Can you purchase these new cards anywhere so we can replace our old cards?

Changing a card that is already in print seems like a bad idea.  What about the thousands of cards that are already printed?  Do they get replaced with new ones or do players just know and remember they changed it?

I never thought Temple of Light or Hands of Bim Shala were that overpowered to begin with.  I've played several temple builds and sure they are good but I've still never lost to one (there are so many ways around the temple of light even with hands out) so it was never a big deal.

I think it would make sense in the future to add NEW cards in new expansions that would add balance or counter these cards if the playtesters or powers that be find a card is out of balance.  Because that way it will make people want to buy those new expansions even more so they can beat existing cards that may be out of balance.  No need to change old cards, just make new ones to bring the game back in balance.

hmm interesting...Maybe I've been playing it wrong but my friend and I assumed that block was "mandatory reveal" enchant and superceded any other rules in play.  We were thinking if you get targeted you have to reveal it and follow the enchant rules, and card rules over rule standard in play rules.

Red I totally 1000% agree on points 1 and 2 but I'm a little on the fence with point 3.

Doing points 1 and 2 well you won't need point 3.  Agree it is good to fall back on but I've found heals to be a waste of spell book points.

Healing vs Summoning

Worse comes to worse a creature dies you summon a new creature at full health ready to go vs casting a heal (which usually won't heal it to full) thus you really only bought it 1 turn and it might die anyways and then you are out the creature and you used up mana and a action to heal it and you have to summon a new one.  Granted summoning a new creature is more expensive then healing one but if you heal it and it dies then you spent mana healing and still spending the same mana summoning new.

There are exeptions to everything of course, some tactically critical creature you only have 1 of in your book or if it is enchanted/buffed up to save all those enchants or maybe a strong creature with good position to keep it there.

Active vs Passive healing

This isn't saying not to heal, just not to "actively" heal.  Since I hold each action at a premium of the mage in higher value than the action of 'most' of my creatures if I do run any healing I run some "passive" healing so my mage isn't doing the casting.  I run the fountain in several decks so a wounded creature can go back there to drink/heal or the regen tree, unicorn etc depending on mage/build.  Sorry for lack of card names I'm at work.

I have dropped every direct heal spell from every single mage book (except for the Preist) but even then there is little need.  I do however run regrowth enchant, regrowth equip, vamparism, and a heal fountain in every non Warlock deck.

Vamparism probably my favorite passive healing method.  I'd go as far to say it is more spell book point cost and mana cost efficient to put extra vamparisms in a book over a heal spell.  Heck I even pay a premium cost and do run one vamparism in my preist decks (not super efficient for preist but so fun watching them heal themselves each turn).

I agree "control" comes in many forms, control position, mana, creatures etc.

So far I've never lost a game playing as the Wizard, regardless what the other opponent mage was.  My only issue with the Wizard is I kept running a predictable, mana denial then load up weak counters that it has been almost too easy.  If something weird happens and get in trouble whip out a Chain Lightning or something else to lock down several mobs etc.

Mana control (starving them):
When I am regenning 14 mana per turn and they are getting 6 mana AND having to pay mana upkeep costs to keep their creatures on the board what are they really going to do to you with such little mana to spend?  They can't mount much of an offense and if they go defense mode it is just a matter of time.  I can summon more creatures, cast more spells or just do more with double their mana (one of the most powerful features of the wizard is the starving/mana denial).  No that alone doesn't win the game but it sets you up SO well to have control.

Position control:
With teleporation, push, and other avenues you can control position.
You can also control if creatures move towards you with the basilisk.
Probably my favorite Wizard combo is Basilisk + Gorgon Archer.  If a creature walks within 2 squares of you or you teleport/push them in the Basilisk (or other methods) keep them in position while the Gorgon Archer shoots at them applying weak conditions.  IF they get lucky roles and keep moving (because they want to kill the Archer) by the time they get to you they are like weak kittens and you just finish them off.  If they want to play the ranged game vs the Wizard I say have at it and if they want to kill the Archer she regens every turn so they spend so much time/turns on that you can build up other ways to kill them (all while still regening double their mana).

I think cards/abilities that would be interesting would be things that dealt X direct damage based on the number of equip items the person is wearing, or an equipment version of Steal Enchantment (snatching an opponents wand or stun hammers would be fun), something to give equipment upkeep costs, or things along that line.

You can cast Steal Equipment Incantation to steal people's equipment (similar to Steal Enchantment) so that card already exists Baron. 

I've been wanting to find a reason to at least try weaving some walls into play.  So far haven't used them much at all.  Think I will give them a shot, even with a modified form of this seems like a fun "side" strategy, although I wouldn't rely on it for a win.

On the last point of destroying it I wasn't saying I would necessarily bother was just point out various options if they really wanted to get rid of it.