So why exactly is Black Knight much rarer now?
I hear people saying that Black Knight is "out of the meta", and I certainly see it a lot less, but I have no idea why. I still play him and get value from him in almost every game. Here's a simple list of reasons why I think he's still an auto-include in several decks
A) Belcher hasn't gone anywhere. Was it supposed to go somewhere?
B) Paladin is back: Quartermuster decks run Belchers, one or two Arguses (which will generally net you either a 3/6 or a 4/4) and, of course, Tirion. Plenty of value.
C) The element of surprise: Because other people aren't running Black Knight, I see far more opponents just casually taunting up giants for no reason than I used to when he was in almost every deck. Gives you an opportunity for a huge swing.
D) Rusty Horn: if you run mechs, you can combo this with Black Knight for a 7 mana assasinate + Yeti. Even if you don't, you'll run into plenty of mech decks - and, related to the last point, they're far more likely to just casually taunt up without thinking about it than they would if TBK was popular.
E) Annoy-o-tron: People may feel that it's not an amazing target, but destroying a 2 mana card is mroe than enough value. And being able to get past that little bugger to get at the juicy minions hiding behind him is huge. Having to waste, for example, an attack from a Belcher and a swing of a weapon just to kill an annoy-o-tron is incredibly painful, and can be game-losing.
F) Less Loatheb, More Harrison: Not a huge point, but it was always annoying how TBK died to an incredibly common 5 drop. He will however trade with Harrison, who's semi-replaced Loatheb: important if you're playing as say Druid, and your opponent does turn 5 Belcher, turn 6 Harrison: TBK will practically eliminate both cards.
Seriously, I don't get it at all: I know people are making space for new GvG cards, in particular Dr Boom, but there are a fair few things I'd cut from a controlish deck before I'd cut The Black Knight.
Posted Jan 4, 2015, 1:48 PM UTC
It loses you games vs hunter and zoo. Both decks run fewer taunts than before (zoo down to 1 argus, hunter very rarely houndmasters). Mech decks usually run only annoyotron, and 1 often gets played early, so you are holding black knight for one card exactly.
I tried running BK myself for a while in shaman but it was just sitting in my hand far too much.
I think it has some potential in controlly spare part decks, the rusty horn combo is pretty strong. Also control paladin/warrior can afford a super situational card like BK. Finally, different types of druid can run it (ramp because you can afford the situational value play, and combo because taunts are often the only thing denying your win).
I know this is kind of irrelevant, but I didn't start playing again until very recently. I was already subbed here though, and I genuinely thought that "annoyotron" was just a bitchy slang for some broken card.
[deleted]
But yeah I'm going to have to agree on the existence of aggro being the strongest reason. Using a black knight to kill voidwalkers is a 5 mana yeti at best, houndmasters are an inconsistent card in hunter decks now, and many types of aggro decks exist (mech mage, mech druid) that either don't include taunts, or only include taunts that don't quite justify running a situational 6 drop (like annoyatron, which only provides minimal yeti value). In addition, a underwhelming turn 5 body against aggro hurts slightly less than an underwhelming turn 6 body.
As a control warrior player, I'd rather run a stronger legendary or a more relavent 6 drop (shieldmaiden for slams and sylvanas is pretty much auto include).
Overall, I'd opt for harrison to give you both tempo gain+card draw over black knight now against the majority of the control decks you mentioned. Being forced to harrison a 1 durability death's bite, truesilver, or even 3 durability light's justice (for cards) is never bad, and putting a gorehowl, ashbringer, or bloodfury can be game changing.