N'zoth is a cool card to have, but we already had metas where he was basically out of radars (because the meta was too fast), so it's not really a forever safe craft, but definitely a powerful neutral card. The revamped Renodecks are probably his best environment atm (to be seen if staple in them tho).
You can always build some homebrews with it, and have some satisfaction. Just be aware that the meta may turn unfavourable to games that regularly need turn-10 for powerturns. And remember he's good for stalling, but not necessarily for sealing the game.
You can conceive it as a poor man's DK, who can afford only one for all classes.
There is a difference between relative powerlevel spikes within a meta, and something that threatens variety...
Nerfs are not all the same BS.
Ofc nerfs are not always right, but that's another story.
Nerfs hit (or should hit) what is powerful and so frequent as to warp the meta around them, impairing the viability of other decks, that should presumably be there in the devs' plans. That's much more precise than nerfs hitting top tier decks. Not all top tier decks deserve nerfs.
The "there will always be a new t1" story is a false argument, because it is a simplification of what is the scope of nerfs.
Do you really want this guy to spawn from random effects? I am afraid every time I generate a random 4 drop/legendary already..
Well, why not?
The 4-mana thing is already in place.
And there are already tons of Elementals or Demons that are nearly unplayable when randomly generated (without synergy), so that's an extremely limited downside. Not much worse than the current situation. And not so much of a downside at all when playing against a Renodeck.
But the rebranding could make those cards viable in some lists, and that's a great upside.
Because it's the worst card that you can get randomly generated on board I am not only talking about current cards but there could be a card that generates a 4 cost elemental or a random elemental (such card won't see play but arena exists) and it's such a feels bad card.
The card is bad, even when Raza priest was everywhere this card saw 0 play even then it's just not a good card.
But what is the REAL chance of randomly summoning it in the ever-growing pool of Elementals or Demons? It's not much worse than summoning a Fire Plume Harbinger. And the chance we'll ever get a card that specifically summons a 4-mana Elemental/Demon is definitely more remote than getting a Darkness from it.
It seems you are really afraid of The Darkness (sorry for the pun, but it was so fitting).
And the historical playrate of the card is actually an argument in favour of giving it a Tribe: it would have more chances to turn from meme to a decent tech.
Do you really want this guy to spawn from random effects? I am afraid every time I generate a random 4 drop/legendary already..
Well, why not?
The generic 4-mana thing is already in place, so that's not an additional downside.
And there are already tons of Elementals or Demons that are nearly unplayable when randomly generated (without synergy), so that's an extremely limited downside. Not much worse than the current situation. And not so much of a downside at all when playing against a Renodeck.
But the rebranding could make those cards viable in some lists, and that's a great upside.
I don't think you can categorise them as elemental. In my opinion they are more demon than elemental coming from the void like Void Ripper or Void Crusher
Yep, that's an alternative indeed. It is particularly true for The Darkness, due to its appearence.
Yet, with the little information we have, the Darkness doesn't seem to be a true Demon, by-product of the Twisting Nether. Yet we can't rule that out, indeed.
And what about Am'gam Rager and Ancient Shade? Is the former a Voidwalker too, while the latter is an Undead (with no existing tribe so far)?
Get off your soap box. Jesus. As he said, you're entitled to your opinion, but it's a game website for christ sake. Relax. Also, a deck doesn't need to run Leeroy to be aggro FWIW.
Are you sure i am the one who should relax?
i politely argued on point (which is about this being a guide, not an opinion in a thread, do you know the difference? It sounds like you don't).
You should relax instead, and answer whole points, not just bits of it, and telling who should get off their soap boxes. Because you are not entitled to that. FWIW.
PS: just in case it's not obvious, i am saying all this exclusively to push and raise the already good quality of OOC content as much as possible. Improvement through (constructive) critique, ever heard of that? I couldn't care less of changing what people call or define their decks, or what is their personal opinion. ;)
The deck wins by hitting the opponent in the face, hence I put it in Aggro.
That's true for Conjurer Mage as well. But Conjurer Mage is no Aggro.
And I disagree also on defining old Spiteful Druid or Priest as Aggro. Because they were not as Aggro as real Aggro.
Old Pirate Warrior is Aggro. Current Tempo Rogue is Aggro. Odd Paladin tends to be Aggro. All these decks are way faster than the current iterations of Highlander Hunter and old iterations of Spiteful decks.
However, I can't refrain from criticising the choice of that Highlander Hunter as an example of Aggro deck. Indeed you explain about Midrange, nonetheless having that deck under Rock-Aggro is arguable at best.
Independently of how good the deck is (which i cannot argue about), independently of it acting as Rock in the meta (which I would still argue about, according to your own definition of "Rock"), it's definitely misleading about what is conceived as "Aggro".
Indeed, I was thinking about something similar, but I was too scared of crafting Arugal exactly for this purpose (I was actually thinking about BOTH Archmage Arugaland Hex Lord Malacrass...).
Although I was more intrigued by a larger Elemental setup.
Anyway, how do you fare against meta decks, old and new? eg Secret Mage, Reno decks, various Shamans?
Quest Shaman is a very solid Midrange deck, that can be tuned to be faster or slower (almost a Control deck).
But ultimately, it stays vulnerable to Aggro or other Midrange (if the QS is implemented to be slow), so it's always in check (so far).
The real difficulty is understanding whether you are facing a fast list, to rush down asap, or a slower one, where you should play around board clears.
In other words, it seems invulnerable because Quest Shaman is actually a whole spectrum of decks, not one single archetype.
PS: I am speaking for Wild, but I assume the same holds true in Standard as well.
Dust it once you decide you REALLY need dust to craft important cards.
That's a safeguard against the "oh i have extra dust, let's craft this fancy legendary!" and then you waste your resources.
In the meanwhile, decide if having golden cards is relevant to you. It's a subjective matter, but unless you are willing to regularly spend money on this game, it's pointless to focus on golden cards, in particular on golden legendaries.
Btw, the new SoU Secret cards are completely useless in Standard atm.
If Secret Mage was a meta deck in Standard, I bet they would have also released a new powerful series of techs or soft techs to deal with it.
So, while they do build archetypes in several expansions, also in Standard, the neat result for now is null in Standard, while it revamped a deck that now threatens to nuke the Wild meta into some kind of ridiculousness.
Was it really necessary to release all these powerful Secret cards together (if at all), with no counterpart?
In the meanwhile, I'll try and adjust my own decks to deal with Burn Mage. Let's hope we can find a solution that makes everyone fairly satisfied.
N'zoth is a cool card to have, but we already had metas where he was basically out of radars (because the meta was too fast), so it's not really a forever safe craft, but definitely a powerful neutral card. The revamped Renodecks are probably his best environment atm (to be seen if staple in them tho).
You can always build some homebrews with it, and have some satisfaction. Just be aware that the meta may turn unfavourable to games that regularly need turn-10 for powerturns. And remember he's good for stalling, but not necessarily for sealing the game.
You can conceive it as a poor man's DK, who can afford only one for all classes.
There is a difference between relative powerlevel spikes within a meta, and something that threatens variety...
Nerfs are not all the same BS.
Ofc nerfs are not always right, but that's another story.
Nerfs hit (or should hit) what is powerful and so frequent as to warp the meta around them, impairing the viability of other decks, that should presumably be there in the devs' plans. That's much more precise than nerfs hitting top tier decks. Not all top tier decks deserve nerfs.
The "there will always be a new t1" story is a false argument, because it is a simplification of what is the scope of nerfs.
But what is the REAL chance of randomly summoning it in the ever-growing pool of Elementals or Demons? It's not much worse than summoning a Fire Plume Harbinger. And the chance we'll ever get a card that specifically summons a 4-mana Elemental/Demon is definitely more remote than getting a Darkness from it.
It seems you are really afraid of The Darkness (sorry for the pun, but it was so fitting).
And the historical playrate of the card is actually an argument in favour of giving it a Tribe: it would have more chances to turn from meme to a decent tech.
Well, why not?
The generic 4-mana thing is already in place, so that's not an additional downside.
And there are already tons of Elementals or Demons that are nearly unplayable when randomly generated (without synergy), so that's an extremely limited downside. Not much worse than the current situation. And not so much of a downside at all when playing against a Renodeck.
But the rebranding could make those cards viable in some lists, and that's a great upside.
Yep, that's an alternative indeed. It is particularly true for The Darkness, due to its appearence.
Yet, with the little information we have, the Darkness doesn't seem to be a true Demon, by-product of the Twisting Nether. Yet we can't rule that out, indeed.
And what about Am'gam Rager and Ancient Shade? Is the former a Voidwalker too, while the latter is an Undead (with no existing tribe so far)?
Now a forgotten meme of Wild.
HOWEVER, with the revamp of Highlander decks, the card could turn into a tech. Granted, a suboptimal tech.
But what if it had eg. an Elemental tag? The card could find new synergies, and be easier to use in a ladder game. Maybe.
Afterall, Radiant Elemental and Lightspawn are Elementals themselves, while being the opposite of what The Darkness is.
What do you think? Are there more cards that deserve a tribe tag?
PS: Am'gam Rager, Ancient Shade too!
Are you sure i am the one who should relax?
i politely argued on point (which is about this being a guide, not an opinion in a thread, do you know the difference? It sounds like you don't).
You should relax instead, and answer whole points, not just bits of it, and telling who should get off their soap boxes. Because you are not entitled to that. FWIW.
PS: just in case it's not obvious, i am saying all this exclusively to push and raise the already good quality of OOC content as much as possible. Improvement through (constructive) critique, ever heard of that? I couldn't care less of changing what people call or define their decks, or what is their personal opinion. ;)
Yeah sure, but this is not just a post in a forum, where everyone describes their personal view.
This is a guide, where you are explaining stuff to newbies (and this is the only reason why i dare to sound so picky). :)
That's true for Conjurer Mage as well. But Conjurer Mage is no Aggro.
And I disagree also on defining old Spiteful Druid or Priest as Aggro. Because they were not as Aggro as real Aggro.
Old Pirate Warrior is Aggro. Current Tempo Rogue is Aggro. Odd Paladin tends to be Aggro. All these decks are way faster than the current iterations of Highlander Hunter and old iterations of Spiteful decks.
Nice guide.
However, I can't refrain from criticising the choice of that Highlander Hunter as an example of Aggro deck. Indeed you explain about Midrange, nonetheless having that deck under Rock-Aggro is arguable at best.
A deck with a 10-mana card like Zul'jin, Zilliax, Sandbinder, etc, and NO Leeroy Jenkins cannot be called "Aggro".
Independently of how good the deck is (which i cannot argue about), independently of it acting as Rock in the meta (which I would still argue about, according to your own definition of "Rock"), it's definitely misleading about what is conceived as "Aggro".
This is the list I'm working on. The idea is to keep summoning solid bodies capable of favourable trades, to steadily overwhelm the enemy.
Deck ID Not Found
It currently has little consistency against decks that can swarm the board fast and/or repeatedly. I so wish Duskbreaker was a Mage card...
Well, i'm working on a Dragon version, and it's honestly a blast to play so far.
Indeed, I was thinking about something similar, but I was too scared of crafting Arugal exactly for this purpose (I was actually thinking about BOTH Archmage Arugaland Hex Lord Malacrass...).
Although I was more intrigued by a larger Elemental setup.
Anyway, how do you fare against meta decks, old and new? eg Secret Mage, Reno decks, various Shamans?
C'mon guys, let's NOT start being toxic with calls for the salt thread at every discussion about cards power.
The OP just asked for confirmation of an impression of his, he didn't whine or cry for nerfs.
Let's stay constructive with our answers. :)
I doubt you have enough card draw to reliably unleash Chef Nomi and Elise the Enlightened. Not before being already dead.
You can hope to survive Aggro by running them out of steam, but i hardly see you actually winning with your own winconditions.
I think you should go harder down the draw/combo path. At the moment, your deck is neither Control nor Combo.
Quest Shaman is a very solid Midrange deck, that can be tuned to be faster or slower (almost a Control deck).
But ultimately, it stays vulnerable to Aggro or other Midrange (if the QS is implemented to be slow), so it's always in check (so far).
The real difficulty is understanding whether you are facing a fast list, to rush down asap, or a slower one, where you should play around board clears.
In other words, it seems invulnerable because Quest Shaman is actually a whole spectrum of decks, not one single archetype.
PS: I am speaking for Wild, but I assume the same holds true in Standard as well.
Keep it for now.
Dust it once you decide you REALLY need dust to craft important cards.
That's a safeguard against the "oh i have extra dust, let's craft this fancy legendary!" and then you waste your resources.
In the meanwhile, decide if having golden cards is relevant to you. It's a subjective matter, but unless you are willing to regularly spend money on this game, it's pointless to focus on golden cards, in particular on golden legendaries.
I absolutely love the fact they keep improving Zephrys the Great.
I finally crafted my Kazakus with the incoming dust from nerfs.
Btw, the new SoU Secret cards are completely useless in Standard atm.
If Secret Mage was a meta deck in Standard, I bet they would have also released a new powerful series of techs or soft techs to deal with it.
So, while they do build archetypes in several expansions, also in Standard, the neat result for now is null in Standard, while it revamped a deck that now threatens to nuke the Wild meta into some kind of ridiculousness.
Was it really necessary to release all these powerful Secret cards together (if at all), with no counterpart?
In the meanwhile, I'll try and adjust my own decks to deal with Burn Mage. Let's hope we can find a solution that makes everyone fairly satisfied.
Thanks to everyone for their contribution.
I'd like to slightly steer away the topic and ask you: how exactly do you deal with Secret Mages?
Is there some strategy to apply, other than changing deck to have a favourable matchup?
Most of us seem to agree that adding anti-Secret tech is highly sub-optimal.