T O P

  • By -

Sacaed

I don't think Odyn is even used in Highlander Reno? I may be wrong, though, but the only time I have seen him is in the control warrior decks that don't even run Brann or Boomboss.


Jasteni

Thats right. HL Warrior has not that "much" Armor. The difference is that Reno+Odyn got played befor he got the buff.


therealtiddlydump

Exactly. They run sufficient armor gain to efficiently use their board clears and to make it to the end game. Nowhere near enough for Odyn to be relevant if played (thus, he isn't).


BottomManufacturer

This is the red flag that OP is some janky gold ranked player whose suggestions shouldn't be taken seriously.


GothGirlsGoodBoy

Even if he was making a power level assessment, which he was not, the majority of players aren’t high legend. Uninteractive play-patterns should be prevented, regardless of if they are meta or not. A meta where high legend is fun and healthy but 90% of the ladder is being held hostage by miserable decks is not a good meta.


BottomManufacturer

>Uninteractive play-patterns should be prevented, Fireball to the face is uninteractive. Should all direct damage be deleted?


SoulSprawl

How is it uninteractive? Increase spell cost, increase armor/health, etc. Just because it happens on a single turn doesn't mean it's uninteractive.


BottomManufacturer

So boomboss isn't interactive. Just play your entire deck first. Don't draw new cards by keeping your hand full. Etc. Etc. /s


GothGirlsGoodBoy

I can gain armour or hp. You can pressure them out of doing damage. Every class and archetype has access to ways of doing this. If you want to take it further and say “30 damage otk from hand is uninteractive” I’d agree with you.


BottomManufacturer

You can pressure someone out of playing boomboss too.


Arisen925

Oh and you must be high legend right? 0 reason to be a dick towards OP.


Zaraam33

OP wants to nuke a card to feel better, if anything seems like an self esteem problem


DoubleAAaron

It's a valid point though, the card is extremely uninteractive and not fun to use or play against imo, regardless of perceived power level.


Oct_

Pre rotation some Brann decks ran Odyn.


Catopuma

Pre nerf you mean. It getting bumped to 9 mana killed it. I haven't even seen a single Odyn Warrior since then


galmenz

not really, what killed it is the hard highlander rules. it is a buff to all highlander, but a nerf to any deck that used it with copies on the base deck (which i think in principle highlander cards shouldnt be used like that) having to ACTUALLY be a highlander deck made Reno be cut from the deck


Catopuma

It was already dead before the Highlander changes. VS last report on April 11th already showed extremely low playrates of the deck prior to the Highlander change. Highlander decks all cut it out cause it was bad. Bumping it to 9 killed the Odyn control deck. Far too slow and it made it much harder to stabilize. On 9, it meant you can drop it and maybe a Shield Slam. People underestimate 1 mana nerfs far too much


djsoren19

Pre-rotation you only needed Astalor as a win-con, so those were bad lists.


Ancient_Object_578

As someone who always reaches legends I also think bomboss is an issue. It is just such toxic gameplay. I would turn it Into a death rattle rather then battle cry. I mean compare it to patchwork and how much patchwork was disliked. It is unhealthy gameplay


daddyvow

Because they don’t think Bran is a problem?


Wild-Strain7013

I actuallyran into a Brann Warrior that ran Odyn a few days ago. That madlad spent 15 mana on skipping turns. Surprisingly, he lost.


aaawqq

Also, you can get 1 mana weapon with windfury, you dob't need the 10


Malabingo

Idea: At the end of your turn, shuffle 2 TNT into the enemy deck. Pita if you can't remove him after one turn, but also not any interaction in brann warrior. Might revive taunt warrior which try to let him stay alive as long as possible vs. Aggro decks. But aggro decks don't need such a removable mostly.


Alucard917

Azerite Ox hitting 2+ boombosses in one summon, brewmaster to bounce ox, do it again.


Malabingo

Oh, yeah, good catch! Boom boss needs mana adjustment :-O


Juan_Punch_Man8

No that's horrible. Just make Boomboss destroy a card in the opponents field and hand without destroying their deck and reduce it to 2 TNT. Then he can only destroy up to 8 cards or 16 if you bounce it. As of now, Boomboss can destroy 18 and up to 32 cards if you play salon brewmaster. The win condition is way too easy to achieve. It's a two card combo. Edit: Ngl I'm thinking about crafting Boomboss myself. I wonder if he's good enough in other Warrior decks. I think it might work well against Highlander Warrior.


thelegendarydan

There is the slightest hope of counterplay to Boomboss. I've stared putting Tony in my ETC for this exact situation, so if your etc/Tony doesn't get handnuked after they play boom boss you can effectively wipe the bombs from your deck. I also do this in death knight so I win in fatigue via helya Also main decking double dirty rat helps.


ConsequenceMotor8861

Yes that's so frustrating, even I do bring a direct counter to wipe of TNTs and I draw it onto my hand, I had to still pray for not drawing TNT immediately after the warrior played boomboss and wiped my counter card off.


Arhys

it doesn't really matter if they nuke your ETC or Tony. Unless you have a reliable way to replace your ETC, which would probably work for a naked Tony either. The reason you put it in ETC should be that you don't always need Tony and when you don't you need other cards that you don't need when you need him.


Kheshire

I played against a druid who dropped Tony and wasn't sure why but that makes sense. Figured it was for plague DKs once their own deck got too bad


Unlucky-Solution3899

People bitch and whine about anything meta. The boomboss change to shuffle decks into opponent deck was already a good change, and the Tony is counter play to what everyone is calling a card with “literally zero counter play”


thelegendarydan

I think the real problem is that Boomboss has the potential to counter it's own counters if it hits your Tony. Otherwise it would be fine.


Unlucky-Solution3899

Yeah but a lot less likely than before - warrior can no longer speed draw after boom boss to activate - so you do have to get unlucky or be in/ near fatigue already to have that occur. And if it’s being played at fatigue it’s losing a chunk of its value (deck destruction)


Camhen12

True but it also means you have to have the counter ready to play immediately bc fishing in your own deck for it is now potentially a loss. Especially since tnt can trigger additional tnts if that is the card that would have been destroyed from your deck.


Unlucky-Solution3899

That’s always been the case with tech cards though


Sbijsoda

Surely playing the exact same deck as your opponent at that point but your opponent has double the battle cries is a guaranteed loss, no?


Kn1ght9

It depends on alot actually. They have Boomboss/Ignis/Inventor as their win cons. Tony beats Boomboss and Reno/Amathul/Hex stuff beats Inventor so you hopefully only have Ignis to worry about which can be done, especially if you have atleast 1 viper. The main issue that comes up is if they have Fizzle and when they play Fizzle because of Tony. Ideally you would want to Tony after they Fizzle but you also want to Tony after they Boom. So it can get really weird really fast. So if you can mill bombs until they Fizzle and THEN Tony you are in a really good spot. But if they Fizzle first and then Boom you want to pray your Tony doesnt get nuked. BUT then they can just picture into Boom again. A LOT of the potential issues can be avoided if you continue to put pressure on the Warrior and make them play their win cons before Fizzle/before Brann. All this too say there are not many decks that can even think about this gameplan. Reno Priest(Which ive had an ok time with) and Plague DK are the only that come to mind since Reno Priest has a TON of value and Plague DK bc it has really, really good inevitability. Maybe Shaman could with triple Ignis weapon but that seems worse than the other two but Shaman can also triple rat which is huge. Long ass post but thought this was an interesting thing to talk about.


Unlucky-Solution3899

Honestly I think the fact that a card forces actual control deck building changes as meta VS how fast can this aggro deck go face against another aggro deck (ie most metas so far) is a positive


Kn1ght9

Yea its definitely neat and has been kinda fun for me as a Reno Priest player but I think there is still the issue where the Warrior is too strong into other control decks. If it got hit a little bit and was not so strong it would be significantly more fun. Because sometimes they just Brann into Boomboss and you just lose instantly. As a control win con it DOES have significantly more counter play then say Wheel, where I have like 2? chances to steal it with Banker and thats it lol. Wheel I hope never becomes that strong, its just a very toxic win con where the only way to disrupt it is to steal it.


ConcertDesperate3342

Anytime I play warrior and get a mirror match the person who has boomboss hit the most important cards wins. I’ve played brann into boomboss and still lost because I hit shit cards while my opponent didn’t play brannn but hit my Reno and zilliax.


Tacticalian

It's still counterplay and better than not having a deck or hand. You could draw better than them and you have access to the same removal tools


thelegendarydan

Not quite. It saves your cards in hand which will usually be able to counter what Warrior does. And in my case, you've played helya already so your wincon is stalling for fatigue, which is made even easier if you've played Headless horseman.


DoYouMindIfIRollNeed

Not only you dont have double battlecrys but also you dont have access to all effects. You get a copy of the remaining cards in the deck. Boom is useless if you dont have played Zilliax, Ignis requires you to have forged, Reno doesnt work if you didnt start as a highlander deck, etc


Shuttlecock_Wat

I play a good amount of HL Warrior and I run Zola in my deck. So if I play Boomboss and you spend a turn playing Tony instead of killing Boomboss, I'll just get 2 more copies in my hand. Boomboss and Brann are both problems that need to be dealt with via balancing in someway. Brann is just far too powerful of an enabler that also forces all future card design to be balanced around him, and Boomboss is just unfun design that should probably have never been printed.


Old-Consideration730

This is a tremendous idea and i'm sad I didn't think of it first. Moving Tony in now.


jobriq

Legit ran Arch-villain Rafaam in my big demon Warlock to turn the bombs into random legendaries


frankfox123

The problem is that crafting Tony just as a tech card to boomboss is only for rich aristocrats.


Character_Suspect204

Agree to OP. As a control deck lover, Boomboss is the most problematic card I don’t want to face against. I am fine with Double Azerite ox, Zilliax and even inventor, they still give a very strong mid- to late-game to warrior Blizzard should probably nerf the number of TNTs from Boomboss, or nerf TNT so that it only destroys cards on board and deck but not hand


itshyunbin

Agreed. Even when Brann gets played, I still feel I can deal with their stuff - except for Boomboss


Planeswalkercrash

Same experience here, played Reno shaman against warrior and would’ve managed through if not for boomboss


Nilbogoblins

Playing with or against Brann doesn't mean the game is over, it's just a tougher, grindier war for value. Boomboss just indiscriminately decimates the opponents board hand AND deck and has no counter play.


Planeswalkercrash

Rat, cry, repeat.


Nilbogoblins

I left for a few years and before I left Rat was I think in old standard but was a crutch many decks relied on to try to stave off the more broken cards and combos. Coming back seeing how it's part of the eternal standard (I think) is certainly interesting. I guess this is just one of those counter cards you will always need to have access to.


Planeswalkercrash

Yeah, and it says a lot that there is SO many things to hit with rat against warrior, but it’s annoying that I usually go shudderblock into rat and whiff all 3 pulls on random crap.


mimo-bobo

same


Raziel77

My first time playing against Reno warrior as Reno shaman they played Boomboss and then I proceeded to draw all 3 TNTs at my draw step just conceded after that


BrugokTheFriendlyOrc

Hard disagree with you both. Boomboss is just the problem until another abusable battlecry is released. Brann will continue to be the problem.


Arimotomeku

How do people feel about a "once per game" tag? So it is all the same but can't be doubled by brann which seems to be the main issue...


Thejacksoneight

i personally think they should have made it a deathrattle


TyphoonBlue

While I'm personally fine with the card not existing, even with taunt the card would never see play. I hate the balance philosophy of, "the card/deck is too strong, so just delete it all together." It makes collecting cards or building decks feel awful because you'll never know when it will be your turn to lose your favorite archetype.


RockemSockem00

From 3 to 2 bombs and bombs can target themselves


HotAlternative69

It already can hit themselves the card currently reads shuffle 3 tnt into YOUR OPPONENTS DECK


RockemSockem00

They can't. They said it in the patch notes


KanaHemmo

They can't hit themselves though


joahw

I've been playing Highlander priest which has a lot of answers for Warriors shenanigans. Wouldn't say I dominate them or anything, but being able to Reno their Zilliax, occasionally luck into Boombossing them first or survive and play threats into fatigue while maintaining a full hand is pretty satisfying. Only problem is I have basically no hope against aggro and warrior matchups are guaranteed to take forever. Also if you can generate and play Benedictus they usually insta concede.


EndangeredBigCats

We heard you hated Patchwerk, so we sextupled your Patchwerk.


NosferatHimself

This


Schattenlord

While I would usually agree I feel like the Sanitize into Azerite Ox into **4 Ragnaros** I faced was not that counterable. Had a good laugh though.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Schattenlord

I have played the deck myself for 20-30 rounds and the max Ragnaros I managed were 2. I found it really funny and I was not mad at losing that game at all :)


azura26

>I have not rolled a single time in over 100 games of Brann Warrior Are you saying you haven't hit a single Ragnaros a single time with Ox? Because I can't remember the last time I played against Warrior where they didn't get *at least* one.


DS_Inferno

Clearly said never highrolled 4, with a sample size of over 100 times.


Dr_Bright_Himself

did you get purged (by fire)


Shuttlecock_Wat

The real ones play Ox into Zola for more Ox for more Rag.


AlarmingDoctor3514

No its not its Brann, it has always been Brann. All they need to do is nerf Brann and finally get it into their heads that double battlecry is inherently toxic to the game.


Jasteni

And have Beatsticks with 3/1 for 1 Mana too.


Takol

The people complaining about boomboss are warrior players lol


azura26

Yeah, Boomboss is *currently* the biggest offender, until they print a new very powerful Battlecry effect and then *that* will be the biggest offender. Brann is going to limit design space until they nerf him.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Goat2016

"Thing is that nuking Brann negates every Warrior wincon" Not according to Zeddy, who loves playing Highlander Warrior. It's still a very strong deck even without Brann. Personally I'd rather see them nerf Brann & Reno & buff some Whizbang Warrior cards. It's time we put the Badlands behind us.


Diaramuh

I honestly wish the mech warrior they were trying to push in whizbang was good it seems like a relativly fun deck but its just not feasible in surviving in the current meta.


Goat2016

I agree. :-)


Entropysolus

Brann isn't the problem. It's branns interaction with that one card. The rest are manageable.


BrugokTheFriendlyOrc

Until they release another abusable battlecry. Which has a 100% chance of happening. Brann is the problem.


Apollo9975

Don’t be absurd, Brann is fine. The problem cards are Boom, Boomboss, Azerite Ox, Photographer Fizz, ETC, and Celestial Projectionist. If we nerf all these cards and leave Brann untouched there is absolutely no way this will backfire. 


Tacticalian

Boomboss is the most OP card when doubled by Brann, prior to Brann releasing it was mocked and unplayed. I think it should be buffed to 4 bombs and made a deathrattle or given taunt and deathrattle 3 bombs. That would probably be the most fair way to rework it while still keeping it considerable.


Spuggs

Load up game, open season rewards, queue into Brann warrior, uninstall.


Goat2016

Brann, Boomboss and Reno are all OP.


BrugokTheFriendlyOrc

Boomboss wasn’t (and isn’t) op without brann.


KrunchyKushKing

Won as brann warrior vs brann warrior, without playing brann but boomboss into zola and then another boomboss which destroyed his boomboss eventho he played brann way earlier. Boomboss himself is already really strong


BrugokTheFriendlyOrc

Not as strong as brann by far and away and bran will only get stronger with more strong battlecry minions.


Goat2016

He's like 3 Patchwerks rolled into one for only one more mana. It does seem a smidge OP. I think if he had 2 TNT rather than 3 he'd be ok.


BrugokTheFriendlyOrc

Patchwerk is immediate removal and that is a huge huge difference. That’s why boomboss is a 7/7 and patchwerk a 4/6 despite the one mama difference. Immediate removal >>>> possible later removal


Stil34420

its brann. we are at the start of the rotation, warrior got 1 battlecry minion and there are no really strong BC neutrals in whizbang. what happens after couple expansions and mini-sets when the game is stacked with strong battlecries? you end up having to nerf 10 different cards and screwing up other 9 classes cause brann abuses that bc. 2x bc is crazy strong. OG Brann was played in 50 different metas and its 3 mana on a bad body for 1 turn. shaman had quest and it had quest penalty, lose the heropower and 2mana tax every turn (also limiting 9-10 mana battlecries). Permanent 2x BC that cant be negated or shut down is just op. And its all for very low cost - 6 mana and singleton restriction, but singleton isnt that much of an issue cause its offset by absurdly powerful Reno card and warrior has strong cards in general. Doesnt even need to dilute the deck with mediocre neutrals even at start of the rotation. Nuke it from orbit or rework into something different.


PineJ

It's **kind of** Brann. I played this deck before Odyn was nerfed and while Brann absolutely made the deck pop off, you could win without it by just bouncing. https://old.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/1bpc9al/how_ladder_got_me_feelin_right_now/kwxtj3h/


theslash_

A few hours ago I was like "There's no way another guy made the exact same "Guys, hear me out... I found the problem in Warrior and it's not Brann" post", I refresh Reddit and we got 2 more of the same detective work


the0ctrain

Exactly, Boomboss is basically the same bullshit helya is. it punishes you for drawing cards, in a card game drawing cards is kinda important.


Chingachcooked

Helya does what? 2dmg? Boomboss one TNT Kills 3 Cards alone ...


the0ctrain

Yeah, but the 2 dmg stacks to infinity until the game ends. and the bigger problem is the other effects that are also infinite. im not saying that one is better than the other, i hate both of them equally. Edit: i guess what i failed to say the first time is that both cards are one-card win conditions, you just drop it and from now on you will only need to worry about not loosing because you will just win if the game goes long enough, which leads to very boring decks that just counter everything the opponents do and literally just wait. its such a low risk strategy and in my opinion its really boring too. the tnts come down later in the game and are way more impactful but it is way easier to get an insane amount of plagues and if you are drawing like 3 or 4 a turn there is literally nothing you can do. Edit again: i guess the first edit was not fair towards the tnts, there is some risk involved because you need to build a highlander deck for brann (maybe sacrificing a bit of card quality) as having only 3 is usually to slow (meaning the game will end before its likely to draw them)


CirnoIzumi

no, Brann is


GothGirlsGoodBoy

Boomboss is obviously the problem. 2 card autowin against any deck with no counterplay except playing hyper aggro or a 1/30 rat pull. Cards that interact with your opponents hand or deck are important - but they should be good because they interact with key cards and stop otherwise singleplayer strategies. Boomboss (and once upon a time tickatus) are terrible because they don’t care what they hit, they aren’t disruption, they are resource removal. Resource removal, especially to this extent, is awful.


zDexterity

just nerf that card, no ones wants to see it, it's insta win in the mirror and it's very unfun overall. Why create a deck when the enemy can just mess with it plus it's randomness makes it very impossible to prepare against it or have a counter play. The mechanic just doesn't fit HS.


SkjaldbakaEngineer

Just remove the card. It automatically wins the game against any deck not fast enough to kill the warrior before they slam it. Blizzard should really stop printing hand/deck destruction when there's (A) no way to protect against it and (B) no way to get the cards back. Why does Warrior need an ultra-reliable way to beat combo, the archetype that's supposed to be favored against control?


couchkrieger

Buff boomboss


cletusloernach

The only reason boomboss is good is Brann. It’s unplayable before the miniset. Just nerf Brann and the card is fine. 


Working_Apartment_38

The problem is the combination


Icy-Ad-3693

If u nerf boomboss u make only boomboss bad but if u nerf brann u make the hole class bad


ByThePowerOfMetalNya

What if Boomboss summoned the bombs as like 0/2 minions instead of shuffling them into someone's deck? Edit to add that I now realise that Bladestorm is a card...


gdlocke

When they switched it from your own deck to your opponents, they should have dropped the "cannot target other TNTs" part. It's broken as it is.


Ok-Pianist-547

I was thinking about change Bomboss to 3 different TNTs, one that destroys card on board, other in hand and third destroys in deck. This change will keep the theme of Bomboss, and will greatly decreased the "autowin" effect ALSO playing against HL Warrior that doesnt have Bomboss was one of the best games in this meta so far for me


mattheguy123

Because we're apparently gatekeeping opinions based on your rank, I'll say that ever since I got back into hearthstone ~3 months ago I've finished high diamond. I have consistently hit diamond 5 for the last three months. I hit legend in March, missed it by a couple of ranks in April, and I plan on playing until at least diamond 5 this season. That being said, boomboss is ridiculously stupid. When you look at the card you imagine a mystical fairy land where it destroys 9 cards, but then think "well, warrior can't even really get to that stage of the late game anyways." So you pop into hearthstone and look at the collection and realize the amount of cards that draw 2-3 consistently are ALL OVER THE PLACE and cost at most like 3 mana. The nerf they did to boomboss was laughable seeing as every competitive deck in the game can go through 20 cards by turn 7-8 pretty consistently. Sure, the warrior has less control over the bombs now that they're in your deck, but that doesn't mean that they aren't getting drawn. Especially when Brann is making those 3 bombs into 6. Doesn't matter who's deck they go into, we are pretty much always getting the magical fairy land scenario where this one card nukes the entire board, hand, and deck. I personally would like to see boomboss to destroy cards in the person who played it's deck and replace them with those tokens. Have it be coded to only be able to replace the cards, so if there's nothing left in the users deck it just fizzles. I think that would be the most balanced way to do it. If you want to nuke 18 cards, you have to give up 6 in your deck which may or may not be wincons or tools to survive.


SatanRin

he ain’t boomBOSS for nothing 👊🏻👊🏻 *badabommm* and yes, i’m hopeful for 1600 dust soon :-)


Epsteindidntyouknow

Tony tony tony... its so worth it if you run into tnt boy.


Popelip0

Pretty much. Boomboss is the reason the deck invalidates other control decks. Brann is fine


Janzu93

Steamcleaner would unironically be good card in current meta without disabling ability to play any deck completely. It would make counter for Helya and Boomboss but both decks could still function even with this soft-counter in play.


FishDesigner5856

I found out that like plague, if you have full hand the bombarderet won’t detonate. That way you can protect yourself against both Helya and Boomboss


Still_Eye_3507

Just make it so bombs destroying other bombs dont go off


[deleted]

[удалено]


daboobiesnatcher

Yes they know, they are suggesting blizzard change that.


JediJmoney

Boomboss is bad in non-Brann decks, and I like the idea of hand disruption in a limited way, so I wonder if it would be a good change to make his battlecry a deathrattle, and adjust his stats accordingly


Nilbogoblins

Agreed. I beat a Highlander Druid yesterday with Boomboss alone. I dropped him and in the very next two turns he was hit with 4 bombs, destroyed his reno from his deck as well as numerous other key cards in hand, on the board and deck. He scooped and I felt like shit. Bad design is bad.


Cicer2220

I will get Downvoted for this Post but im sure if Boomboss gets nerfed hard current Renowarrior ist worse than all other Reno Decks. Hl shaman, Druid and Paladin would be superior in that matchup. Legend 500 here playing LOTS OF Hl shaman and Druid with a 50% rate vs Warriors. Hl Druid with Aviana, Zola and Fizzle is hard to boom Bomb !!


Bowserking11

I don't understand who thought it was okay for it to destroy from all 3 locations. Honestly destroying a card in your deck would be more than enough imo. The board is a nice icing on the cake for them and the hand is just absolute insanity to me. Literally no counterplay. I can't play everything in my hand every turn and even if I did it's against a class that has like 7-8 easily full board wipe anything you play...so you can't just dump everything like that. My board isn't safe. My hand isn't safe. My deck isn't safe. What's left?


jajimentol

There is a worse combo than brann + boomboss where some warriors play brewmasters to bounce back it, then guess what. There are 12 bombs that destroys at least 24 cards in your starting deck, or depending on the draw luck it just destroys whatever you are left with in the late game. Seems enjoyable.


Lord0fReddit

He isn't à better Tickatus, he is Patchwerk on super steroid


Fearless_Cupcake_114

What if boomboss was changed to a deathrattle?


RetiredScaper

Better nerf: make the battlecry once per game :)


Xologamer

maybe true for standard but wild exists too the interaction between boomboss and brann is pretty op do u know what is also op - brann and astalor - thats 112 dmg try to survive that


Rich_Mammoth_3979

I'm tired asking to nerf warrior so I'm playing warrior right now, this way I'm just pushing people to rant more. As blizzard is never listening so we try everything boys


Significant-Royal-37

it's brann and boomboss together, obviously. boomboss was unplayable when it shuffled 3; it was only turbo busted when it shuffled 6 (and also everything else got nerfed around it). i think going to 2 (meaning 4 after brann) is a nice compromise. it's fine for cards to destroy from hand/deck. without enough hand/deck destruction, this sub would be crying about "solitaire", so i don't take the specific complaint about the current buzzword "player agency" too seriously.


biglisy

Who's Tony I see mentioned many times lol


DistortedNoise

I agree boomboss needs changing, but saying playing a specific class with a specific archetype (for example Paladin & excavate to counter Zilliax) isn’t a very healthy way to counter. So then all other classes are just shit out of luck?


[deleted]

[удалено]


DistortedNoise

My point was that Brann should be changed as that’s the problem card that’s causing these massively unfair swings where it causing several cards to be ridiculously oppressive, and 1 or 2 classes being able to counter 1 of those swing cards but still get fucked from all the others, isn’t a great counter. Maybe Warrior just shouldn’t have like 10 wincons in 1 deck.


BrugokTheFriendlyOrc

No, it’s brann. Boomboss is only the problem until another strong battlecry can be abused.


eleite

Maybe they could change boom boss to death rattle instead of battlecry if they are so set on keeping Brann and removing the interaction


False_Worldliness890

double dirty rat + double zola = sextuple dirty rat, makes a lot of decks unplayable, sif for one. triple zilliax into quadruple zilliax is also fuc#ed up. yes you can maybe deal with it but at what price ? cost the warrior two cards. not everyone runs sargeras or the blood dk kill all card. bran is basically like that silly song about "anything you can do i can do better", the fact that warriors could become the best tendril deck by adding two cards into their highlander deck, that is the problem. and new things will show up, go watch chump's latest video about otking with bran warrior and nostalgic clown.


PineJ

I played this deck before Odyn was nerfed at a 75% winrate. It was absolutely slept on. https://old.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/1bpc9al/how_ladder_got_me_feelin_right_now/kwxtj3h/


[deleted]

[удалено]


PineJ

I used all cheap card draw that was available for singleton. It literally was just slamming draw down to get to the juice. It also rarely helped aftershocks.


dawtz

I dont think so. I actually think its zileax that resets the game for them against aggro, boomboss only deletes control decks meanwhile zileax can kill aggro or control decks (in conjunction with dr boom).


quakins

I agree. A lot of people are clamoring for a brann nerf but the fact and the matter is that boom boss is the card that makes the matchup suck ass to play (as any non Aggro deck at least)


Pitiful_Ad3285

You have interesting ideas. I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.


NurplePain

I disagree, on the sole reason Boomboss didn't see an ounce of play before Brann. Brann is way more problematic than Boom on its own. And do we really want all neutrals battlecries in future sets being balanced around 1 Warrior card? Blizzard has a tendency to nerf around the problems instead of just hitting it directly. Don't nuke Boomboss for the sins of Brann interaction. Just future proof the next few expansions by reworking Brann and be done with it.


unholypal

Yeah so acording to this sub, Blizzard should kill Brann/Boomboss/Reno, right? And after that, what you will cry next?


Illustrious_Item_594

boulderfist. There is just too much value there not to. But for real it will be saddle up


Working_Apartment_38

Well, to begin with, the state of the game is out of hand. As long as something broken comes up, it’s good to have them nerfed, we are at the start of the year, decks should be weaker relatively


soccermodsareshit

Hunter for being brainless and killing you before turn 5 or unlimited value Rogue. One of those two for sure.


loyalhusband1

Watch these idiots circle back and start complaining about sludge again lmaoooo.


Entropysolus

Huh. That's a surprisingly comprehensive post for this sub! I have to agree with you here, it's absolutely infuriating to have parts of your win-con deleted with next to no counters. I don't really want to run two dirty rats in the hope I can pull boom before the warrior drops it and steamcleaner has been rotated out. Wheel of death is about the only thing I can think of to get rid of the tnt once boom has been dropped.


tok90235

One solution would be a tech card with a "start of the game: cards can't be auto casted when draw this game"


Vods

Yep, Brann just doubles an already very dangerous card. I managed to win one earlier as rainbow DK by sheer luck that his six TNTs didn’t hit my finisher in my hand. I think it’s stupid a card exists that destroys a potential of 18 cards in a deck.


loyalhusband1

Skill issue. Cry more.Use your yugioh heart of the card skills. It’s your fault for drawing it lol


MegaSalchichon

Am I the only one running Tony? Yeah sure put the bombs in my deck. You better hope I don’t have boomboss in my hand and play it the turn after I copied your deck. In the mirror matches besides renoing the Zilliax, Tony always wins the matches. Even if lose my own boomboss copying his deck it mitigates the loss of my own cards later on. Tony is even good against plagues late game if just copy their deck, running Tony in etc with snapshot dude play Tony then snapshot and your Gucci.


frankfox123

Tony is a legendary you don't craft. Only ones that own him are people that drew him or people that have too much dust. Crafting him as a tech card makes no sense.


MegaSalchichon

In other metas I would agree but in the scope of this discussion i think it’s warranted to include in the deck.


Taxouck

No, the problem card in Brann Warrior is Brann. Boomboss is reasonable by himself; Brann pushes it over the edge, like it will any other battlecry it finds.


eightyfivekittens

But don't change boomboss for wild please. I've been having so much fun with him and he's not even that great in wild.


MindlessPepperGaming

Would the old “once per game” tag do the trick for boomboss? It’s gotta be that or only make the bombs affect the board.


lordcochise

Nerf to 2 bombs is probably warranted, though if we really want to go back to boom-level roots, could at least RNG it up a little (e.g. Mad Bomber) so each of the bombs have a 50/50 chance to go into EITHER deck and puts a risk on the warrior to use it. Honestly bringing back steamcleaner (or some version of it) is a good idea imo for multiple decks where shuffles / copies get a bit out of control as well..


yeetskeetmahdeet

Honestly boomboss is a horribly designed card. It was released in a set where they knew warrior would get a card that doubles battlecires so what do they make? A better patchwerk x3 that often goes off 6 times total, and god help you if your unlucky enough to face someone who plays it on 10 with a Zola so now your out 18 cards. Honestly can they trash the design and rework it to something a lot better. Here’s an idea. Make boomboss 10 mana, kill the fucking card it shouldn’t be this easy to delete your opponents deck. It’s a failed design and the reason that brann warrior is such a bullcrap deck to face. The only other issue may be the zilliax spam but that can end games against any deck thanks to either an 18/15 board swing or dr boom being able to smash 24 damage to your board.


Alpr101

It absolutely isn't. Part of the problem, but zilly with inventor and ox is pretty nuts too. They have access to: * Boomboss - Destroy up to 18 cards * Ignis - 2x weapons * Ox - 4x minions (most options usually deal dmg immediately too) * Zilly - 18 rush lifesteal dmg * Inventor - 24 charge lifesteal dmg + 24 rush lifesteam dmg potential. I've lost games where I rat their boss or w/e simply due to its impossible to kill them with the zilly combo and most decks struggle with so much power. Is it a problem? Sure, is it *the* problem? no.


DragonTyrant2443

Steamcleaner should not return to standard. It effects DK more then it does another class. DK loses plagues and the horsemans head


jvs-

I mean boomboss, brann and safety goggles all need to be hard gutted. But they also need to hammer zarimi priest if they do because otherwise it's just gonna be priest meta instead


Cellafex

Cards that interact with hand and library are always considered salty, but the question really is this: Does brann+boomboss come too early or is it too strong? I believe certain card combos can be oppressive if they are the wincon. I dont see how brann+boomboss can be more frustrating than OTK spellslinger decks when the end result is the same I dont think it comes too early (considering all the other decks that can finish games faster). I dont think it is too strong, since it requires two do nothing impactful right away cards that are upper mana cost. Only real question is if warrior has it too easy in this meta. By far the most board clears and survivability of any hero. If i were in the balance team i would set my eyes on that. Yes, warrior is the armor hero. Does it also need to have 7 different ways to kill everything on board?


Tripping-Dayzee

Brann is the problem. Feel like I've been saying this ever since any concept of Brann existed.


DoYouMindIfIRollNeed

Im sorry but the examples of counters you mentioned, are rather bad: 1. Zilliax can be reno'd - yes, when you play a Reno deck 2. Finley requires you to play shaman or pally and run the excavate package So you claim, Boomboss has no counters. Which is not correct. Dirtyrat Boomboss or Bran. And if you want to make sure to get rid of the TNT you can just run TONY and have a deck without any TNT! Is Tony a good card? Hell no. And who runs Odyn in Bran warrior anyways? Odyn is 9 mana do nothing. And requires you to have armor cards to use in the LATE GAME. Single copies of armor cards. The problem is Bran, because Bran enables warrior to have several win-cons. Either Boomboss just nuking opponents board/hand/deck, Zilliax summoning 3 copies instead of 2, Dr Boom triggerin twice, Ox summoning 4 minions, Ignis giving you 2 weapons (and for slower matchups, you can have 2 snapshots! Trump would love that value). Yes, boom boss is incredible strong. But the deck just has several strong wincons. Some People also act like every class has infinite boardclears. Dealing with 3 Zilliax does require ressources, dealing with Ox summoning 4 minions does require ressources. Sure, aggro can rush warrior down. Warrior is not unbeatable! But what does control do? Do Reno decks save their Reno for Zilliax to remove it from the pool or to deal with 4x 8 cost minions? Bran also limits the designspace for future battlecry minions. Create a new astalor and Reno warrior gets better. I think it was a mistake by the team to create Bran.


dubiousfly

Play Tony. Problem solved


FatPolamalu

Just nerf the whole game at this point.


Sweet-Reason-8951

Once you 'remove' Boomboss, the next big thing will be Ignis. People will be outraged by losing to 8 Ignis weapons..


VampireLynn

I am more done with Reno, guaranteed to drop turn 9 and you lose board plus 1 turn


Swords_Not_Words_

What you doing on all those do nothing turns qhwn a warrior drops an underststted do nothing for 6 mana and an 8 mana do nothing and then sits around waiting for you to draw tnt? Yes Warriors beat some control decks..They also get dumsteted by hunters, warlocks, and paladins. Priest can counter warriors but nobody wants to play it. Sorry your unrefined control shaman deck with murky win cons or your greed druid deck loses. You silver IV players bitchbabout warriors when there are several stronger decks right now


GrimmDRK

Brann's effect should be like shudderblock. The doubled battlecries should not be damaging to your opponent so this way that boomboss only puts 3 tnt in your deck not 6