I was watching @scarzig’s youtube video (only halfway thru atm) and it made me consider a way to nerf it, if CPG desired: Add the Bond keyword. Still holds the statline, holds the strong potential power, but allows a larger chance for the opponent to try and respond to it.
Opinions?
People say the same thing about Lavaslasher, but… why? “Add Bond to it, that’ll balance it.” What? Why? How does that fix any of the problems it has?
Why not just make it only apply to non-BBS spells? Or adjust the statline down, so that it doesn’t trade as well into minions like Elucidator?
i think the stat nerf should be enough. dropping kron to a 4/4 killed it, the same should happen to blue conjuror
Well kron had provoke and immediately summoned a 2/2 with an effect. This merely draws a random unit upon proc
I’m afraid Bond is too easy to satisfy. Look at Trinity Wing. Sometimes people forget its effect is triggered on Bond because of how naturally the requirement is fulfilled. Besides, Bond effects only trigger upon hitting the board, so Blue Conjurer would only get one Arcanyst, which I think would dissuade nearly anyone from playing it,
I think the way to handle minions like Blue Conjurer is to have their effects only trigger on the first spell played that turn. The spell-spam nature of Vanarcanysts is what makes them strong, so taking that luxury away would really help tone them down.
Don’t really get why the Blue Goat should be nerfed in the first place. Yeah the amount of RNG is stupid but the card isnt overly strong imo. Most Arcanysts are really bad and just replace fodder and even if you get a good one you still need the mana to play it. There are more important cards that need a look at than this one. Not to mention that the Arcanyst hype died down more or less anyway since the last patch.
I didn’t say it should, though it understandably seems implied. I don’t care about blue conjurer either way, but I thought I would provide an approach had there been any desire for CPG to.
Anycase, @mrmana3 provided a concrete point that pointed out the error in my approach, so this topic is null and void.
Alternatively, not activating the trigger upon BBS usage would actually work to prevent the creation of card advantage, while keeping the value generation component of the card.
The more I think about it, the more I think BBS should not be counted as a spell.
Nope. Just let the card be.
So your proposal is to literally make it into an entirely different card than it was meant to be?
As the creators of the card said.
They wanted to make a card that allows for cross faction minion usage.(So by limiting it to only neutrals would kill the purpose). Also, the only reason people even play this card is as of its chain spell potential allowing for powerful hand refills. If it could only draw one Arcanyst a turn the chances of getting an Arcanyst you would actually not replace would be reduced significantly.
Well, the creators might be wrong. It’s not like the devs can’t make a mistake or something.
And I totally agree with @anon62818569 here; it seems like most people haven’t really seen Scarzig’s video on Blue Conjurer, which is a shame - he very meticulously went through the odds of pulling very good and better-than-average minions via Blue Conjurer and showed, through some hard data, that the problem is actually quite simple - the pool of minions from which BC pulls is just too good. It generates, on average, too high a value. And there’s really nothing more to be said here - AB was a bad idea, Arcanysts were a bad idea, but even compared to them Blue Conjurer was a particularly bad idea.
What if instead of adding an arcanyst to your hand, it turned a random card in your hand into a random arcanyst? Or a random arcanyst in your hand into a random arcanyst?
This would:
Take out the card draw. You need a hand for it to work.
Introduce a risk/reward aspect. You have to judge if it will improve your hand at all. If your hand is just an illusion, go nuts. If you have a good card in your hand, you should probably play it first. It also means as you cast more spells, playing more spells gets riskier.
I think making it turn a random arcanyst in your hand into a random arcanyst is the better of the two.
Then simply create worse arcanyst. Problem solved.
Congratulations, you just removed a decent card from the game.
Yes, or just nerf one card instead of potentially messing up a 20+ minion pool.
I like it! high risk, high reward, and you also remove the ridiculous draw buff. @baharoth, the fact that you think this kind of nerf would “remove” BC from the game just speaks volumes about how ridiculously OP it is right now.
This game has seen some broken things and in my opinion Blue Conjurer is pretty tame in comparison. I understand the card can be frustrating to play against, but when losing to Vanar, I have never thought to myself “Gee, I would have won if it weren’t for that lucky Blue Conjurer”. Arcanysts are very snowball-y in nature and Conjurer only adds to that, but usually it’s too slow to turn the tide when you are losing.
The fact that this change would turn the card into complete garbage has nothing to do with how strong it is now. Spending cards and mana for a worse Aethermaster effect isn’t worth a deck slot. Card advantage is the main reason the card is used to begin with, if you take that away and replace it with a stupid gambling effect then there is no reason to run him.
If the card should be nerfed, and imo thats a big if, then they should just limit the card pool he can draw from, like only Arcanysts with manacost 3 or less to prevent him from drawing high mana value bombs. The game has enough useless crap cards already, we don’t need more of that.