the ones I face always go face (heh), and make very few trades. That's the total opposite of how I play it, as I play it more of a control deck. To be fair though, playing it as control hasn't really gained me a good win rate with it.
So, what kind of deck is it? Is it supposed to play aggro, always go face, like the ones I've went against?
the ones I face always go face (heh), and make very few trades. That's the total opposite of how I play it, as I play it more of a control deck. To be fair though, playing it as control hasn't really gained me a good win rate with it.
So, what kind of deck is it? Is it supposed to play aggro, always go face, like the ones I've went against?
No, it is a midrange deck 100%, as the main strength is to dump big stats on curve. A deck with zero one-drops is not aggro. Period.
The problem with the term "aggro" is that is so relative. In card games, there will always be a "control" and a "beat down" deck. Any deck that is the "beat down" vs. the majority of the meta tends to be called aggro, even though there have been much more agressive face decks in HS in the past.
It's midrange with a strong early game. Trade against zoolock, odd pally, tempo mage, and try to hang in against odd rogue (toughest aggro match), which are all straightup aggro. Even pally is probably also a trade matchup but the deck is so poor against even shaman, you'll get the hang of it. Hunter is a strange matchup as sometimes you should go straight face all the way as they will overpower you with recruit and Rexxar. Against slower decks you're the aggressor obviously but since your deck has no draw, it pays to consider how much you need on the board to win. Even warlock is almost an instant loss so if you figure it out let me know. BSM is also bad. Odd warrior the key is Hagatha and some luck. I play wind speaker as a tech for priest and other slower decks.
The power in it is it’s flexibility. It can play like Aggro with all of the early game power cards, but switch to midrange easily with Lich king, hagatha, and even kalimos.
It's more so midrange than aggro. The reason I don't outright call it midrange is because of Genn Greymane giving the deck infinite one drops which can be used in the deck.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Experienced Deckbuilder, Legend Player, Wild Expert, TCG Veteran and Contributing Author toWildHS & Vicious Syndicate. Any and all support is greatly appreciated as it helps me make further quality content. 🐺 ➣Twitter ➣Decks ➣Patreon
depends how you starts the game, flametongue and Direwolf make it a really fast aggro deck, but if isnt in hand at the start, is more like a midrange deck
If you play it straight aggro, you really have to hope the opponent draws poorly (more so than most aggro decks). It can work out and sometimes you need to play it that way. But card draw is just OK so you can find yourself pretty screwed if opponent has answers. You need to be smarter with plays and not over-extended. I played it aggro when I first piloted and it wasn't as successful or fun.
Long story short, it's more mid-range than aggro or control.
I'm not sure why the HS community has never bothered using the well-established MtG terminology - to my knowledge, the only HS folks who regularly use terms like "Aggro-Control" or "Midrange-Combo" are Kibler and (in the olden days) Strifecro. Even Shaman is Aggro-Midrange, to all appearances.
It's an aggressive Midrange type of deck. Most Even Shaman run Hagatha the lich king and Kalimos, not at all an aggro cards. Once i got beaten by an Even Shaman as an Odd warrior..... I just didn't respect Hagatha and i got serve a bad lost we played a fully charged spell stone on his Giant.
Probably I am a bad Odd-Warrior player (i was rank 4 maybe that time but i don't play odd warrior much) and he was a quite good Even Shaman Player, but to further prove the point, the odd warrior match-up is almost fair (48.4%), while all the other aggro deck in the meta have an ultra-low winrate against Odd Warrior (25-35%).
Nah, it's not you, I've found that while I do get served by odd warriors, the matchup is much tougher for them than other aggro decks because the deck doesn't draw aggressively, and it can to some degree generate value like odd warrior. Spells like hex can somewhat erode warrior's later value as well. I'd still say odd warrior is favoured but I never go "oh I've lost" when I queue into odd warrior. Especially if Omega assembly generates trash or the pack from Elise isn't good. One of the hardest cards to deal with from the shaman side is super collider.
Zoo is kind of between agro and midrange and I feel like this is a zoo type deck.
Overwelm your opponent and then go face but you still make trades (not always but often enough) so it is neither pure agro nor pure midrange as this deck really focuses on the overwhelm strategy
Can you name one midrange deck in the history of hearthstone which does not beat slower deck by overwhelming them?
Either, they dump stuff on curve until the opponent runs out of answers, or they have some kind of comboplay they are looking to set up, typically based on the board.
IMO, the most typical midrange deck was Dragon priest. Other common uses of the term include fon/sr druid, Quartermaster paladin, hunters with higmanes and shamans with fire elementals. I think even shaman fits perfectly in this group of midrange decks: they all seek to curve well into their 6+ drops and take through the MID-game.
If so, it's a pretty poorly conceived one. Your one drop is going to be an 0/2 minion 75% of the time, the deck packs multiple 6 and 8 drops, and your reach/damage from hand is pretty inefficient as its largely tied up in minion stats.
I dunno; the lines are blurred these days. It's an interesting, versatile deck (especially with the Hagatha value play nowadays) that handles various matchups in pretty different ways. Seems pretty unrefined, too, with no one list being definitely correct. I'm excited to see it evolve with the next set.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
the ones I face always go face (heh), and make very few trades. That's the total opposite of how I play it, as I play it more of a control deck. To be fair though, playing it as control hasn't really gained me a good win rate with it.
So, what kind of deck is it? Is it supposed to play aggro, always go face, like the ones I've went against?
Win condition of spam the board and hope opponent draws bad. Sounds like aggro to me.
Depends on a matchup. Against aggro and zoo decks you almost always trade. Against slow control decks, of course, you are going to play aggro game.
Quasi-stellar radio source
its a board spam deck and more close to a aggro deck, some matchups you dont need to play like an aggro deck
Depends. I dont have all the lwgendaries so I play an aggro version but the corpsetaker hagatha version is much more midrangey
Yes.
No, it is a midrange deck 100%, as the main strength is to dump big stats on curve. A deck with zero one-drops is not aggro. Period.
The problem with the term "aggro" is that is so relative. In card games, there will always be a "control" and a "beat down" deck. Any deck that is the "beat down" vs. the majority of the meta tends to be called aggro, even though there have been much more agressive face decks in HS in the past.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
It's midrange with a strong early game. Trade against zoolock, odd pally, tempo mage, and try to hang in against odd rogue (toughest aggro match), which are all straightup aggro. Even pally is probably also a trade matchup but the deck is so poor against even shaman, you'll get the hang of it. Hunter is a strange matchup as sometimes you should go straight face all the way as they will overpower you with recruit and Rexxar. Against slower decks you're the aggressor obviously but since your deck has no draw, it pays to consider how much you need on the board to win. Even warlock is almost an instant loss so if you figure it out let me know. BSM is also bad. Odd warrior the key is Hagatha and some luck. I play wind speaker as a tech for priest and other slower decks.
The power in it is it’s flexibility. It can play like Aggro with all of the early game power cards, but switch to midrange easily with Lich king, hagatha, and even kalimos.
It's more so midrange than aggro. The reason I don't outright call it midrange is because of Genn Greymane giving the deck infinite one drops which can be used in the deck.
depends how you starts the game, flametongue and Direwolf make it a really fast aggro deck, but if isnt in hand at the start, is more like a midrange deck
People get salty on this forum when you call midrange aggro, be careful
If you play it straight aggro, you really have to hope the opponent draws poorly (more so than most aggro decks). It can work out and sometimes you need to play it that way. But card draw is just OK so you can find yourself pretty screwed if opponent has answers. You need to be smarter with plays and not over-extended. I played it aggro when I first piloted and it wasn't as successful or fun.
Long story short, it's more mid-range than aggro or control.
I'm not sure why the HS community has never bothered using the well-established MtG terminology - to my knowledge, the only HS folks who regularly use terms like "Aggro-Control" or "Midrange-Combo" are Kibler and (in the olden days) Strifecro. Even Shaman is Aggro-Midrange, to all appearances.
Nah, it's not you, I've found that while I do get served by odd warriors, the matchup is much tougher for them than other aggro decks because the deck doesn't draw aggressively, and it can to some degree generate value like odd warrior. Spells like hex can somewhat erode warrior's later value as well. I'd still say odd warrior is favoured but I never go "oh I've lost" when I queue into odd warrior. Especially if Omega assembly generates trash or the pack from Elise isn't good. One of the hardest cards to deal with from the shaman side is super collider.
Can you name one midrange deck in the history of hearthstone which does not beat slower deck by overwhelming them?
Either, they dump stuff on curve until the opponent runs out of answers, or they have some kind of comboplay they are looking to set up, typically based on the board.
IMO, the most typical midrange deck was Dragon priest. Other common uses of the term include fon/sr druid, Quartermaster paladin, hunters with higmanes and shamans with fire elementals. I think even shaman fits perfectly in this group of midrange decks: they all seek to curve well into their 6+ drops and take through the MID-game.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
ITT everyone describes aggro decks as something that isn't aggro because apparently that's a bad word.
I remember when people tried to say that Zoo was a control deck because it encouraged minion trading.
If so, it's a pretty poorly conceived one. Your one drop is going to be an 0/2 minion 75% of the time, the deck packs multiple 6 and 8 drops, and your reach/damage from hand is pretty inefficient as its largely tied up in minion stats.
I dunno; the lines are blurred these days. It's an interesting, versatile deck (especially with the Hagatha value play nowadays) that handles various matchups in pretty different ways. Seems pretty unrefined, too, with no one list being definitely correct. I'm excited to see it evolve with the next set.