The Champions of Doombringer

    • The Champions of Doombringer

      G'day!

      I think it's clear to everyone that some of the champions are far better than most of the others for limited. Some of them are borderline OP but I don't think a nerf is necessary (ok maybe... but I do love 'em :P) to those champions, instead I think a buff to some of the others is warranted.

      Below is some of the champions that I'd like to see buffed. However, I'm not going to cover the familiar champions as it isn't necessary to have 20 playable champions and I personally think they need some big changes to even be considered by players (maybe the Devs have a plan for these in the future or were designed more for constructed?).

      Ignatius, the Granite King
      21 health is too low, the majority of players are never going to get the bonus 5 health that is on offer, so he should start with 23 health (perhaps give a bonus of 4hp if meeting the requirement). This also makes it more rewarding when a player is able to pull off the pentashard dream which is not the easiest thing to do and also carries a lot of risk. And, since it is a 5 cost charge power, most games it will only see 1 activation.

      Tashi One-Horn
      He should be 3 cost. It carries a random element and thus the odds of winning big is likely very low.

      Jaws
      Honestly he isn't that bad but there is a lot of minus effects in this format so it being random is really bad a lot of the time, not only will you lose health but you might get a troop back that has 0 health (especially since a lot of the troops in b/r have 1 starting health). Since he has already has negative effect attached in the health loss, It should only be able to get back troops that have at least 1 health.

      The Nameless Knight
      The odds of a player even having a card in their hand by the time you have this charge power (for limited) is low and they can obviously see it coming. How about for 5 cost opponents discards a random card and the player discards a card (random also perhaps) and then draws a card with 22 health.


      I'll leave it at these ones for now, if anyone has some feedback they would like to leave for these champions or others, feel free to leave a comment.

      Cheers

      HAVOC

      Twitch —— YouTube —— Twitter —— Steam —— Patreon

      The post was edited 4 times, last by HAVOC ().

    • i think nerfs are necessary

      and the charge powers should also be costed based on their strength beyond the current card pool because of kismet draft

      limited has gotten to the point where i'd rather play without any champions at all. if the game can't include the tools to let people play an interactive match, then the high power level kills the potential for fun and for competition
    • I think Ignatius is in my top 5 for favorite champions to run, and I play against him pretty regularly. Don't see any need for a buff.

      Three charges for Tashi sounds too powerful.

      Jawz is situationally good, but I'll admit I have not yet encountered one of those situations.

      I'd like to see some sort of tweak for the Nameless Knight, and agree it would have to be more than just a health and/or charge cost change.
    • Magic wrote:

      I think Ignatius is in my top 5 for favorite champions to run, and I play against him pretty regularly. Don't see any need for a buff.

      Three charges for Tashi sounds too powerful.

      Jawz is situationally good, but I'll admit I have not yet encountered one of those situations.

      I'd like to see some sort of tweak for the Nameless Knight, and agree it would have to be more than just a health and/or charge cost change.
      How would three charges for Tashi be too powerful? it would still be floobs compared to our lil' green friends

      Twitch —— YouTube —— Twitter —— Steam —— Patreon
    • Berryknight and Rabid Rider are too good right now at 63% and 55% winrate respectively because there is a large disparity between their power level and every other champion in this set.

      I would love it if for once CZE decides to buff the other champions instead of nerfing the strongest ones. Good champions should exist and they should be notably better than the rest. At the moment with that being just two out of the twenty it's a bit worrisome. I'm not asking that all 18 champions be buffed. I would happily be content if half of that were as good as Berryknight and Rabid Rider are.

      I sincerely hope CZE do something about this because this limited format has been the best experienced I've ever had as a limited player from a deckbuilding standpoint.
    • Yasi wrote:

      Berryknight and Rabid Rider are too good right now at 63% and 55% winrate respectively because there is a large disparity between their power level and every other champion in this set.

      I would love it if for once CZE decides to buff the other champions instead of nerfing the strongest ones. Good champions should exist and they should be notably better than the rest. At the moment with that being just two out of the twenty it's a bit worrisome. I'm not asking that all 18 champions be buffed. I would happily be content if half of that were as good as Berryknight and Rabid Rider are.

      I sincerely hope CZE do something about this because this limited format has been the best experienced I've ever had as a limited player from a deckbuilding standpoint.
      Man, beaten to it. I was thinking about starting a thread exactly about this.

      Here is what 90+% is going to happen - sometime a month or two from now HexEnt looks at the data and decides these two champs are broken (because they are). Then they are going to move both to 4 charges and neither champion will ever be played again in any format.

      They both suffer from the Gorn problem. At 3 charges they are too aggressive and you can reliably get to 2 uses in a limited game. At 4 charges, you are almost never going to get to a second use. The Blackberry Knight suffers extra because you will not be able to curve out and get as many rowdy triggers onto it. Rider loses out on forcing a Howling Rebel through on turn 3 to ramp out a game breaking 4 drop (Killwheel, Maniacal Ripper, etc). The 1 charge change is actually a 50+% nerf to the champions despite appearing to be a minor change.

      What I would like to see, but sadly won't happen because it requires programming - Add the text/ability "When you activate this power increase its charge cost by 1." It would leave them both as aggressive champions for the 1st use, but significantly delay the 2nd use in most games. I'm sure there are other potential solutions as well, but again I seriously doubt we'll see them.
    • That has always been the case with these changes...instead of buffing the other champions to be a bit better, as good, or even better than the offending champions, CZE has in the past, always chose to nerf the strongest ones and making them as unplayable or semiunplayable as the rest.
    • Yasi wrote:

      That has always been the case with these changes...instead of buffing the other champions to be a bit better, as good, or even better than the offending champions, CZE has in the past, always chose to nerf the strongest ones and making them as unplayable or semiunplayable as the rest.

      Not completly true. They buffed champion too. For example in the previous set.

      But I think they are more willingly nerf a champ than buff the others because buffing champ do not necessary make most of the players using them mofe often because they are used to the op ones.

      But when you nerf the op champ the impact is much more noticable because you change something players use a lot.
    • What ever happened to sub-20 health aggro champs? Rabid Rider should be at 18, Blackberry Knight should be at 21, IMO. And if they were printing a champ like Blackberry Knight, why not print Reversion into the set? Imagine what having access to Reversion would do for the format.

      IMO, there's three different adjustment knobs for champions:
      • Health - Fine Adjustment (Side Rant: Health needs to stay in the range for the archetype. Once aggro goes past 19, move it back down and adjust charge cost.)
      • Charge Cost - Medium Adjustment
      • Charge Ability - Coarse Adjustment
      In development, if all champions have to get higher health because the games are over too fast, that's a card pool issue. The fix isn't buffing all champions' health up and up. You know what ends games too fast? Killwheel. And One-Hit Wounder. And the +5/+3 and Crush card. Noxious Turn. Multiple 3/2s for 2. Multiple 2/2s for 1. Haymaker.

      Do I need to continue?

      If aggressive champions need more health because of game length, fix the card pool.
    • You're correct. CZE did buff some champions last set.

      On a related note, I hate that the idea of a fix for most of the champions is to just increase/decrease health and increase/decrease charge cost. Granted, for some cases it's just that simple. But I think when you have the opportunity to revisit old champions that it would be fun to completely redesign them, or that's what I think a designer's wet dream would be.

      Take the Familiar champions for example. Familiars are already a niche trait in Hex and you want limited players to invest their decks into these guys for a charge power that are similar to other champions with less restrictions?
    • I feel like they should make Berry Knight's charge power increase in charge by 1 when used. (ie. 3 for first use still, but 4 for second). I feel like 3 is too low, but 4 would be too high, so split the difference to some degree.

      But I do also think that some of the other champs are just dramatically too weak.
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.
    • StorrowN wrote:

      What ever happened to sub-20 health aggro champs? Rabid Rider should be at 18, Blackberry Knight should be at 21, IMO. And if they were printing a champ like Blackberry Knight, why not print Reversion into the set? Imagine what having access to Reversion would do for the format.

      IMO, there's three different adjustment knobs for champions:
      • Health - Fine Adjustment (Side Rant: Health needs to stay in the range for the archetype. Once aggro goes past 19, move it back down and adjust charge cost.)
      • Charge Cost - Medium Adjustment
      • Charge Ability - Coarse Adjustment
      In development, if all champions have to get higher health because the games are over too fast, that's a card pool issue. The fix isn't buffing all champions' health up and up. You know what ends games too fast? Killwheel. And One-Hit Wounder. And the +5/+3 and Crush card. Noxious Turn. Multiple 3/2s for 2. Multiple 2/2s for 1. Haymaker.

      Do I need to continue?

      If aggressive champions need more health because of game length, fix the card pool.
      I agree. For example, The Rabid Rider charge power gives more damage than Angus the Arsonist for lower charge cost (if enemy has a blocker for my Flare Imp, but can't block it with feral, then TRR charge power gives me in fact "free" 5 damage) and with more starting health, which is silly.
    • I really agree with Havoc here. Most champs of the 20 seem rather weak. I mean for example, why spend FIVE whole charges to deal 1 maybe 2 damage to TARGET TROOP? I haven't played much limited to know the impact of the "familiar champs" but at least the ruby one should at least get 1 extra damage for each familiar you control imo.
      The Wardens of Entrath is a large, open to public community of Hex enthusiasts with a mission to help and support Hex players and content creators alike!

      Find us on our Discord server or website!
    • Please note that this is only my opinion based on several drafts and some brewing for standard constructed. I can't and don't want to speak for any other format.

      StorrowN wrote:

      What ever happened to sub-20 health aggro champs? Rabid Rider should be at 18, Blackberry Knight should be at 21, IMO. And if they were printing a champ like Blackberry Knight, why not print Reversion into the set? Imagine what having access to Reversion would do for the format.
      It's funny that health adjustments were my first reaction as well. However, Rabid Rider has access to Blood and I have to say that I met several BRW "aggro" decks that also ran the healthgain-rage 2 Terminus or Noxious Turn(s) and I've seen Riders with 30+ health in stalling wars. So I am not very convinced that changing his health would make much of a difference because the general strategy against him is to stall and outvalue (and to remove the champ power target at quick speed) or to race him and the latter is quite difficult when opposing troops with very high attack can be granted pseudo-evasion. A change in terms of health wouldn't do enough imo. I would suggest to reduce the attack buff to +2 (and maybe reduce the health to 21 if that is important to anyone). I am not sure if this has too many implications for standard constructed but it seems weird that other 3-damage buffs cost 4 and this one also grants pseudo-evasion. Increasing the champ power to 4 seems counter-intuitive because it is meant to be aggressive and triggering it once per game is pretty weak.

      Regarding Blackberry Knight (the champ I like the most and have most experience with in draft), changing his champ power to 4 will be problematic for constructed if Rowdy decks will use this champion (which isn't even completely unrealistic). The reason: Turn 3 is the turn where most strong Rowdy troops are played, so the champ power curves pretty perfectly into a strong on-curve play. Also, a turn 4 Grape usually doesn't impact the board anymore because it is effectively a 0/1 that requires other cards to do anything relevant. If people have Moss Scarabs and Flare Sprites in the same limited format or 4/4s like Goldfathers in constructed, turn 4 Grape seems too weak. On the other hand, reducing Blackberry's health isn't great for constructed either because Rowdy usually plays a slower paced game. 21 health isn't doing too much to the champion in limited as well, especially if Rider gets hit by the nerf bat. It seems really difficult to nerf this champion tbh and I don't see anything that would be good on all ends at this point. So this champion alone could be the reason to justify buffing bad champions instead of nerfing the best ones.

      The actual problem with Blackberry Knight isn't so much his champion power imo. I think many cards in his shard combination (preferably + diamond) are just very strong on-curve tempo plays and a fixing-heavy format can be dominated quite easily by tempo advantages. Also, sapphire and diamond have several really strong tempo removals and wild has the best finisher for filled-up boards in the entire format with Terrible Temper. The champ power is just one piece of this huge puzzle that might fit a little too well into the entire gameplan.

      One of the reasons why Blackberry Knight is played very frequently is the fact that the other on-shard champions are a lot weaker (at least in draft) and have less synergy/require very specific cards. Blackberry Knight is an overall good choice. The SD one is okay but pretty value-oriented, so no tempo play, The WD one...I can't even remember what that is tbh, the two on-shard familiar champions are weak or again value-oriented and slow (sapphire) and the regular single-shard champions are both rather weak. Sure, Wicked Wilda is probably great in longer sealed games or she even makes sense in the right draft deck but she is super-anti-tempo and thus not the best choice for a draft format where two champions just close out the game while you can't benefit from her champ power because you drew the troops that don't synergize too well and need to have some blockers. The diamond champs are both weaker in Rowdy decks because you don't need (very slow) fixing since you try to play on a curve and the familiar one is usually not needed because your cards will buff your troops.

      I would also like to see buffs on weaker champions. That BS champion is a disgrace. Tachi One Horn is fine, though, simply because you can actually get disgusting high-rolls and I think that the Hex team didn't want to go for too much randomness after Portal and Conscript.
    • @Venomspider

      I fully agree with everything you said. My post was more in regards to set development, rather than what we can do now.

      Now that the cards are locked, I don't know what can be done to nicely adjust Rider and Knight. I honestly think Knight is fine. It requires the right deck, and it gets insane value, but it can be beaten. I would still move the health to 21, if it were up to me. But I think the ideal situation would have been to have Reversion in the format. But we can't fix that now.

      As for Rider, I'd still try out 18 health first, see where it goes, then re-evaluate. At this point they are probably going to have to nerf Rider into oblivion, but the better fix would have been to adjust the card pool. Like, what was going on internally that no-one pointed out all the 3/2s for 2. And 2/2s for 1. Aggro used to be about small, fragile, speedy bodies trying to get under the opponent. Not 7 power Lifedraining Swiftstrikers on turn 3. And definitely not about a self-enabling 8/8s for 4 resources, in Killwheel. Oh, you are trying to stabilize? Fine, I'll give my 3 resource troop that attacks as a 6/6 Crusher +3 ATK and Feral. And, you're dead.

      But, what do I know. The set is still gas in limited, even with the flaws.
    • One thing I'd like to point out about the high win % of Knight and Rider is the fact that they are the go to choices and therefore chosen a lot. If you're in R/W then you should be Rider, if you're in S/W you should be Knight (sometimes Wilda with specific troops).

      The reason they are so good is because they are aggressive in a format that promotes going several shards, they are obviously going to win a lot as you cannot afford to stumble against them.

      If other champions were given buffs and the familiar ones reworked (they are so flooby and there isn't even that many familiars :( ) then we would probably see some more diversity in choices. Aggressive champions should exist and it should be no surprise to anyone that aggressive champions have a high win % in a format where the majority of players are going 3 or more shards.

      What I would be interested in seeing the data for is how many of those Rider and Knight players were doing just 2 shards, or minimal splash.

      Twitch —— YouTube —— Twitter —— Steam —— Patreon

      The post was edited 2 times, last by HAVOC ().

    • StorrowN:

      As a rather greedy limited player, I understand your frustration with Rider very well. I don't think that starting with 5 less health because your opponent gets a +2 attack buff and Feral on a 3/2 for 3 charges would be that bad but the damage that can be done right now seems just too much. Killwheel + champion power is completely overpowered and often leaves the opponent only with two options: block and give up 2 troops or get into lethal range of a lot of cards. Even for a 1-Shot ability, this is extremely strong. Not to mention that, unlike the 3 cost 2/2, Killwheel doesn't even have poor stats after it hit you. And any card that grants Crush makes Killwheel an uncontrollable destructive force.

      HAVOC wrote:

      One thing I'd like to point out about the high win % of Knight and Rider is the fact that they are the go to choices and therefore chosen a lot. If you're in R/W then you should be Rider, if you're in S/W you should be Knight (sometimes Wilda with specific troops).

      The reason they are so good is because they are aggressive in a format that promotes going several shards, they are obviously going to win a lot as you cannot afford to stumble against them.

      If other champions were given buffs and the familiar ones reworked (they are so flooby and there isn't even that many familiars ) then we would probably see some more diversity in choices. Aggressive champions should exist and it should be no surprise to anyone that aggressive champions have a high win % in a format where the majority of players are going 3 or more shards.

      What I would be interested in seeing the data for is how many of those Rider and Knight players were doing just 2 shards, or minimal splash.
      I fully agree with this. Especially right after launch, when I went for Blackberry Knight 5 times in a row, I noticed how often games were just decided because players were too greedy or trying 4+ shard good stuff. I also think that many players didn't appreciate the strength of Termini right from the start and tried to avoid drafting the fusion materials because they were scared of not having enough playables. This seems to change at the moment even though I got 2 of the "This battles target troop" Apocalytes late in the last pack of my last draft and they carried my deck. Maybe nobody was in Wild or something but I am surprised how often I see the best apocalytes wheeling.

      Regarding your last notion, I am certainly one of the players who doesn't want to go into more or less than 3 shards. I noticed very early in my first drafts that two shard decks are often weaker in terms of power level and 4+ shards seem really inconsistent unless you have a ton of roots. I also usually don't just splash a third shard, which is quite surprising to me as well, but I rather play 3 "full" shards. I don't have any data on other players and I might not be representative, but I ran only 1 2-shard deck in 17 draft runs (RW) and I think I only splashed a 3rd shard about 3 times.

      On a sidenote, RW(B) Gnolls is only my 4th most successful archetype (out of 5). The best are DWS Blackberry Knight, BDW Rebirth either with the BD or the B champ, and BDS Enders/handbuff with the RD champ. However, my sample size is probably too small and I am not the best aggro player in limited anyway.
    • Ok, this seems to be the right place to discuss opinions about and changes we would make to Doombringer champions.

      Mistress Eravyn - at 5 cost it rarely does anything before turn 5. at which point there are better options? she is mostly useless in constructed, unless you really want that +1 extra lhealth she has over Renner or try experimenting with rebirth. either -1 cost, or +2 health would make her see play.

      Ignatius, the granite king - He's fine where he is.

      Tashi One-horn - Might need either -1 cost or +5 health to be different. Blood ruby all removal could play him as a threat generator, but right now Entity Unknown is a better choice.

      Thk'tatcha - really nice tempo champion, realistically fine where he is, but maybe better situated at 19 health (is 20 still forbidden or is that only a running gag?). If we get a troop heavy midrange deck any time soon this will be a nice counter. i see many Webborn Apostates in his future.

      Wicked Wilda - you tempo yourself - unless you use it on a 2 drop you can't play the card the same turn. she seems fairly week. maybe allow the ability to be quick?

      The Familiar Five - Too balanced - please consider -1 Cost for all but the draw a card champion.

      Nameless Rider - Too little too late - -1 cost. anything but +5 health or -1 cost will not get him played.

      The Rabid Rider - -1 [ATTACK] and +1 cost he is too dominating.

      The Shadow of Blightwood - Fine.

      Chamberlain Augustus - ideally -1 cost. +3 health is also fine.

      Jawz - unfixable purely by number adjustments. either make it work with the Toughness of the troop or +8 health, but giving him that much health will make people choose him just to gain more starting health - ignoring his power.

      Limerick the Lewd - does he work now? if yes - he's fine.

      Madeline the Flayer Good as she is - maybe -1 health?

      Obliteron Solis - Fine as he is.

      Annihilix Ode - -0 to -1 health. Fast Aggressive Champion.
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
      • Commisioner Pravin Lal - Alpha Centauri

      The post was edited 3 times, last by SlayerStronghold ().