Is the warlock hero power op?

Posts: 184
I understand the power has its weakness when up against some classes which have the capability to OTK or close to it, but against these type of decks most classes are potentially dead the next turn, except maybe a few of the more robust ones. and against hunter you don't necessarily want to flood the board with minions anyways, as a shaman I feel your pain in this respect.

The reason I think that the warlock hero power requires balancing is because it enables warlock to field better aggro decks than any other class which do very well in a majority of matches which makes it a very common class because your odds of winning are quite high.

The reason I think the warlock hero power is too powerful in the zoolock play style is because it enables warlock to make inefficient trades due to the ease at which they can replenish there hand. Unless a player can trade 2 for 1 every time against a warlock, then they will quickly lose board control and then the game. It's not a problem that warlock cannot start life tapping until after turn 3 because this enables them to pump out as many cheap minions as they can without fear of running out of cards when the mid game comes around. Yes there is also a downside of losing 2 life, but most warlock playstyle seem to be a race of some sort, so really all you have to do is cause 2+ damage to your opponent each turn in order to stay ahead of the life point curve.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,184
hand. Unless a player can trade 2 for 1 every time against a warlock, then they will quickly lose board control and then the game. .


See, this is how we know you're just bad and whiny. It's not at all hard to trade 2 for 1 in a LOT of cases against a Warlock Zoo. Just looking at Warrior, you have Cleave, Fiery War Axe and Arathi Weaponsmith which all trade either 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 (weaponsmith).

Also, if the Warlock is tapping every turn, which he'll need to, then he's not going to be able to play as big minions as you will. A Shieldmasta is going to be a 2 for 1 trade against 2 2-drops.

Summary: please go away and stop posting here until you learn to play.
Reply Quote
Posts: 184
05/06/2014 07:23 PMPosted by Zoid
See, this is how we know you're just bad and whiny. It's not at all hard to trade 2 for 1 in a LOT of cases against a Warlock Zoo. Just looking at Warrior, you have Cleave, Fiery War Axe and Arathi Weaponsmith which all trade either 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 (weaponsmith).


It's not hard, but you need to atleast trade 2 for 1 against the lock, minimum. Zoo locks run enough buffing minions to allow their early game drops to trade up once the lock has board control, which they should.

Nothing can be said about war axe. I have a lot of trouble with warriors, but in their defense I think they need some great value cards like cleave,weaponsmith, and waraxe to make up for the fact that most of their card draw mechanics only work on a card for card basis, and there's no sustainable card draw inherent in the class. That being said, I hate going up against the waraxe too and most classes that aren't running a late game deck will have tremendous trouble with it, but atleast if you're zoolock you can replace the minions killed by war axe with much more ease.

05/06/2014 07:23 PMPosted by Zoid
Also, if the Warlock is tapping every turn, which he'll need to, then he's not going to be able to play as big minions as you will. A Shieldmasta is going to be a 2 for 1 trade against 2 2-drops.


as said previously there are several minions which grant extra attack, all of which are relatively cheap, so a minion that you played on turn 1 such as flame imp can be easily buffed to kill that yeti and now the warlock opponent is in a terrible position and the lock has traded 1 card for 1, and 1 mana for 5.

Plus most zoo locks i face have a very large amount of 1-2 cost minions, I don't think they are known for running large minions but rather using buffing minions to trade up. and there's always soulfire.

A shield master is easily taken out with just a flame imp with an abusive sergeant buff, a very easy combo to pull off.

05/06/2014 07:23 PMPosted by Zoid
Summary: please go away and stop posting here until you learn to play.


You can attack me all you want, but it doesn't help your argument, and the fact that you decided to simply start insulting me means that you can't keep up in the debate. I'm just trying to have an intelligent conversation about the warlock hero power, but if your so worried about the power actually being nerfed that you start lashing out, well then I don't see this conversation being of any use.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,184
Sigismund, seriously, stop. In order to trade a Flame Imp for a Yeti, you have to put down TWO buffing minions and the deck only has six, all of which can also be run in any deck. So now you've got 2-3 minions on the board at least just to deal with 1, which leaves him extremely vulnerable to AOE. I absolutely love it when a Zoo Warlock tries to drop 2-3 minions in one turn and buff everything because I just AOE the turn after and now he's tapping desperately to try to fill the board again.

And just because someone insults your intelligence or playing ability doesn't mean you've won, it may actually mean your argument is just ridiculous. It's the same reason I don't debate anti-vaccination people, their argument is so fundamentally ridiculous that there's nothing to do besides tell them they are being stupid.

But anyway, I'm done here, I hope you eventually figure out how to play, the game is much more fun when you look at a tough matchup as a challenge to be beaten rather than just scream OP.
Reply Quote
Posts: 184
05/07/2014 10:02 AMPosted by Zoid
Sigismund, seriously, stop. In order to trade a Flame Imp for a Yeti, you have to put down TWO buffing minions and the deck only has six, all of which can also be run in any deck. So now you've got 2-3 minions on the board at least just to deal with 1, which leaves him extremely vulnerable to AOE. I absolutely love it when a Zoo Warlock tries to drop 2-3 minions in one turn and buff everything because I just AOE the turn after and now he's tapping desperately to try to fill the board again.


I'll stop when someone is able to provide enough counter evidence to change my mind about the current sate of the zoo lock. If anyone has a valid argument and isn't just going to scream insults I invite you to continue the conversation with me. I feel like I've had reasonable responses so far and would be open to reasonable arguments.

Also if anyone wants to debate anti-vaccination with me, I'm open to that as well.

As we discussed earlier lifetap allows the warlock to trade 2 cards for 1 without being concerned. So a flame imp + abusive may technically be 2 cards just to take out a yeti, but that is okay due to lifetap. And the plus side is you still have the abusive on the board after you have cleared the yeti. And six buffs, 2 soulfires, and 2 doom guards seem like plenty to take care of big creatures that you may run into up until turn 8-10 at which point your opponent should be dead anyway or close to it.

And as far as aoe being a counter to zoo lock, I agree that it is often the only way to claw your way back into a game, but I find that unless you can come up with a 3 damage aoe, then you really won't be able to kill all the warlocks minions which have most likely had their health buffed by young priestess or blood imps or shattered sun cleric, all of which seem to e pretty common cards in a zoo deck. But to perform a 3 damage aoe early enough in the game you either need to be shaman or priest, otherwise it will require 3+ card combos involving Pyromancer which will put the warlocks opponent behind in cards and at best leave the board completely empty just to have the warlock begin flooding it the following turn. And I do consider it board control when you have 2 minions on the board, while your opponent has none.
Reply Quote
Posts: 866
If you're constantly trading 2 for 1 than you will eventually lose, if only because you'll run out of threats well before your opponent. Saying constantly trading 2 for 1 thanks to life tap is a good strategy is misleading to say the least. You still have only 30 cards in your deck and you still have a limited mana pool each turn, life tapping doesn't change any of these things. What life tapping allows you to do is unload all your weapons upfront and leave nothing behind, that could be good if you manage to overload your opponent and win, however it could also backfire if you're the one reacting to your opponent(trading 2 or more for 1 as you keep saying) as it will only delay the inevitable rather than get you close to victory.

As for Zoo being a strong deck, it's not because of life tapping but because of the meta. Zoo emerged when aggro Hunters dominated the field, as it was a way to counter Hunters and Murlocks while also not losing to the typical Hunter counters. Now that aggro Hunter is no longer popular, mid-range Hunter is completely different and actually fares very well against Zoo, Zoo is no longer as powerful as it was previously. Moreover with the emergence of mid-range Hunters crushing the aggro version as well as Murlocks Druids are on the rise again and we all see a great variety in Druid decks being played a lot. Druids have a field day with Zoo because they simply have bigger threats that Zoo needs to at least 2 for 1, usually even 3 or 4 for 1 like in the case of Ancients of War, which simply dries Zoo out and crushes them to dust.
Reply Quote
Posts: 184
Everything you said is pretty reasonable. I'm sure zoo does have it's weaknesses, even if not as apparent as other decks. And all I can say about druid is that they seem to do very well against most match-ups and the have the versatility to form decks to answer any form the meta takes.
Reply Quote
Posts: 5
Zoo is a silly deck and I really don't think it is more annoying than OTK deck (which is nerfed now, yay)

Handlock on the other hand is quite good and can be better with a better player.

But back to the topic; I think pretty much every hero power but warrior is balanced. All of them has their upsides and downsides. It costs life but we have Molten Giants and Jaraxxus so. I mean you have to use some synergies in your decks, you can't think (or judge) of cards and mechanics on their own.
Reply Quote
Posts: 184
I guess it's all really relative to how much synergy you can generate from your hero power. The warrior one has multiple utilities which makes it very nice. mage and druid both seem pretty good for making good early game trade, mage especially which is why we probably see so many valuemancer decks. For this topic specifically I was focussing on the warlock hero power giving the warlock access to multiple decks which are all very strong and difficult to counter, specifically the zoo. My issue with the power is that it can have more effect on a game as it allows the lock to not have to field as many card generating minions, even more so it allows them to play more aggressive rush/zoo type decks then just about any other classes.

However I understand that most lock class cards are trash and if the lock power were actually nerfed (I know for a fact it wont be), but if it was, those class cards would have to be re worked/improved.

I agree that handlock has a higher ceiling of potential. Given the right cards and skilled player I think it has more potential.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,527
05/07/2014 10:02 AMPosted by Zoid
It's the same reason I don't debate anti-vaccination people, their argument is so fundamentally ridiculous that there's nothing to do besides tell them they are being stupid.


Doesn't that depend on.

1. What their actual argument is.

2. Which vaccines they are against.

I mean, it's been shown that various vaccinations (Gardasil for example, though there are also innaccurate claims which fuzzify the issue for people who don't have the time to go through it all) have potential side effects that are worse than the actual diseases, let alone the effectiveness of vaccine/risk rate of vaccinated persons vs. non-vaccinated persons. In some extreme cases, vaccines have been shown to be counter-productive to say the least: Baxter had apparently not done particularly good quality control for example, allowing a live form of the virus (avian flu, H5N1) they were supposed to be vaccinating against to be in their vaccine (making it a source of infection rather than immunization).

Personally, I'm all for vaccinations, so long as the risks from taking the vaccine are less than what it is trying to prevent. There could probably stand to be less mercury involved in vaccines... but that's just a general rule that there could probably stand to be less mercury involved in anything that goes into the human body, and a stance I'm pretty sure most people agree with regardless of their feelings on vaccines in general.

Anyway, here's the problem with "Zoo" in this particular discussion... I think Sigismund has had fairly different experiences with the deck. I'm not sure if that's from differences in rank, exposure, sub-metas (such as there being different metas depending on when/what servers you play on), or what.

I, personally, have not had the success with or problems against Zoo to the degree that Sigismund states I "should" based on his personal experiences. That may be that I'm not as good with or played against people as good with the deck as Sigismund has, or it might be the other way around. I don't know.

Sigismund HAS been highly repetitive in their claims, but this has also been across multiple threads and discussing the topic with multiple people, so it's somewhat understandable. I don't think it's good to call someone's arguments stupid when they at least provide their reasoning and it is at least somewhat logical.

I do, however, think it's hard to convince someone of "how it usually plays out" when a person's experiences have historically been different... and that's on both sides. "You're playing it wrong" might be valid, but how can anyone go about convincing another person that it is, in fact, them, rather than yourself when both could, potentially, be accurate?

Someone might appeal to rank, but that usually comes out as arrogance and evokes an emotional response.

Someone might appeal to "authority" and point out past nerfs to the deck-type during the Beta (nerfs to Flame Imp, Blood Imp, Sun Shattered, and DoA, though not all nerfs were inspired by Zoo-style Warlock decks). But again it evokes an emotional response, and it doesn't reflect the current state of the game anyway.

Zoo is good, and like all good things in a given game, there are those that will say it's OP, and those that will say it's "just right" or even slightly UP with certain meta considerations.

I've personally made my case to Sigismund a few times, but if he never experiences the same results/situations that I have, even if my arguments are logical and backed up by my own experience and that of others, it will likely get tossed out even after fair consideration.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,524
05/09/2014 02:46 PMPosted by Tsenzei
05/07/2014 10:02 AMPosted by Zoid
It's the same reason I don't debate anti-vaccination people, their argument is so fundamentally ridiculous that there's nothing to do besides tell them they are being stupid.


Doesn't that depend on.

1. What their actual argument is.

2. Which vaccines they are against.


Yes. It would. For example, if Zoid were to argue that it is patently ridiculous to argue against a Morgellons vaccine made out of heavy metals because this is exactly like the MMR triple jab conspiracy nonsense, I would suggest that maybe he has no idea what he's talking about. As I would in this case.

The warlock hero power has been causing problems since the beginning stages of the open beta. None of the other hero powers even come close.
Reply Quote
Posts: 866
05/18/2014 08:25 PMPosted by BlackSun


The warlock hero power has been causing problems since the beginning stages of the open beta. None of the other hero powers even come close.


Define "causing problems" please.
Reply Quote
Posts: 2
sdfsdf

05/20/2014 04:19 AMPosted by OwlRaider
05/18/2014 08:25 PMPosted by BlackSun


The warlock hero power has been causing problems since the beginning stages of the open beta. None of the other hero powers even come close.


Define "causing problems" please.


I played zoo to rank up from 11 to 5 easily one morning whereas I was stuck between 12-8 for weeks with all other classes. I get no enjoyment playing with or against zoo so I tried not to play one myself but nothing is more effective against all other decks than zoo. Tap and dump everything repeat and rinse no thinking required. Not really going to have a bad hand with 2 draws every turn and no need to hold on save any cards. Now I main zoo to rank up. If you can't beat them join them.
Reply Quote
Posts: 27
No it is not. draw a card costs 2 mana and the hero power costs 2 mana [because you don't actually use a card] so we have a 0 cost hero power but you take damage.
now it gets tricky, ''heal 2 health'' costs 0 because that is the priest hero power, now if you reverse it to take 2 damage you have something that has the right costs for a hero power, now we need something of equal value to fill it up, which is the ''draw a card''.
if my calculation aren't right ,reply.
Reply Quote
Posts: 479
05/08/2014 10:50 AMPosted by OwlRaider
If you're constantly trading 2 for 1 than you will eventually lose, if only because you'll run out of threats well before your opponent


Thats kinda the thing yes you will run out of cards but here is the thing how often does this usually happen before the opponent dies.

And also look at how the 2 for 1 trading is happening.. The AGGRO deck is hitting the player... The player under attack is using his attacks to hit the minions..

so 2 3/2's attack for 6 , A yeti then kills one , the remaining hits again for 3.. yeti kills other..

It was a 2 for 1 trade. But the defensive player took 9 damage . Oh the warlock 2 damage to draw that second card. Midgame they are constantly putting down 2 cards and attacking while the defending wastes attacks on killing them doing 0 damage to the warlock which has free reign to usually draw 10 free cards before even thinking about being threatened.

Oh you AOE and clear the board.. warlock don't care did you play anything after the Clear.. no Warlock places 2 more minions and are back where they started.

Since there are no dead draws and you are pretty much evenly trading the entire time this game its very hard to turn the tables and clear the opponents table and put out a suitable threat the same turn. The warlock being able to double draw hurts since they won't run out of deck.
Reply Quote
Posts: 184
05/20/2014 01:05 PMPosted by deckie
No it is not. draw a card costs 2 mana and the hero power costs 2 mana [because you don't actually use a card] so we have a 0 cost hero power but you take damage.
now it gets tricky, ''heal 2 health'' costs 0 because that is the priest hero power, now if you reverse it to take 2 damage you have something that has the right costs for a hero power, now we need something of equal value to fill it up, which is the ''draw a card''.
if my calculation aren't right ,reply.


so because priest can heal for 2 damage at the cost of 2 mana you are saying the warlock hero power actually costs 4 mana which is fair because it's better than other hero powers but at a greater cost?

I think the only thing missing from you calculation is that there is another hidden value in being able to draw cards which is not accounted for, it allows the warlock to not have to waste any spots in his deck for card drawing cards and instead go purely for value/synergy/damage.

Also I don't think 2 health from the priest can be translated into 2 damage is worth 2 mana, taking 2 damage to have superior and proactive board control is much more valuable than than a reactive 2 heal. In addition the minion you draw from that 2 health life tap will at the bare minimum put out 2 points of sustainable damage each turn, which seems like a bargain for 2 life and 2 mana, and the life part doesn't even really matter unless you lose board control, which you shouldn't as a zoo lock. I will admit that against miracle and other otk decks life tapping too much can put you at risk, but rogues are super strong right now, and otk/miracle are threats that most classes have problems with.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,527
05/20/2014 03:55 PMPosted by Sigismund
I think the only thing missing from you calculation is that there is another hidden value in being able to draw cards which is not accounted for, it allows the warlock to not have to waste any spots in his deck for card drawing cards and instead go purely for value/synergy/damage.


Sure... kind of. You could argue that anyway. You could also argue that Warriors and Priests don't need to add any healing cards to their decks, or that Hunters and Mages don't need to add any direct damage to their decks.

I don't think that'd make for a GOOD argument mind, but it's there. It doesn't mean that Warlocks can run higher value decks than others, it simply means that that value is shifted towards other means. A Warlock might be able to invest more in stats/board presence and use their Power to make up card advantage... or maybe Healing to minimize their added health lose. A Mage though might invest more in card draw, and use their Power to make up board presence or augment a direct damage Burn strategy. A Priest might focus on higher stats and using their Power to maximize the efficiency of cards... or they might double up on healing and stall even longer.

All of these are potential strategies, and while Power effect certainly has an affect on deck-building it doesn't mean that any particular power affords any particular class to have a higher-value deck... it only shifts some potential budgeting priorities.
Edited by Tsenzei on 5/21/2014 3:50 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 79
The Warlock Hero Power is not OP.

But I think Mountain Giant on Turn 4 is OP.
Reply Quote
Posts: 18
completely broken
Reply Quote
Posts: 163
What if Warlock hero power draws an extra card on your NEXT turn? Would it be less OP and more balanced? Or not really make a difference?
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]