Hearthstone realm banner
Hearthstone realm avatar Hearthstone realm home

Hearthstone

146 Characters Joined
Create Thread
Hearthstone | Posted by | 6 years, 8 months ago
Discussion

Why was Aggro Priest nerfed so fast compared to pretty much all other aggro decks?

Seems pretty bizarre that once priest finally got a non dragon/non SS actual aggro(ish) deck that it gets nerfed while in the past paladin/warlock/warrior got to use aggressive strategies for significantly longer before ever getting nerfs (and even then some of those classes did not always get deck crippling nerfs for their respective decks in some of their respective metas).

31 Share

// join_the_conversation

Sign in to share your thoughts, vote on comments, and connect with the community.

Sign in Create account

Comments

Sort by:
Oldest Newest Top

  • Seems pretty bizarre that once priest finally got a non dragon/non SS actual aggro(ish) deck that it gets nerfed while in the past paladin/warlock/warrior got to use aggressive strategies for significantly longer before ever getting nerfs (and even then some of those classes did not always get deck crippling nerfs for their respective decks in some of their respective metas).

  • Something something class identity. They should have HoFed divine spirit for sure

  • Feels a lot worse to be blown up by a 20/20 northshire cleric than it does to be beaten down by a murlocadin, imo

  • They got tired of hearing all the bitching about Big Priest, so now they’ll never let priest have a T1 deck again (even though BP was never T1

  • Cause aggro priest was waaay too good, and blizzard already predicted people would bitch about priest after they nerfed mage and warrior to they nerfed the easiest card to nerf- one that they buffed 2 months ago. 

  • Meme answers aside, it was a very common and strong deck in top legend.

  • Well i personaly did not see the need to nerf Extra Arms but i also kinda understand why they did it. Like DoubleSummon said - Aggro/Combo Priest was very good and could snowball the opponent pretty hard - i mean it is one of the strongest decks (at least before the nerf) according to HSReplay :) 

  • 'Cause priest is doomed to be an eternal slow-combo hero. Period.

    I was having lots of fun with aggro priests in wild (not this stupid combo in standard), with things like Shadowbomber, Shadow Ascendant, Spawn of Shadows and Kobold Sandtrooper, but i don't even dare to try it again with Extra Arms at 3...

    feelsbadman

  • Most likely answer: they already had nerfs on the schedule, and they were scared of how strong the aggro combo priest could be. Leave aside the philosophy that has always dictated their actions in the past (give it time, see how it pans out). Leave aside the fact that the meta hadn't even had a chance yet to get hostile against aggro priest and come up with counters to it.

    They were already doing other nerfs, so they made a hasty decision to revert the Extra Arms nerf alongside other much-more-deserved nerfs to decks that have had their (very long) time to shine.

    And the nerf really did completely destroy the deck, as expected. Priest can go back to being garbage tier again; Blizzard hates you guys.

    Edit: Oh, and it was also a very cheap deck, so almost anyone could have crafted it if they wanted to spend the dust. Other super powerful decks are more limited in their scope, because not that many people have all the cards (Reno mage, control warrior, pocket mage, etc) - so maybe they have a lesser impact naturally since not everyone can afford them.

  • Because of the dumb combo thats why. Priest can't have nice things because of Divine Spirit and Inner Fire, should have just HoF the piece of shit cards and be done with it.

    • Quote From SamHobbs494

      Because of the dumb combo thats why. Priest can't have nice things because of Divine Spirit and Inner Fire, should have just HoF the piece of shit cards and be done with it.

      Honestly, it's not really even the combo. It's the ability to get through taunts AND the combo. I kinda think the sleeper problem here is Silence and Mass Dispel. These cards are the antidote to the hard counter for the Divine Spirit Inner Fire combo: TAUNTS. Without such easy silence access, the combo is MUCH harder to consistently pull off, because the only thing the opponent needs to stop the combo dead in the water is a taunt or two or three. But the silences negate that hard counter, leaving very little way to hard counter the combo.

      TL;DR - the real issue is Priest's access to very powerful silences.

  • Fast Nerf they took way long to Nerf back in the day pirate warrior.

  • They shouldn’t have nerfed extra arms. Aggro priest was fun to play and it dint break your spirit like control warrior. Warrior makes me gnash my teeth in frustration.

  • BRING BACK EXTRA ARMS!!

  • I think it was just the timing.  It would be weird to nerf the #2 and #3 classes/decks but not the #1, albeit Pocket and Boom are a lot more "toxic" than extra arms was on the meta.  They would risk having priest be super broken and/or have to turn around and nerf it anyway.  I'm not sure this would have been the case because even though Priest was super strong on it's own, reno mage was super popular and it preyed on that matchup.  

    I think it was the easy way out.  They didn't want to address the complete lack of win condition for priest by addressing divine spirit / inner fire.  I have kind of mixed feelings on the nerf.  Think they could have done it in a better way but the deck did need to be nerfed in one way or another, imo.

    • Quote From duppie

      I think it was just the timing.  It would be weird to nerf the #2 and #3 classes/decks but not the #1, albeit Pocket and Boom are a lot more "toxic" than extra arms was on the meta. 

      This is extremely short-sighted to say that combo priest was the #1 deck. One or two weeks does not indicate long term performance. Mage and Warrior were in the top two spots for a LONG time. To say that they were #2 and #3 is just not true. Combo priest was far too new to say anything definitive about it; and definitely WAY too soon to say it was going to be better than Mage and Warrior

      • Quote From sto650
        Quote From duppie

        I think it was just the timing.  It would be weird to nerf the #2 and #3 classes/decks but not the #1, albeit Pocket and Boom are a lot more "toxic" than extra arms was on the meta. 

        This is extremely short-sighted to say that combo priest was the #1 deck. One or two weeks does not indicate long term performance. Mage and Warrior were in the top two spots for a LONG time. To say that they were #2 and #3 is just not true. Combo priest was far too new to say anything definitive about it; and definitely WAY too soon to say it was going to be better than Mage and Warrior

        Priest was the best deck so far, that could have changed from meta warping around it but that doesn't mean the deck wouldn't need a nerf.  Priest was the best performer on ladder and tournament play and it had a better matchup spread than warrior and mage.

        The new combo priest wasn't around any longer than reno mage was.  Luna's pocket galaxy might have dodged a nerf if cyclone mage was still the only mage deck, highlander mage is what made it broken to the point of no return.  

        Quote From JFK

        *puts tinfoil hat on* Is it possible that Team 5 decided to nerf Extra Arms instead of Nortshire or Divine Spirit or something else because they want to show that the buffs were not successful (along with Pocket Galaxy) so that they don't have to do them again, at least not any time soon? I'm just paranoid, right?

        Yeah, I think that is just paranoia.  They don't want to nerf Divine Spirit because it's one of if not priests only viable win condition competitively and Northshire is a card that carries most priest archetypes on its back.  If they were to nerf/HOF these basic set cards they would be killing priest without providing adequate replacements and those replacements are going to take time to test.  I don't think they even expected combo priest to be as good as it was so the easiest and quickest way to fix it was to revert the snowbally card they just buffed.  

        • Quote From duppie
          Quote From sto650
          Quote From duppie

          I think it was just the timing.  It would be weird to nerf the #2 and #3 classes/decks but not the #1, albeit Pocket and Boom are a lot more "toxic" than extra arms was on the meta. 

          This is extremely short-sighted to say that combo priest was the #1 deck. One or two weeks does not indicate long term performance. Mage and Warrior were in the top two spots for a LONG time. To say that they were #2 and #3 is just not true. Combo priest was far too new to say anything definitive about it; and definitely WAY too soon to say it was going to be better than Mage and Warrior

          Priest was the best deck so far, that could have changed from meta warping around it but that doesn't mean the deck wouldn't need a nerf.  Priest was the best performer on ladder and tournament play and it had a better matchup spread than warrior and mage.

          The new combo priest wasn't around any longer than reno mage was.  Luna's pocket galaxy might have dodged a nerf if cyclone mage was still the only mage deck, highlander mage is what made it broken to the point of no return.  

          Quote From JFK

          *puts tinfoil hat on* Is it possible that Team 5 decided to nerf Extra Arms instead of Nortshire or Divine Spirit or something else because they want to show that the buffs were not successful (along with Pocket Galaxy) so that they don't have to do them again, at least not any time soon? I'm just paranoid, right?

          Yeah, I think that is just paranoia.  They don't want to nerf Divine Spirit because it's one of if not priests only viable win condition competitively and Northshire is a card that carries most priest archetypes on its back.  If they were to nerf/HOF these basic set cards they would be killing priest without providing adequate replacements and those replacements are going to take time to test.  I don't think they even expected combo priest to be as good as it was so the easiest and quickest way to fix it was to revert the snowbally card they just buffed.  

          didn't stop them from killing Druid's core cards with RR patch and only now sstarting to actually build the class back up again without it. They never had a problem with completely eviscerating a class for a long period of time with the goal of overall balance.

          If anything, this might indicate that Divine Spirit will be targetted at the end of the year when the old sets rotates and they have a better foundation to "rework" the Priest class (like it's happening now with Druid)

           

          Friendly

        • Duppie says that priest was the best deck in tournaments, yet only one priest made the top 8 at the recent Masters tournament, and didn't even end up in the top 4. The top 4 were two mages, a warrior, and a hunter. Hmmm ....

          • Quote From sto650

            Duppie says that priest was the best deck in tournaments, yet only one priest made the top 8 at the recent Masters tournament, and didn't even end up in the top 4. The top 4 were two mages, a warrior, and a hunter. Hmmm ....

            Priest had the highest overall winrate as a class at the whole event by far (59%) to mage (50%) and warrior (46%).  Basing the power level of the decks off the few games in the finals doesn't make sense, being the best deck doesn't mean its 100% winrate and never loses.  The quantity of mages and warriors was greatly in their favor.  Dog's freeze mage wasn't the best deck in the game even though he won the vegas tour with it.  

            It was looking quite strong in open cups too.

             

            • Quote From duppie
              Quote From sto650

              Duppie says that priest was the best deck in tournaments, yet only one priest made the top 8 at the recent Masters tournament, and didn't even end up in the top 4. The top 4 were two mages, a warrior, and a hunter. Hmmm ....

              Priest had the highest overall winrate as a class at the whole event by far (59%) to mage (50%) and warrior (46%).  Basing the power level of the decks off the few games in the finals doesn't make sense, being the best deck doesn't mean its 100% winrate and never loses.  The quantity of mages and warriors was greatly in their favor.  Dog's freeze mage wasn't the best deck in the game even though he won the vegas tour with it.  

              It was looking quite strong in open cups too.

               

              A funny thing happens when a certain deck mostly has mirror matches for an entire tournament. What do you suppose is the winrate of a tournament that is all mages? You guessed it: 50%. Of course the overall mage winrate is artificially deflated because all of those mirrors automatically have a 50% winrate. This causes the overall data for mages to be almost entirely useless for that tournament; with so many mirrors, overall winrate tells you nothing about the deck's power level.

              Warrior had a lower overall winrate because it's not very good against mage specifically. And the tournament was mostly mages. Which should tell you something significant all by itself. Yet, despite the overall lower winrate, there were still 2 warriors in the top 8. And in spite of the overall higher winrate, there was only 1 priest in the top 8. The proper take-away is this: the priest was favored in that tournament, but the DECK was inconsistent, even in the hands of very skilled players. How can the average winrate be way higher than other classes but still not break into the top 8? Because the top 8 had winrates of 75-90%, WAY higher than the average of any deck. So, the only decks that make it to the top are ones that can CONSISTENTLY win in the hands of the best players. And priest just didn't hit that mark. Even with 2-cost Extra Arms, it was not consistent enough.

              Summary: Taking overall data for a tournament setting is extremely deceptive and leads to poor conclusions.

              Side note: I played with a similar deck quite a bit - there were times that you blow out your opponent, and other times you have a hand full of spells with no minions, and you just get steamrolled. It was a very polarized deck, but not consistent enough to be called the best deck in the game; not even close.

              • yea the high quantity of mages definitely put their winrate closer to 50%.  they said the winrate of mages against other classes during the cast and it wasn't much higher than 50% but I can't find that number right now.  Every deck can have bad hands that just lose.  Combo priest wasn't that polarized actually, maybe with its draw but not its matchup spread.   

                I'm not even super adamant that priest was the best deck or anything, just going by winrates at legend and other things mentioned.  The meta hadn't had time to turn against priest yet, and that may have happened, but at the time of the nerfs it had a really strong matchup spread and winrate and even if it isn't "the deck" it was still very close.  I think the nerf made sense.

  • *puts tinfoil hat on* Is it possible that Team 5 decided to nerf Extra Arms instead of Nortshire or Divine Spirit or something else because they want to show that the buffs were not successful (along with Pocket Galaxy) so that they don't have to do them again, at least not any time soon? I'm just paranoid, right?

  • Maybe because "aggro" priest performed extremely well at high levels whereas most "OP" aggro decks were only good at lower ranks and not tournament play.  This could be something related to how they evaluate their stats because we know most nerfs are stats based

  • because Priest's class identity is having only broken win conditions and gettng their successful decks nerfed whenever they pop up.

    Divine Spirit is totally fine btw, not at all the root of the problem. Clearly, Blizzard is doing the 500 IQ galaxy brain plays when they completely revert their policy on trying to fix underlying issues with the Basic/Classic set and instead just bandaid fix the deck by kneecapping cards that are barely out for one expansion.

     

     

    Friendly

  • As others have pointed out, it's probably the unfortunate victim of the round of nerfs that was already planned to take down dr. boom, Conjurer's and Pocket Galaxy. While aggro priest was clearly very powerful thanks to extra arms, I very much doubt that deck, as opposed to the OP card in it, was the reason for the nerf.

    While it feels bad that priest got nuked when it's finally relevant again, I would prefer it if Priest became viable on the back of solid but fair cards. EA was a bit too strong, changing it to 3->2 mana or 2->3 mana for a total of 5 mana for 4/4 stats would've been more fair than just throwing the card in the gutter like this.

  • I agree that this nerf way WAY faster than any other aggro nerfs in the past, however it was nerfing season and maybe there is something potentially broken in the next set so they got to the nerf now before it happens.

  • Because unlike most aggro decks, Priest was playing in a way that is pretty much impossible to answer for most decks. If they land Northshire turn 1, what can you do? Coin a Frostbolt or Pain? That's about it. IF you're a Mage or Priest. It's a Northshire and you're against Priest so playing your own 1 drop doesn't cut it, you can't wear down the Cleric's health over time because of healing AND they draw cards to boot. Turn after, Extra Arms. Now that minion you cannot trade into is a 3/5. Hope you have a Fireb...no wait, it's turn two, and your game is over. Now obviously a major part of that issue is the fact Blizz refuses to learn that 1/3 statline for 1 is not ok, let alone with additional abilities, but priests can be about as much trouble with any minion, say a Lightwarden. Even though Lightwarden is much easier to answer, the truth is that in most cases the cards that answer it aren't ones you want to play (Arcane Shot) because they're too narrow. So just allowing Priest to have a snowbally start in general is a recipe for disaster. Northshire should be on the chopping block, but if there isn't a good turn 2 follow up, they're manageable at least.

    • Quote From lMarcusl

      Because unlike most aggro decks, Priest was playing in a way that is pretty much impossible to answer for most decks. If they land Northshire turn 1, what can you do? Coin a Frostbolt or Pain? That's about it. IF you're a Mage or Priest. It's a Northshire and you're against Priest so playing your own 1 drop doesn't cut it, you can't wear down the Cleric's health over time because of healing AND they draw cards to boot. Turn after, Extra Arms. Now that minion you cannot trade into is a 3/5. Hope you have a Fireb...no wait, it's turn two, and your game is over. Now obviously a major part of that issue is the fact Blizz refuses to learn that 1/3 statline for 1 is not ok, let alone with additional abilities, but priests can be about as much trouble with any minion, say a Lightwarden. Even though Lightwarden is much easier to answer, the truth is that in most cases the cards that answer it aren't ones you want to play (Arcane Shot) because they're too narrow. So just allowing Priest to have a snowbally start in general is a recipe for disaster. Northshire should be on the chopping block, but if there isn't a good turn 2 follow up, they're manageable at least.

      Fundamentally the priest class is broken: it's a steaming pile of trash with a handful of plainly OP cards/combos like Northshire and Divine Spirit/Inner Fire thrown in to make it somehow fair. It's a terrible way to balance the game because all the crappy cards sit around collecting dust while the OP cards that get printed every now and then to make the class viable accumulate in wild and ruin the experience for players there.

       

      Instead of buffing and then nerfing Extra Arms they should've taken a hard look at the priest basic and classic sets.

  • 1) Team 5 may be trying to act faster to nerf oppressive decks in general.  At least in Standard.  So comparing this to not nerfing aggro decks quickly in the past is not an apples to apples comparison if they've had an overall change in philosophy of how long they wait (or don't wait) for nerfs.

    2) I'm wondering if the fact that the card was recently buffed meant they were keeping a close eye on it and ready to revert back quickly if they thought it was too powerful at 2 mana.  Similar line of thinking with Pocket Galaxy nerf.

  • Nerfs seem to be happening faster after the expansion drop.  They assess win rates and feedback and move quicker than before.  The idea they moved faster on aggro Priest could just reflect this