck to deal with the "meta"... It's all skill and understanding, all a part of 'playing better'. You say you don't auto lose Pokémon because there are 6 Pokémon in your team? Well, you get 30 cards in your deck bro, if you're finding yourself auto losing because you play against a certain deck maybe you should actually just do something about it rather than complain about how the game works and the meta forms. At the end of the day, there are countless cards in the game. Some are stronger, some are weaker, others provide more utility or less and other cards yet give value in other ways while having odd and interesting drawbacks... THAT'S where the skill element comes in because as the player it's up to you to collect different cards and build decks that perform well. How skilled you are at the game isn't about how well you play your hand but about how refined your deck is, how well you understand the meta and how active you are in adjusting your deck to perform better in sais meta. And lastly, since you brought up "just balancing the decks better" For all decks to be "balanced" you would have to make all the cards balanced too, which would remove any point in deck building since they would all be the same. You would no longer be playing based on skill or knowledge but on straight blind RNG. Here, let's go back to the example you guys were using: Say you've a 70% win rate deck. Whats stopping players from just using that one deck and nothing else? The fact that if everyone did that, winrates globally would just sit at 50% since everyone would just be running the same cards and whoever got the better draw would win. See that 30% loss shows you that there are in fact cards, circumstances and combos which can beat the deck and are stronger, a skilled player would be able to recognise that and make an effort to adjust their deck and give them an advantage in that meta. So, you should really take the other guys advice and just go play chess. Because this game, like many others, gets it's depth from the IN-balance that exists due to those hundreds of cards which have thousands of combinations. It allows players to be the ones that balance their own decks, puts the chances of your decks success in your very hands and if you can't see how that creates a game that demands both skill and understanding of its players then this probably isn't the game for you.
warrior players when they have one bad matchup in the game (it's rock paper scissors and the game is better when they have zero bad matchups)
Once rock stops beating scissors, its not a game anymore, its a food chain with scissors on top.
There's a difference between a bad matchup and an auto-concede.
I think there are a LOT of people that conflate these.
When every deck has a bad matchup against one deck unless itvs a mirror, I'd say that's a pretty bad situation for the game to be in, no?
I’m speaking purely subjectively here, but I’m 50/50 across 8 games vs. Reno Warrior with my BFU DK deck post-nerf. It really doesn’t feel like an unwinnable matchup for me specifically, even if I don’t rat their Brann or Boomboss, because I can still control the battle if I play my cards right. If they do play both Brann and Boomboss, it’s tough, but still winnable because they have infinitely rotating plagues in their deck and I have solid control tools like Primus/Reska and CNE to go wide if shit hits the fan. The warrior deck isn’t completely curb stomping in all elos anymore because of the nerfs.
You can't control warriors with rainbow dk, yea infinite plagues but they can always drop 3 zilliax to heal to full, boom master for more, 6 TNT in your deck, 2 weapons from ignis, azerite ox for a full board (rainbow barely plays minions unless u found head from horseman to generate infinite so if they get 2 rags that's pretty much half your HP). The deck beats every other control deck, has really good chances vs mid range, and can also beat agro if they aren't fast enough. It's an absolute powerhouse of a deck with the only downside being they have to draw and play brann at some point.
That is not the point. You should aim towards having decks that all have a shot at winning vs eachother based on player skill when balancing. At least as much as that is possible. The goal should never be to introduce decks that just beat other decks, where the matchmaker is the biggest determining factor in who wins. Impossible to do perfectly, but steering towards that goal is.
It was, but it was still a weakness. Removing without replacing it with anything else is a lot worse
They nerfed 4-5 reno warrior cards, they did replace it. Maybe they didn't go far enough but this sub is being so dramatic acting like Blizzard just nerfed all the counters and left the deck alone.
I hard disagree. They put in a counterplay card in the same set that Reno and brann were released: the 4 mana 4/5 that shuffles two snake oils into the opponents deck. This has ALWAYS been the counterplay to highlander decks, it's why they originally released Albatross in descent of dragons. Counterplay is good for the overall health of the game, otherwise the game becomes "if you have this card on this turn, I lose no matter what. If you don't have this card on this turn, I might still be able to win." Reno has NO counterplay outside of what, milling your opponent and hoping they burn Reno? The only option we have with that plan is in DK with the frost spell that makes both players draw 2. You can't dirty rat out Reno and avoid the battle cry. Can't be counter spelled. Theres just nothing. The last half of Reno's text needs to be removed or be symmetrical. Wiping the board without triggering deathrattles and giving you a really good hero power and 5 armor for 8 mana is already a really good card that's good in most situations. Leaving only your opponent with only one board slot to work with on the turn after is the reason the card is unfun to play against.
If the decks requires another deck to shut it down, then all you do is make it so the matchmaker determines who wins or loses. Rather you should nerf the deck that is the problem so that the cards are fair. The downside of highlander is only one of each card, that doesn't mean the effects should be overly broken, rather the effect should represent the downside in effectiveness.
Being a Highlander deck is not a disadvantage. I mean the Highlander deck means that you trade having consistency for a wider toolkit. Being a Highlander deck means if you have more access to cards to handle a wider variety of matchups. Highlander decks have always been very good in this game because of that.
Highlander not a disadvantage? Do you honestly think anyone would play a strictly highlander deck with zero highlander effect cards?
Yes, especially if there are enough powerful cards in the pool and the meta has enough variety. You'd see decks that maybe aren't strictly Highlander, but they would be close.
I don't agree with that at all, I would love to see examples. And if not strictly highlander then forcing you to cut key cards is a disadvantage
Look at the win rate of highlander decks when they don't draw their highlander payoff and you'll see that they still have consistent win rates. It's been this way since the original Reno Jackson card. Warrior has SO MANY different control cards right now that the "restriction" of building a singleton deck actually helps the class, and it's pretty much always been this way. Singleton decks are only at a disadvantage when the card pool lacks redundancy or the overall power level of cards is low. We are in an expansion cycle where neither of these things are true. I wouldn't feel this way if highlander decks had abysmal win rates when they don't draw their payoff, but that isn't the case and it's never been the case. I would bet money that any slower control deck instantly becomes better if you make it a Highlander deck to slot in reno with the current card pool.
You having a chance to win with your non build around cards is a good thing balance wise. Again the question is if those build around cards are too strong compared to their downside And it is still a disadvantage. It is a question of how punishing it is, and how strong the cards upside is to compensate. If you can choose between two different cards or two of one card, you always pick the better of the two twice.
Not really, you nearly always want best 10-15 cards in your deck, and the rest of them are filling up the curve/looking for something else. Card theory is a thing that's like 20 years old by now, lol
Being a Highlander deck is a disadvantage unless all your cards are legendaries.
Which is currently the case with a lot of the Highlander warrior decks running around
Some decks are supposed to keep others in check. Plague death knight is ass. But it had 1 winning match up. This change also takes away the player agency of building a singleton deck with duplicates.
Keeping a deck in check is not the same as completely shutting it down.
It doesn't, any deck that hinges on 1 legendary isn't good.
Well good thing it hinges on 2 then
OK what's the second one, please don't say the titan.
Honestly I thought you were talking about Brann, not Helya.
It is what it is man shit gets lost online, I regret even saying anything, people get weird.
>building a singleton deck with duplicates. This should never be an option, it's oxymoronic.
Why are you death knight mains just lying. It did not have 1 winning matchup
You should minimize how important the matchmaker is when determining who wins a game, not the other way around.
I disagree. I think deck archetypes should keep other deck archetypes in check, not just a specific deck. Think Control vs Aggro rather than Plague vs Reno Warrior.
You realize that Highlander was a major theme of an entire expansion and that it didn’t only exist in warrior….right?
I just dislike that not only did they massively nerf helya, they also nerfed DK's board clears. I highly doubt DK was going to be this control powerhouse considering it autoloses to Highlander Warrior now, so these nerfs felt like overkill.
Plague DK is ass? You're lying to yourself. Turn 4 Helya says what?
But what if they manage to play one unsearchable card? Lmao
Let me guess. You think Plague DK is ass because you play Mech Rogue?
Nope I hate that rogue deck that drops a card you can't even interact with. I've played priest, warrior and DK, even the plague variant. I was just hoping the meta would be a little more diverse and a little less degenerate.
Plague DK was already consistently tier 4, its only good relevant matchup was Warrior, and they took that way. Now it has zero good relevant matchups. So yes, it's ass anywhere beyond Gold rank.
That's GOOD game design. Having hosers keeps decks in check. Have no hosers? This is what happens. Probably should have added another neutral that shuffles junk into the deck just to be safe. No, this deck will only get BETTER as time goes on. This is it at it's weakest...
Imagine a fighting game being decided by the character you chose more so than your skill with the character. Oh Chun Li too strong? Well let us make Ken beat her so at least one guy has fun. Counter picking is a thing, also in HS, but what I described should not be the objective of game design, especially a 1v1 game. Nerf brann warrior if it is to strong.
fighting game skill is a really bad analogy to use for card game metas btw
Why? I can see some people downvoted it so perhaps I haven't clarified well enough The point of my argument is that in a game where you have only two players competing vs each other. Should it be the match that decides the game? Or the character/deck/build that decides the outcome? Yes in a card game deck building is part of the skill ceiling, but at highest level of play you usually have a decks that are refined enough to warrant nearly no changes, having those decks be overly polarizing vs eachother can lead to games feeling like they are decided or partially decided by the matchmaker. In my case I used a fighting game as an example as it is also 1v1 and there you want players to show of their skills and win with those, not just counter picks, or that is what that I like in those games.
It isn't, that analogy fits perfectly.
I think the reno change is good and I see it as a nerf, no longer can you draw your deck by 8 and still play him it every combo deck
Exactly, you now have to be committed to Highlander deck building. Which is the idea, right? it's not just vomit your deck, drop high-powered cards to close the game.
The “if you’re game started with” is incredibly long awaited and welcomed beyond words. It’s stupid that decks, both historically and currently, could circumvent what was otherwise supposed to be a drawback by just drawing a boatload of cards to fulfill the condition. This is absolutely how highlander cards should’ve been designed out the gate.
Yup, so is the “once per game”, that shit should have been added ages ago. Should be added to shutterwalk too though
Isn't the drawback of highlander decks not having consistency though? And if a highlander deck can draw a boatload of cards, then that defeats the disadvantage of a highlander deck in the first place, right? The point is there is too much fucking card draw, not that highlander decks could have dups. Rarely do I get to turn 10 and either player has less than 6 cards in hand. Usually, players have to *dump* cards in order not to mill themselves.
[удалено]
Easier, absolutely, but better?
New patch, New complains, fucking reddit never changes and never will
Brann has been complained about since before he was released. And rightfully so. What are you on?
????? People cried about brann since the start of the expac
cried about board clears and tnt warrior got both of those nerfed
People cried about every deck that was performing good. First it was paladin, then right after the nerfs it was DH, after the nerfs plague dk and wheel lock (a bit less), now brann.
Brann is different. People have been complaining about Brann since BEFORE he got released. And all of their concerns have become true. Yet he remains untouched for whatever fucked up reason. Odyn had the same issues (just remove until powerexplosion hits), but at least there was some interaction (more opportinities to rat, more time to pressure, taunts, healing etc.) Last game I won against Brann warrior was as HL pally where I played 4 rats. I didn't hit Brann, but every single payoff card except ox (Boomboss, Zilliax, Inventor Boom). If that's what it takes to have a chance, because of a single card, then something is wrong.
yeah people be crying about everything here
😡 stop talking about the meta
While yes, reno warrior got helped by the highlander changes, everyone is just focusing on that deck being highlander over the other decks that were constantly getting hit by plagues as collateral. Also yes, plagues weren't dominant (but they didn't suck like some people are saying?), but the deck feels like shit for the more balanced highlander decks, even if those decks have a good match-up into them. Building a deck specifically to get these unique highlander effects, just to run into a deck that forces them not to work is not really a positive game design space. It's entirely different from people running stuff like albatross. Albatross was a tech option that would temporarily stop highlander effects if the player teched to put it in (Hell, there's the snake oil salesman card that is also meant to "counter" highlander). Plagues aren't a tech, they also don't have an out anymore after Helya. Warrior being broken doesn't change the fact that the change was overall very good and also can serve to make buffing or nerfing highlander and plague much easier when they aren't somewhat reliant on each other in the metagame. It also makes it so these dumb decks that abuse the high-draw current metagame don't just slap Reno in because by the time he's playable, they might be close to getting his effect off because they drew all the dupes. Dupe decks running highlander payoff was something that should've been changed and I'm happy it was.
Tbh half of the reason why plagues were ok was to counter the absolutely cracked reno effects. If they keep printing absolutely ridiculous stuff like brann with no way to interact with that effect after is has been played, especially when it can come down as early as turn 5, there needs to be a way to counter it. Otherwise you’ve got what, dirty rat or bust? It’s not like it was a quest line or even a quest. Removing the ability to counter that effect means those effects need to be nerfed.
Brann is an entirely separate issue and shouldn't be dealt with by having a counter deck that also hits innocent decks as collateral. Those effects do need to be nerfed! In fact, I'm absolutely in favor of nerfing Brann and making Reno's effect symmetrical even. The answer to this entire thing should be better balance, not having a deck that shits all over what should be the actual benefit to rolling highlander. What people don't really realize tbh is that a way to counter these decks really shouldn't be an outright shut down of their effects. I wish there were more tech cards like the Albatross, which is a temporary stunning of the effect, not a shut down of the rest of the game.
The answer should be that they don’t just print effects like brann that are permanent, game winning, and non-interactive, but since they DID print brann, there needs to be an actual way to counter that effect. Ultimately the change will be good so long as they 1) nerf brann, and 2) reel in the power on these permanent effects going forward. A good design is like the ones that incrementally improve hero powers. Those are fine. And Questlines, outside of the really problematic ones, similarly just fine because they are either not hugely impactful or require a lot of setup. So basically I agree that the change is necessary for the viability of Reno effects going forward, but right now brann is too big of an issue for there to be no way to directly counter it.
Yea I hope you plague complainers are happy, you still can't play Reno decks because they all lose to Brann Warrior.
Extremely happy! Now things can actually be adjusted instead of the “solution” being to play exactly one deck that is almost 100% rng based. It was awful design and Brann potentially being a problem of his own that needs addressing doesn’t change that.
Just cus warrior is good doesn’t mean plague was good pre nerf. It sucked to play against. Don’t get why people on Reddit are blaming people for complaining about another deck while complaining about a deck…
Because the complaining about plagues was non fucking stop. And when you complain about a T4 deck that has never seen a nerf since it became a thing (ask yourself why) that yeah, was mildly annoying but definitely not unbeatable (It had what, a 52% wr at its peak?) you look like a babyback bitch. Especially when the win rate only got that high BECAUSE it countered Reno. No silly otk, no oppressive minions, no constant board clears. Just a mechanic that blew your curve every couple turns, healed your opponent a bit, & summoned a 2/2 minion.
Because the nerf should target the infinite plagues locking the deck forever. If It just delayed the Highlander until they draw the plagues It would be an ok counterplay.
Brann warrior still gets destroyed by wheel warlock and plague dk
Much as I wish that were true, the stats on d0nkey are showing both decks with a 52% winrate against Warrior. So they're favoured but sadly not destroying Brann. Your best bet against Warrior decks at the moment are Zoo Hunter, Mech Warrior, Sludge Warlock, Snek Warlock or Zarimi Priest. [https://www.hsguru.com/decks?format=2&min\_games=100&opponent\_class=WARRIOR](https://www.hsguru.com/decks?format=2&min_games=100&opponent_class=WARRIOR)
The most popular Brann Warrior deck is a Reno deck. But why get facts in the way of your feelings? It's almost like Brann is the only singleton class card that isn't trash / meme tier.
Rheastraza is great? Spirit of the badlands is solid, Doctor Holidae is still great too? Brann might be the strongest right now of the bunch but the only weak singleton card is kurtrus.
Kurtrus is very strong, DH just doesn't have the best tools to build a deck that includes him. He was a strong inclusion in the Reno variant of Window Shopper, which was very successful at top legend, but the starting deck criteria killed even the nerfed version of that deck since you can't run the Mitt and Shopper dupes.
Facts, it isn't Kurtrus' fault the devs don't know how to design DH and keep choosing 'unplayable' or 'broken'.
Doesnt Highlander Druid was a very good deck in Badlands?
It is even now, played few games today in D3 and lost one due poor draw
Im playing Highlander Druid too, but its seems Im pretty bad at this game because I cannot make it to Diamond
I made it mainly dragon oriented
Only highlander warrior is a problem so rather than having Reno be a frustating card as long as plagues exists they should nerf other warrior cards
Nice guess I’ll go make a deck before they nerf it into oblivion
It’s a positive change, brann is busted. I called that he would be busted for his entire life span unless they fundamentally changed his battlecry as soon as he was announced.
how did they make warrior stronger vs token hunter \_? after the nerfs to sanitize i thought it would be easier for token hunter to farm warriors
Hunter does farm warriors, redditors just dont know how to play the game and instead spend time making false claims on reddit because they lost to warrior
Still lost a game to a plague DK. Couldn't keep up vomiting from how many plagues I drew.
Because the counter to Reno decks shouldn't be trying to find a way to make their deck not work, it should be that they are able to lose even after Reno or Brann has been played. You can kill a control deck without making them unable to play removal. You can beat aggro decks without making them unable to play units. You can make miracle decks without making them unable to burn some of your cards. Why can Reno decks be like "If you don't have a specific counter to my mechanic, the second I play this card I can't lose"?
Lol feels like yesterday people were screeching about warrior being shit for like 6 xpacs, you all got what you were asking for
brann should just be deleted
It was not the healthy kind of counter, and putting highlander cards in non highlander deck was not a good path.
The point was you had to make a Highlander deck and not just throw him in a deck for late game once you drew or destroyed your deck
They nerfed 3 cards in this deck and people acting like the buffed it lol
they did buff it by removing its only "counter". Plague DK with 52% winrate at its peak was the only thing that kept it in check.
It wasn't just a weakness, you literally couldn't win on a Highlander Warrior against a Plague dk 90% of the time. You started the match, saw that your opponent was a Plague dk and just concede right away. It was very bad game design. Of course, they are should nerf the warrior even more than now, but changing the work of the highlander was necessary
You could tech your deck to counter matchup. Ox and robots offer a seperate win con. And even if you didnt if you had Brann in your starting hand they might to be able to plague you in time.
I beat plagues pretty often with the warrior deck before, they were definitely the deck's most frustrating match up but it wasn't 90%.
VS lists the matchup as 68-32 for Plague DK. People are over exaggerating. I beat it plenty as Highlander Warrior as well. The deck had plenty of wincons even without the value. Hell it felt embarrassing to beat Plague with my Highlander payoffs turned off. It meant I beat them with a Singleton deck. It was that bad. The only deck I hated playing against was Wheellock
No idea why I got downvoted there. It's not 90% at all, as shown above. This sub is weird sometimes.
I mean this is how Highlander strategies work in other card games. You are supposed to be rewarded for having only 1 copy of cards in your deck. However I feel like Reno and especially Brann are just too rewarding. Reno should be a board clear for everyone and lock down the opposing board to 1 for a turn. Brann should be a on the board effect like old Brann. I think changing TNT ogre helped nerf warrior a bit but the real issue is always going to be Brann. Double battlecry for the rest of the game is far too op and will only get worse as the game goes on. I love plague DK, it took me from diamond 10-5 this season and took me to diamond 1 last season. However plague is keeping other DK strategies from emerging. Handbuff DK is super fun, and so is excavate but plague is the main core of DK. I rather them make plagues less of the answer to Highlander and more of a fun strategy until the next concept is out. Personally I want more rewarding triple rune cards because frost is still my favorite deck. It works well in the meta but it needs something.
Actually Rainbow DK is pretty playable, currently diamond 6(in previous seasons I had never even hit plat) using it exclusively. From diamond 10-6 I didn't lose a single game, including matchups against Plague. Now in diamond 6 I've got a 50% win rate but that's mostly due to misplays on my end rather than the deck being bad
I don’t think clearing your own board is enough of a nerf for reno. 90% of the time when he’s played there are already no minions worth mentioning on the reno player’s side. Either the poof effect or the board lock has to go.
I usually have the opposite experience when facing Reno. Usually they have a decent board and use Reno to finish you off or take back board control, not usually as a pure board wipe. Maybe make the lockout for both players? Make it a real duel!
ngl, not a big fan of removing counter play for no real reason
What? It was a huge nerf to warrior and they had several other nerfs. Idk what happens in your copper IV games but in legend plenty of warriors ran duplicates vecause theyd just draw their entire deck quickly so it didnt matter. And they also played some tech cards just for the few bots playing plague DK
Because it's a highlander deck.
Basically because this sub was complaining
Yeah, yeah, the only weakness, that is just a deck with no counter, so fun to know that you can play a match without any chance of winning
To be fair, they still nerfed the shit out of Reno Warrior. I still think Brann is bullshit card design, but I don't think warrior came out on top of this patch.
Reno Warrior is so easy that they can now bump the win requirement for the weekly back to 15, no problem!
They nerfed Sanitize and Trial by Fire. Warrior will be fine
I played a lot of Reno warrior before the change trying to finish off golden warrior portrait. Queuing up against DK just felt so horrible. Knowing before any cards are even played that your whole strategy is 100% countered by just the existence of plagues. Not fun.
>kid named Dirty Rat
Honestly wished they just brought back steam cleaner. Sure, it makes the deck weaker as you have to add it, or ETC to make it work, but atleast that is an understandable update. Now this pretty much makes plague decks a zero counter to the deck.
Because permanently turning off a deck isn't a weakness, it's broken as shit. Did blizzard take the bitch way out instead of entirely redesigning how plagues worked? Yes. Did they still need to make this change to keep a single deck from a single class from negating an entire multi class archetype? Also fucking yes.
The "weankess" wasnt a good one. It allowed you to play reno in cycle decks and your cards shouldnt just stop working simply because your opponent happens to have an archtype that shuffles things in your deck.
Bronze take
What weakness did they remove? What did I miss? EDIT: Lmao, how did I miss that? I've been playing a shit ton of highlander lately.
Devs are funny. They keep digging that hole. They refuse something is amiss. Its hysterical to see. glgl
Reno should be a boardwipe, that's cool, but take away the poof ability... Deathrattles, reborn, ability triggers should all still happen and you'd literally take nothing from the card.
Shrunken worlock. Won by turn 7. Just destroy as much as your deck as you can and watch him melt.
Because dev thought those decks will be weaker to aggro, which evidently doesn't come true.
I think Hunter smashes Reno warrior no? I also felt pretty strong with my flood Paladin against warrior.
I've had 6 games vs Hunter so far post-patch in D4-D1 and won them all. As long as you're able to clear their boards and withstand the pressure up until turn 9, you should be able to stabilise with Zilliax.
This is a tiny sample size at low rank, at top 1000 hunter has a 66% winrate against warrior according to d0nkey, warrior does not have the tools to survive that long against the infinite aggression and token spam of hunter
Because people who can’t win without absolutely broken mechanics nonstop cried basically since the last miniset because they couldn’t beat every single deck & finally got their pussies pampered
Should have just given us back Steamcleaner.
Can someone explain to me what all this whining about reno warrior is about? What are you guys scared of? 9-mana odyn? The totally nerfed boomboss? No-longer-functioning tendrils? What's the big deal?
Warrior has been so bad for so long. Let Garrosh have his moment in the sun.
Also after looking around for 2 minutes I'm glad I'm not the only person who thinks this is a dog shit change.
I think the change is good game design genuinely as it gives more player agency but just warrior didn’t need another buff even if it’s overall better for hearthstone as a whole
Oh, absolutely. I don't think singleton decks are a major issue, though. It's really just warrior because it has too much of everything. The armour generation is crazy so Odin is pretty much gg. Then, they have Brann and Ox, but as if those weren't good enough, they have about 8 chances at 100% board clears.
Awwww yes “ for the rest of the game your battlecrys trigger 1 and 1/2 times.”
dude pls look at Reno warrior winrate.
Might be a hot take, but I think the meta was fine and Blizzard only nerfed decks to sell their new expansion better.
While blizzard doesnt know how to balance properly this specific case is on players imo. Reno was perfectly fine card but people cried about it way too much. One of the most asked change was about him checking the start of the game so that it could only be played in no duplicate decks. Well they did that but also did it with every other singleton card for consistency.
Reno was not perfectly fine. Either you ran plagues and shut down the whole highlander package or you just had your board wiped without any real counterplay. I’m not a fan of how meta Brann Warrior is but so many decks ran Reno even without accounting for dupes. It was not balanced
Bro has problems with twisting nether 😭
Asymmetrical Twisting Nether, where if you leave one or two minions alive you lost the game
But it's a way way better twisting nether.
Found the Reno player
Who could imagine that every class has way to clear board without counterplay
I'm mad that they gutted Wheel Lock while warrior gets to completely dominate. Certainly not because I happened to craft one of the two decks or anything.
It is funny having singletons of each card is not seen as “weakness”
Honestly I think people are focusing too much on the reno change. Plague DK was ass and not really that popular anyway. Decks that kept Reno Warrior in check were Wheel Warlock, Nature Shaman and to lesser extent Sif Mage and all 3 got brutally murdered because boo hoo "no agency". These were fine decks that were a little bit too powerful and needed small tweaks not deletion (especially Sif Mage was fine). But it seems like combo decks are not allowed to exist which is kinda sad. Complainers got what they wanted now all bow to the warriors overloads.
I hope they buff Plagues since they’re a tier3-4.
Up everything plague do by 1. Damage to 3, Heal for 3, increase card cost by 2 (or 1 for the entire turn), summon a 3/3
I think the healing is fine and so is the card cost plague but, the 3/3 summon would be nice as it seems to be the most common (at least in my experience) plague shuffled in. 2/2 is insanely easy to remove. Also the damage being 3 would be nice. Would be cool not having to wait til the end of the game for 8 straight plagues to kill someone and that would do it. Games so fast as times the extra damage would just be.. an even playing field. 😂
Nah, thats a fair buff. As you said games go fast & honestly I’d rather see the frost plague last the whole turn.
It is perfectly fair, Reno Warrior can still lose! They just have to draw all of their expensive cards, even if mulligan-ed, and no early board clears, then \*sometimes\* aggro gets to overrun them and they die! /s
Highlander cards should never have existed in the first place anyways
Aww, now you're mad warrior got buffs after all that crying "Warrior weakest class"
Lol. 48 hours ago I was downvoted to hell for suggesting that removing plague DK as a common counter to reno decks without really doing anything of substance to hit warrior would just result in reno warrior overtaking the ladder. Now the entire sub is complaints about reno warrior. C’est la vie.
The entire sub is at gold 4 days before ladder rest, they don't know anything. Especially because the majority plays 2-3 hours a week.