- 2 mana 2/3 (battlecry: your opponent can only draw one card next turn)
- 4 mana 4/4 (battlecry: gain +4+4 if your opponent has played a quest this game)
- 3 mana 5/5 (battlecry: If your opponent has less than 8 cards in hand, he draws 2 cards)
Yes, Im not a fan of polarizing metas. At this point if they aren't nerfing the stormwind quest in general all I have hope for is counter cards. But as just like how Patches the Pirate survived the mountains of Golakka Crawlers, its but a band-aid to a gunshot wound.
wish you guys wouldn't have allocated all the resources to cloning Raid: Shadow Legends, a game no one likes nor asked for. If those resources were instead allocated towards making the client better, we'd be in a better spot. I hope Mercs dies quickly. Gacha games are immoral
That guy was right tho, in my opinion, the players deserve a functioning platform, yet there are still countless bugs. You can easily find one in every mode. I once even had to restart client in just 2 wild games because the animation stuck and made me lose the game. And to make it worse, Iksar evaded the question without answering it.
He didn't answer it because that's a statement, not a question. Im surprised that he responded at all.
There's better ways to phrase that statement, so I have to agree with HuntardHuntard. Its just not very nice.
It's not like the rest can't net-deck them and still play them.
I'm simply asking for statistics that are relevant to the whole player base, not just the top 1%. Imagine a real life example - setting the minimum wages based on the top 1% richest people in that country. Bankruptcy says hello.
And again, i'm talking about the usefulness of the provided statistics, not the numbers. It makes it very easy to show only what you want to show, while not caring about what happens with 99% of the playerbase. I could even argue that card changes should be based on what happens in the (higher) brackets leading to Legend, with a lower focus on what happens in Legend. But never just the top 1%...
If you're really hungry for stats, you dont have to rely on blizz to provide it, there's at least two major websites that provides adequate stats at different brackets. Hsreplay is one, and Vicious Syndicate is another.
Ultimately, Im not sure what is there to complain about. Most top companies dont showcase full stats to their customers because its not in their interest to do so (that's not to say its correct or ethical, mind you). In this case, there's nothing conspiratorial about them sharing a small piece of data. Any hearthstone player worth more than a discarded piece of tissue paper can and will judge for themselves, and if they willingly follow anyone's data like a good little sheep then that says more about them than anything else.
If they're sharing the top 1% data, that's fine. Take it for what its worth because it isnt gospel. Two weeks ago Dean comes along in his Q&A telling everyone that he's surprised that no one is playing rush warrior because the deck has a 55% win rate, and yet here we are; rush warrior is still not being played.
Its the community as a whole, not any single group of individuals. If they're not complaining about something that means the games dead. Its good to hear them out because not everyone speaks with a tomato in their mouth, but its pretty much senseless to complain about community heat.
It is undeniable that stormwind is generating more hate than usual, but that's hardly surprising. Crystal caverns rogue is one of the most hated deck of all time, even when its win rate was below 50%, and not only are we seeing it come back in another form there's at least 3 different types of it currently.
Anyway, its strange that this is being brought up when the post is not even about this topic.
Mul for demons to get Anatheron out as early as possible. You only need the removal later when you have Anatheron. The idea is to use your removals to clear the way in the end game so your minions can hit face.
Dont hesitate to use Hysteria even if you have a board. Anatheron has too much health to ever die from it, and it can remove some minions so yours can hit face. If you have twisting nether early, just play it. you can never play it when Anatheron is up.
This one is fairly straight forward, I honestly think the hardest battle is against Xyrella. As long as you get Anatheron up early you shouldn't be losing because Anatheron can easily stall until you get enough removals for the finish.
Its actually a nice change from the very familiar, kid friendly tone we have so far in the book of mercs. I do like the fact that Tamsin actually feels sorry for having to beat up Guff, and the build up to the eventual sister showdown, even if the winner is practically decided anyway.
One thing I don't like, in terms of gameplay, is how when the opponent switches to something else they end your turn immediately and then take two turns of their own.
Other than that its been a rather good 8 game adventure.
Agreed with much of this article. Fact remains that quest decks are too easily completed, features 3 tiers of rewards, and finishing it usually means death in 2 turns max. Games end by turn 8 on average now, and we all know that it used to be turn 6.
Im avoiding commenting extensively on wild, but in standard the problem is very similar except quest warrior is not yet a scourge. Let's have a short review of the problem;
- Mage ends games the following turn after Varden is played. Usually turns 7-8, and that's assuming the opponent plays little to no minions. With minions, the quest can be completed by turn 6. In other words, whenever the meta is composed of ordinary hearthstone i.e. curvestone plays, quest mage will always win, barring strong disruption like Cult Neophyte and Far Watch Post.
- Shaman finishes around turn 7, but Brukan only kills on average within 2-3 turns. Its slower than mage, but shaman's clears are preposterously powerful with Perpetual Flame without any downsides and shaman can crucially heal so the usual burn strats don't always work compared to mage. While mage can be killed by aggro, shaman is near immune to it. The quest reward basically allows shaman to outvalue everything. And I simply cannot imagine how team5 will solve this without powercreeping this straight to hell.
- Warlock finishes vary according to deck build. The current most healthiest questlock deck is handlock, where the quest is an after thought, more as a last resort. However, that doesn't change the fact that when tamsin comes down its lights out within 2 turns, via fatigue or otherwise. We've already seen warlock nerfed twice, and I happen to know that wild is such a cesspool of warlock decks that there's no chance we won't get a third nerf. Like really team5, just nerf this quest already.
- Hunter varies in wild and standard. In wild, this can finish as easily as turn 4-5 thanks to Rapid Fire. Needless to say hunter is a major problem in wild. While this has not picked up yet in standard, as shown by rapid fire this can easily change with the introduction of more spells for hunter. Quest hunter in standard is currently too slow for the meta, because hunter cant heal and can't clear as efficiently as the other decks. But does team5 intend to design around the quest for the next 1.5 years? I should think not.
- Quest warrior is shit in standard, but is an absolute monster in wild. This one is up in the air for me. I think its easy to design around this in standard, because there's no mandate for pirates to be printed every expansion. But again, if the meta slows down enough, this can easily be another problem, and warrior have no shortage of clears and heals to make sure it can get there.
- Nothing needs to be changed to priest, but team5 should take from this design philosophy. Powerful things should have weaknesses and should never be easily played, and quest priest is that exactly. The reward will always be vulnerable to mutanus and even the god destroying end reward that literally destroys the opponent when played is only available on turn 10, turn 9 at the very earliest. Is there any reason why team5 isn't designing the other quests like this?
- For the others: quest paladin (too slow, and cant heal), quest dhunter (too difficult to play correctly), quest rogue (powerful but can be played around), quest druid (destroyed by taunts. Like literally)
How to fix it? Just make the conditions more difficult to finish. Strong rewards should also come with difficult conditions, and this is only reflected in a few of the quests like priest. Otherwise, more radically, the quest rewards needs to be bumped up to 6-7 mana. This makes it very difficult to avoid a mutanus, which will balance the quest decks more or less but at a risk of making them unviable. Either way, if team5 leaves this hanging like this, they'd have to design around it for the next 1.5 years and that's a scary thought. We all thought the DKs were too powerful, well this expansion single handedly warped wild around its little finger. How many cards ever made as much a difference?
The only thing that comes to my mind is to either reintroduce Loatheb or to literally have a card that reads "if your opponent played a quest, gain +4+4, etc."
But if hearthstone history says anything, its if the reward is powerful enough it justify playing around even its strongest counters. Golakka Crawler didn't make Patches the Pirate go away, and even Loatheb didn't stop freeze mage from continuing seeing play.
If we are to see any change, Im afraid giving the quest tweak a miss is a mistake in the making.
Thanks to the tool here, its relatively simple. Don't be put off by the number of sequences you have to go through.
Input the data into the tool, then drag the cards accordingly in sequence 3 to the middle "?" minion.
Move on to sequence 4, same thing as sequence 3. Just drag the cards accordingly to the "?" minion.
That's it really. Ive seen worse puzzles off a cereal box mind you, this one just looks intimidating, but in practice is no more than following instructions as simple as preparing a cup noodle.
Thanks again to the community and outofcards for solving this so that I don't have to :) 500xp, and a card back. Don't give it a miss, its just 10 mins.
Its really way too early to say that, game's not even out yet. Blizz did themselves a massive disfavor in not communicating the monetization aspect well (which is likely to be topic no.1 among players anyway) and then did a double fk up by showing not 1, not 2, but 3 different pre-order bundles at a fairly vertical price range.
Theres like a month away from launch and its likely that the heat from this will prompt a few changes. If they hope to avoid being in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons, I sincerely hope they will.
When I use the term polarization, I had in mind something like ungoro quest rogue, where control matchups are just free wins while against aggro matchups its very near a free win for my opponent. Ive been trying a great deal of different decks but have not really settle on anything because it always seem like there's some matches that I literally can never win against. If my opponent top decks lethal, or rng himself to victory, that's one thing; but right now seems like there's always something, whether its quest shaman or shadow priest, there's always some 80-20 matchups that I just cant imagine beating with my current deck. I gave up on priest in the barrens meta precisely because I just hate how warlocks are auto concede matches.
But as I mentioned, after the 2nd round of nerfs it has gotten better. Let's hope it continues to get better, but I suspect that the powerlevel of the quests are still in the way of a more healthier meta. No one can outvalue quest shaman, quest warlock has inevitability, and quest mage will just kill you on turn 7-8 if you cant heal and/or dont have burn. I agree that we still have the midset so there's hope. But team5 tends to design in advance, so its unlikely we'll see any counter cards for quests, so at some point they'd have to address it. I think its safe to say that the hype is dead and buried by now so there's no reason to delay if there are any plans at all.
Auction house for hearthstone is a scary thought. I don't think I ever want to see it. Limited time events for card trading among friends is interesting, an entire auction house will just create incentives for people to start multiple accounts for grinding real life cash. I mean, in bronze wild I'm seeing 2 out of 10 games being a bot, and that's just for grinding gold. Imagine what will happen if you can convert said gold to USD.
As for the comment on polarizing, I think its fair to say that we are currently in one of the most polarizing metas for some time. On one hand there's hyper aggro decks like shadow priest and token/taunt oracle druid, and the other are the combo/solitaire decks. Some matchups are so miserable its astounding. After two rounds of nerfs, it has gotten better, but not addressing the quests directly is baffling.
After the episode of having to rename in game characters because the higher ups are such sleezebags, I can understand this decision. I never understood why people would want things named after themselves, it will always at some point in time create controversy one way or another. St Petersburg has been renamed so many times within the last 150 years its just comical.
Complaining is easy and people need something to vent, I can understand that. But there's a fine line between venting and making people genuinely uncomfortable, and unfortunately our society aren't really good at educating people about this.
In my mind, anyone with a real job wouldn't really have much time to care about twittering bs on the internet, but then again twitter itself encourages short angry bursts as opposed to well thought-out responses. If they wouldn't put any ounce of effort into writing a response, I guess its only fair that most, like me, would just ignore it.
There's no doubt in my mind that the mercs showcase was too short, and honestly poorly done. That there are lots of stick over the monetization of the mode is largely because there's very little known about it, except for its price tag, and blizz would do well to communicate better over this specific area.
However, no one should be harassed over this. Its really too petty to get angry at something that's not even released, and have absolutely no impact on the game that everyone is enjoying right now. Mercs is its own thing; if you don't like it, then feel free to ignore it, it won't change a anything in both hearthstone hearthstone and hearthstone battlegrounds.
That being said; short, angry words bordering on personal insults to others via the internet is about as intimidating as the public toilets. I honestly find long worded statements more scarier because then I'll have to actually read through it and process a response in my head as opposed to simply ignoring it.
Priest questline is ironically the most balance of them all, despite the quest reward literally reads 'destroy the opponent'. Mostly because its requirements will almost always leave priest vulnerable to a mutanus, and the fact that priest doesn't really need the quest to win. A built that curves is usually a midrange deck that is more than capable of closing games themselves and this finisher is way too slow, coming out on turn 9 at its fastest. The most the quest brings to the table is a win condition against control decks.
It might be time for team5 to bite the bullet and simply admit that the stormwind quests as a whole are too powerful and too easily completed. I don't mind if the rewards are powerful, but it should at least be hard to complete, or there has to be more to the gameplay than just steamrolling towards quest completion. Handlock in standard is a good example of a powerful quest deck that at very least relies on the quest as a final last resort, and presents an infinitely better game to go against than pre-nerfed d6 warlock.
Just tweak the quest conditions in stormwind as a whole. Games are over the turn after these things come on board, usually around turn 6-8. If they're this powerful it should be coming out past turn 10 at least, and if the deck does nothing else other than finishing the quest, they should at very least be vulnerable while doing it; warlock in wild clearly isn't, shaman in standard will never lose to aggro, while mage can and will destroy you consistently the following turn after the quest is completed.
As long as we're speculating:
- 3 mana 3/4 (cannot be damaged by spells)
- 2 mana 2/3 (battlecry: your opponent can only draw one card next turn)
- 4 mana 4/4 (battlecry: gain +4+4 if your opponent has played a quest this game)
- 3 mana 5/5 (battlecry: If your opponent has less than 8 cards in hand, he draws 2 cards)
Yes, Im not a fan of polarizing metas. At this point if they aren't nerfing the stormwind quest in general all I have hope for is counter cards. But as just like how Patches the Pirate survived the mountains of Golakka Crawlers, its but a band-aid to a gunshot wound.
He didn't answer it because that's a statement, not a question. Im surprised that he responded at all.
There's better ways to phrase that statement, so I have to agree with HuntardHuntard. Its just not very nice.
If you're really hungry for stats, you dont have to rely on blizz to provide it, there's at least two major websites that provides adequate stats at different brackets. Hsreplay is one, and Vicious Syndicate is another.
Ultimately, Im not sure what is there to complain about. Most top companies dont showcase full stats to their customers because its not in their interest to do so (that's not to say its correct or ethical, mind you). In this case, there's nothing conspiratorial about them sharing a small piece of data. Any hearthstone player worth more than a discarded piece of tissue paper can and will judge for themselves, and if they willingly follow anyone's data like a good little sheep then that says more about them than anything else.
If they're sharing the top 1% data, that's fine. Take it for what its worth because it isnt gospel. Two weeks ago Dean comes along in his Q&A telling everyone that he's surprised that no one is playing rush warrior because the deck has a 55% win rate, and yet here we are; rush warrior is still not being played.
Its the community as a whole, not any single group of individuals. If they're not complaining about something that means the games dead. Its good to hear them out because not everyone speaks with a tomato in their mouth, but its pretty much senseless to complain about community heat.
It is undeniable that stormwind is generating more hate than usual, but that's hardly surprising. Crystal caverns rogue is one of the most hated deck of all time, even when its win rate was below 50%, and not only are we seeing it come back in another form there's at least 3 different types of it currently.
Anyway, its strange that this is being brought up when the post is not even about this topic.
Mul for demons to get Anatheron out as early as possible. You only need the removal later when you have Anatheron. The idea is to use your removals to clear the way in the end game so your minions can hit face.
If Im not mistaken, there's 2x Twisting Nether, 2x Hysteria, 2x School Spirits, 2x Cascading Disaster, 2x Soul Rend, and 2x Dark Bargain. Rest are demons.
Dont hesitate to use Hysteria even if you have a board. Anatheron has too much health to ever die from it, and it can remove some minions so yours can hit face. If you have twisting nether early, just play it. you can never play it when Anatheron is up.
This one is fairly straight forward, I honestly think the hardest battle is against Xyrella. As long as you get Anatheron up early you shouldn't be losing because Anatheron can easily stall until you get enough removals for the finish.
Is no one playing around turn 1 Oh My Yogg!, which is why the turn 1 advantage so much higher for secret paladin?
Its a quest/combo meta. Its no surprise that aggro decks are on top at all.
Its actually a nice change from the very familiar, kid friendly tone we have so far in the book of mercs. I do like the fact that Tamsin actually feels sorry for having to beat up Guff, and the build up to the eventual sister showdown, even if the winner is practically decided anyway.
One thing I don't like, in terms of gameplay, is how when the opponent switches to something else they end your turn immediately and then take two turns of their own.
Other than that its been a rather good 8 game adventure.
Agreed with much of this article. Fact remains that quest decks are too easily completed, features 3 tiers of rewards, and finishing it usually means death in 2 turns max. Games end by turn 8 on average now, and we all know that it used to be turn 6.
Im avoiding commenting extensively on wild, but in standard the problem is very similar except quest warrior is not yet a scourge. Let's have a short review of the problem;
- Mage ends games the following turn after Varden is played. Usually turns 7-8, and that's assuming the opponent plays little to no minions. With minions, the quest can be completed by turn 6. In other words, whenever the meta is composed of ordinary hearthstone i.e. curvestone plays, quest mage will always win, barring strong disruption like Cult Neophyte and Far Watch Post.
- Shaman finishes around turn 7, but Brukan only kills on average within 2-3 turns. Its slower than mage, but shaman's clears are preposterously powerful with Perpetual Flame without any downsides and shaman can crucially heal so the usual burn strats don't always work compared to mage. While mage can be killed by aggro, shaman is near immune to it. The quest reward basically allows shaman to outvalue everything. And I simply cannot imagine how team5 will solve this without powercreeping this straight to hell.
- Warlock finishes vary according to deck build. The current most healthiest questlock deck is handlock, where the quest is an after thought, more as a last resort. However, that doesn't change the fact that when tamsin comes down its lights out within 2 turns, via fatigue or otherwise. We've already seen warlock nerfed twice, and I happen to know that wild is such a cesspool of warlock decks that there's no chance we won't get a third nerf. Like really team5, just nerf this quest already.
- Hunter varies in wild and standard. In wild, this can finish as easily as turn 4-5 thanks to Rapid Fire. Needless to say hunter is a major problem in wild. While this has not picked up yet in standard, as shown by rapid fire this can easily change with the introduction of more spells for hunter. Quest hunter in standard is currently too slow for the meta, because hunter cant heal and can't clear as efficiently as the other decks. But does team5 intend to design around the quest for the next 1.5 years? I should think not.
- Quest warrior is shit in standard, but is an absolute monster in wild. This one is up in the air for me. I think its easy to design around this in standard, because there's no mandate for pirates to be printed every expansion. But again, if the meta slows down enough, this can easily be another problem, and warrior have no shortage of clears and heals to make sure it can get there.
- Nothing needs to be changed to priest, but team5 should take from this design philosophy. Powerful things should have weaknesses and should never be easily played, and quest priest is that exactly. The reward will always be vulnerable to mutanus and even the god destroying end reward that literally destroys the opponent when played is only available on turn 10, turn 9 at the very earliest. Is there any reason why team5 isn't designing the other quests like this?
- For the others: quest paladin (too slow, and cant heal), quest dhunter (too difficult to play correctly), quest rogue (powerful but can be played around), quest druid (destroyed by taunts. Like literally)
How to fix it? Just make the conditions more difficult to finish. Strong rewards should also come with difficult conditions, and this is only reflected in a few of the quests like priest. Otherwise, more radically, the quest rewards needs to be bumped up to 6-7 mana. This makes it very difficult to avoid a mutanus, which will balance the quest decks more or less but at a risk of making them unviable. Either way, if team5 leaves this hanging like this, they'd have to design around it for the next 1.5 years and that's a scary thought. We all thought the DKs were too powerful, well this expansion single handedly warped wild around its little finger. How many cards ever made as much a difference?
The only thing that comes to my mind is to either reintroduce Loatheb or to literally have a card that reads "if your opponent played a quest, gain +4+4, etc."
But if hearthstone history says anything, its if the reward is powerful enough it justify playing around even its strongest counters. Golakka Crawler didn't make Patches the Pirate go away, and even Loatheb didn't stop freeze mage from continuing seeing play.
If we are to see any change, Im afraid giving the quest tweak a miss is a mistake in the making.
Thanks to the tool here, its relatively simple. Don't be put off by the number of sequences you have to go through.
Input the data into the tool, then drag the cards accordingly in sequence 3 to the middle "?" minion.
Move on to sequence 4, same thing as sequence 3. Just drag the cards accordingly to the "?" minion.
That's it really. Ive seen worse puzzles off a cereal box mind you, this one just looks intimidating, but in practice is no more than following instructions as simple as preparing a cup noodle.
Thanks again to the community and outofcards for solving this so that I don't have to :) 500xp, and a card back. Don't give it a miss, its just 10 mins.
Its actually simpler than it looks. Finished it in 10 minutes. Took me longer to cast the lunar eclipse on ysera (no thanks for rng gods).
Its really way too early to say that, game's not even out yet. Blizz did themselves a massive disfavor in not communicating the monetization aspect well (which is likely to be topic no.1 among players anyway) and then did a double fk up by showing not 1, not 2, but 3 different pre-order bundles at a fairly vertical price range.
Theres like a month away from launch and its likely that the heat from this will prompt a few changes. If they hope to avoid being in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons, I sincerely hope they will.
When I use the term polarization, I had in mind something like ungoro quest rogue, where control matchups are just free wins while against aggro matchups its very near a free win for my opponent. Ive been trying a great deal of different decks but have not really settle on anything because it always seem like there's some matches that I literally can never win against. If my opponent top decks lethal, or rng himself to victory, that's one thing; but right now seems like there's always something, whether its quest shaman or shadow priest, there's always some 80-20 matchups that I just cant imagine beating with my current deck. I gave up on priest in the barrens meta precisely because I just hate how warlocks are auto concede matches.
But as I mentioned, after the 2nd round of nerfs it has gotten better. Let's hope it continues to get better, but I suspect that the powerlevel of the quests are still in the way of a more healthier meta. No one can outvalue quest shaman, quest warlock has inevitability, and quest mage will just kill you on turn 7-8 if you cant heal and/or dont have burn. I agree that we still have the midset so there's hope. But team5 tends to design in advance, so its unlikely we'll see any counter cards for quests, so at some point they'd have to address it. I think its safe to say that the hype is dead and buried by now so there's no reason to delay if there are any plans at all.
Auction house for hearthstone is a scary thought. I don't think I ever want to see it. Limited time events for card trading among friends is interesting, an entire auction house will just create incentives for people to start multiple accounts for grinding real life cash. I mean, in bronze wild I'm seeing 2 out of 10 games being a bot, and that's just for grinding gold. Imagine what will happen if you can convert said gold to USD.
As for the comment on polarizing, I think its fair to say that we are currently in one of the most polarizing metas for some time. On one hand there's hyper aggro decks like shadow priest and token/taunt oracle druid, and the other are the combo/solitaire decks. Some matchups are so miserable its astounding. After two rounds of nerfs, it has gotten better, but not addressing the quests directly is baffling.
After the episode of having to rename in game characters because the higher ups are such sleezebags, I can understand this decision. I never understood why people would want things named after themselves, it will always at some point in time create controversy one way or another. St Petersburg has been renamed so many times within the last 150 years its just comical.
Complaining is easy and people need something to vent, I can understand that. But there's a fine line between venting and making people genuinely uncomfortable, and unfortunately our society aren't really good at educating people about this.
In my mind, anyone with a real job wouldn't really have much time to care about twittering bs on the internet, but then again twitter itself encourages short angry bursts as opposed to well thought-out responses. If they wouldn't put any ounce of effort into writing a response, I guess its only fair that most, like me, would just ignore it.
There's no doubt in my mind that the mercs showcase was too short, and honestly poorly done. That there are lots of stick over the monetization of the mode is largely because there's very little known about it, except for its price tag, and blizz would do well to communicate better over this specific area.
However, no one should be harassed over this. Its really too petty to get angry at something that's not even released, and have absolutely no impact on the game that everyone is enjoying right now. Mercs is its own thing; if you don't like it, then feel free to ignore it, it won't change a anything in both hearthstone hearthstone and hearthstone battlegrounds.
That being said; short, angry words bordering on personal insults to others via the internet is about as intimidating as the public toilets. I honestly find long worded statements more scarier because then I'll have to actually read through it and process a response in my head as opposed to simply ignoring it.
Priest questline is ironically the most balance of them all, despite the quest reward literally reads 'destroy the opponent'. Mostly because its requirements will almost always leave priest vulnerable to a mutanus, and the fact that priest doesn't really need the quest to win. A built that curves is usually a midrange deck that is more than capable of closing games themselves and this finisher is way too slow, coming out on turn 9 at its fastest. The most the quest brings to the table is a win condition against control decks.
It might be time for team5 to bite the bullet and simply admit that the stormwind quests as a whole are too powerful and too easily completed. I don't mind if the rewards are powerful, but it should at least be hard to complete, or there has to be more to the gameplay than just steamrolling towards quest completion. Handlock in standard is a good example of a powerful quest deck that at very least relies on the quest as a final last resort, and presents an infinitely better game to go against than pre-nerfed d6 warlock.
Just tweak the quest conditions in stormwind as a whole. Games are over the turn after these things come on board, usually around turn 6-8. If they're this powerful it should be coming out past turn 10 at least, and if the deck does nothing else other than finishing the quest, they should at very least be vulnerable while doing it; warlock in wild clearly isn't, shaman in standard will never lose to aggro, while mage can and will destroy you consistently the following turn after the quest is completed.