Then odd warrior must be more so as it has a higher winrate, as does even shaman. Looking at the popularity of secret-based hunter, it might be possible to push DR hunter to S-tier using Flare, if it didn't drag you down too much against mage and warrior. Oh, wait, it seems that from 5-1 DR is back on top and the only tier-1 hunter, like the nerfs never happened.
If only I had a dollar for each thread about hunter
You could what? Buy a couple of ice creams? Maybe even a game on Steam Winter Sale?! Gasp! XD
I think you're overestimating the number of threads on this topic! Haha!
A few hundred ice creams, actually.
Damn! Ice creams must cost literally pennies where you're from I suppose.
I can't tell if you're blind or trolling at this point, as you skipped over the screenshot of 500 threads about hunter. I guess people see only what they want to see.
You.... literally just looked for threads that included the word hunter... in a forum that has been going for many years.... and you got only 500. And you think that proved your point?? That means there's been a thread about Hunter on average.... what? Once a week? Maybe? Yeah, we're utterly swamped with them right now...
Wow.... I'm guessing maths and probability aren't your strong area. /smh
" If only I had a dollar for each thread about hunter" Yes, I never mentioned any specific time or month for these threads, so yes, having a dollar for each thread about hunter would net me quite a bit of money. 1 thread a week about the same topic every single time, is tiring. You're part of the problem, if you're going to make one of these garbage threads, at least try something new.
Because those - the masses of mindless fanboys - are the strenth of Blizzards arrogance and compleet disregard for balanced and well thoughtout card design.
This is the point that I'm trying to get across and that you're constantly ignoring. Your words aren't reaching any masses. That is why I keep suggesting to you that you go to other platforms as well and spread your message there. Expand your audience so that your words might actually have a chance of having an impact. Repeating the same message to 20 people won't have the desired effect, even if those 20 people stopped playing hunter, but gaining the ear of masses might stand an ant of a chance of creating an impact.
I see you also don't read properly - like most fanboys do, because the point you are trying to make just fuels my arguments.
I'm done. I've tried to help you by suggesting how can you get your highschool philosophy message on card design and ethics in game across a broader audience so that you can actually make an impact with it but all that you've done in return is called me a fanboy and repeated yourself like a parrot. I wasn't arguing against your stance and your opinion on hunter, card design or developers, at any point, yet you've kept talking about it, although no one disagreed with you.
Speaking ethics is most effective in places where people don't care and nobody seems to be listening. Ok, fine, but there need to actually be people there to listen to what you're saying! Your words won't create any significant impact in place where less than 0,1% of the entire playerbase is listening, that is a fact. There is a difference in effectiveness when preaching about ethics to a crowd of 20 people than don't give a shit and a crowd of 2000 people that don't give a shit and yet you refuse to see that.
LOL, talking about ethics by the end of 2018, you guys are so outdated. Maybe I should give you a lesson about this times and a doses of immoral behaviour, hehe. :P Even though I hate many things from the current era, the constant rejection from many people towards the silly ethical and moral values of the past is something I love, so please, just stop with your nonsense. :)
You misunderstood. Nobody sane gives a flying fuck about etchis and moral values anymore...except for a raging lunatic who can't git gud so he spews reddit philisophy and considers hs devs the root of all evil in the world.
You misunderstood. Nobody sane gives a flying fuck about etchis and moral values anymore...except for a raging lunatic who can't git gud so he spews reddit philisophy and considers hs devs the root of all evil in the world.
Do you know how to beat or counter spellhunter without playing hunter yourself? because over my last 30 games 75% have been hunter :(
I've been feasting on Hunters with Odd Quest Warrior, even before Zul'jin came along. The only deck I hade problems with was Deathrattle Hunter and their sticky boards, but all the other archetypes are very manageable and actually predictable to play against, especially Spell Hunter. Just keep one board clear for your opening hand, and save one again for the inevitable Zul'jin board refill.
Can’t wait for DK rexxar to rotate. Too much value generation with the current card pool. A single card can outvalue an entire control deck in standard. The card pool is simply too strong.
What did blizzard expect? They printed with rexxar a fairly cheap death knight. Included four expansions of insane beasts for his heropower for nearly unlimited versatile value.
Printed cards to make spellhunter viable (Rhok`delar, spellstone, wandering monster, crushing walls).
This expansion they added a new neutral minion that recruits a beast from your hand for recruit hunter. For the spellhunter friends they just included a new HERO, that fits perfectly into the deck and the other very good spells hunter has already.
Lastly they nerfed druid insanely untimely into the ground when it didn't even have a tier 1 deck. They reasoned that everybody would include the same op cards in druid (hello rexxar, hello candleshot, hello hunters mark, hello unleash the Hounds).
As a result we got a new hunter meta that polarises between hunters, hard counters and hunted. This is actually worse that witchwood. Before, you met the same 6 decks all the time. Now you meet a hunter every third game on average.
Team5 actually don't have a clue about their own f**ing game. They couldn't have made it more retarded if they'd intended it.
What did blizzard expect? They printed with rexxar a fairly cheap death knight. Included four expansions of insane beasts for his heropower for nearly unlimited versatile value.
Printed cards to make spellhunter viable (Rhok`delar, spellstone, wandering monster, crushing walls).
This expansion they added a new neutral minion that recruits a beast from your hand for recruit hunter. For the spellhunter friends they just included a new HERO, that fits perfectly into the deck and the other very good spells hunter has already.
Lastly they nerfed druid insanely untimely into the ground when it didn't even have a tier 1 deck. They reasoned that everybody would include the same op cards in druid (hello rexxar, hello candleshot, hello hunters mark, hello unleash the Hounds).
As a result we got a new hunter meta that polarises between hunters, hard counters and hunted. This is actually worse that witchwood. Before, you met the same 6 decks all the time. Now you meet a hunter every third game on average.
Team5 actually don't have a clue about their own f**ing game. They couldn't have made it more ******** if they'd intended it.
Well, Rexxar did almost nothing to improve the hunter class when it was printed or the expansion after(no new beasts added to rexxar pool). I can't blame them for deliberately improving his beast pool either considering how little impact he had on the game.
Spellhunter too had little to go on at first. Being nothing special upon release, it lost 3 sets of cards the following expansion while only gaining 2 possible deck additions, 1 of which actually put minions into your deck. So again, adding more cards to the game that improved an average deck probably wasn't much of a concern for them.
Oondasta was almost certainly not designed specifically for recruit hunter. Sets are created 2 expansions in advance after all. Zul'jin on the other hand was likely created with spell hunter in mind. The card is very strong, often game winning in some matchups, while doing little more than force the opponent to save a board clear in others.
The druid nerfs might seem untimely to some given how druid wasn't the dominant class of the current 2 week old expansion, but I can't remember an expansion where they weren't floating around the top tier sooner or later. I love it when a class has enough good options to make multiple strong decks. It's frustrating having to wait until my opponent has zero cards remaining in his deck before being able identify what they are playing though. Along those lines I agree with the nerfs. Of the hunter cards you mentioned, only 2 will remain in standard. Release the hounds and hunter's don't compare to wild growth and nourish IMO. Hunter's mark saw an average amount of play at best before candle shot. My only complaint about rexxar is how random it is. This amount of randomness from a single card over a long game is not a great design. Repeatedly failing to get the beasts you need or being on the receiving end of the perfect zombeast turn after turn is a miserable experience.
Is this "Hunter Meta" really worse than Meta's in the past? Decks like pirate warrior, jade druid, raza priest, cubelock and others were all dominant at times. If there is a perceived best deck, a lot of people will play it and these were all popular enough to queue into 1/3 of the time. Except these were decks and not just a class. Hunters have 5 decks atm with a winrate over 50%. I do face a lot of hunters, but rarely the same deck twice in a row. Is the problem that you have to guess when you mulligan?
Personally I think hunter is in a great spot atm, all their good decks have a reasonable amount of counters(all of which are fine in their own right). When classes have only 1 playable archetype for a long time, that's when I feel the design team has failed.
anecdotal poppycock != actual statistics. Yep you are wrong. Decks beat it, decks win more than it. Sorry bout your deck, but taking turns is the Blizzard way and your turn over.
I'm really not sure why people don't just tech in chief inspectors. They are good statted minions and every deck has room for a couple tech cards. Remember when every deck had a golakka crawler in it? Just put this guy in, burn three secrets, and it's basically an auto win. Literally all you need to beat hunter at this point is two chief inspectors and two 3 damage aoe spells. Use the other 26 cards however you please.
Hunter is the best deck out there but it isnt suffocating the meta at all. It's not like cubelock was, or razakus priest. It's good, and easily beaten. I'd argue it's the least oppressive #1 deck since before ungoro.
I'm really not sure why people don't just tech in chief inspectors. They are good statted minions and every deck has room for a couple tech cards. Remember when every deck had a golakka crawler in it? Just put this guy in, burn three secrets, and it's basically an auto win. Literally all you need to beat hunter at this point is two chief inspectors and two 3 damage aoe spells. Use the other 26 cards however you please.
Hunter is the best deck out there but it isnt suffocating the meta at all. It's not like cubelock was, or razakus priest. It's good, and easily beaten. I'd argue it's the least oppressive #1 deck since before ungoro.
Playing DR hunter, I considered Flare, but a quick analysis showed it would at best be a wash, and most likely weaken the deck. Most of the grumbles on the forum are from ex Kingsbane and ex Druid players and based in emotion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I'm really not sure why people don't just tech in chief inspectors. They are good statted minions and every deck has room for a couple tech cards. Remember when every deck had a golakka crawler in it? Just put this guy in, burn three secrets, and it's basically an auto win. Literally all you need to beat hunter at this point is two chief inspectors and two 3 damage aoe spells. Use the other 26 cards however you please.
Hunter is the best deck out there but it isnt suffocating the meta at all. It's not like cubelock was, or razakus priest. It's good, and easily beaten. I'd argue it's the least oppressive #1 deck since before ungoro.
Playing DR hunter, I considered Flare, but a quick analysis showed it would at best be a wash, and most likely weaken the deck. Most of the grumbles on the forum are from ex Kingsbane and ex Druid players and based in emotion.
The insane amount of hunter in ladder is just a coincidence then? All complains have no reason? Really?
Really I think that many players here are just insisting on playing decks that are bad match-ups against hunter while also avoiding playing decks that do well against them.
If only warlocks had 3 damage AoE & a board swarm that instantly out tempoed almost any slow zombeast. Hmmm...
If only mages had multiple wide AND tall aoes to deal with insane amounts of threats. Hmmm...
If only paladins both board clears for any type of board and had combo win conditions that didn't care about trying to out value Rexxar.
If only priests had a 3 damage aoe to deal with wolves and a 7 mana aoe to deal with Zul'Jin instantly. Hmmm...
Decks that have answers to hunter and have actual win conditions aren't complaining about hunter. Either you're playing a deck that doesn't have an answer so you just resort to saying hunter is unbeatable or you are playing one of the above classes and do not understand how to work the match-up.
I'm really not sure why people don't just tech in chief inspectors. They are good statted minions and every deck has room for a couple tech cards. Remember when every deck had a golakka crawler in it? Just put this guy in, burn three secrets, and it's basically an auto win. Literally all you need to beat hunter at this point is two chief inspectors and two 3 damage aoe spells. Use the other 26 cards however you please.
Hunter is the best deck out there but it isnt suffocating the meta at all. It's not like cubelock was, or razakus priest. It's good, and easily beaten. I'd argue it's the least oppressive #1 deck since before ungoro.
Playing DR hunter, I considered Flare, but a quick analysis showed it would at best be a wash, and most likely weaken the deck. Most of the grumbles on the forum are from ex Kingsbane and ex Druid players and based in emotion.
The insane amount of hunter in ladder is just a coincidence then? All complains have no reason? Really?
Oh, they are certainly popular on the ladder, winning is a different story. At rank 20, sure, secret hunter is S-tier. By rank 17, warrior and shaman take over, which brings a tear to my eye.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
"a bit broken" lol it's completely broken
Then odd warrior must be more so as it has a higher winrate, as does even shaman. Looking at the popularity of secret-based hunter, it might be possible to push DR hunter to S-tier using Flare, if it didn't drag you down too much against mage and warrior. Oh, wait, it seems that from 5-1 DR is back on top and the only tier-1 hunter, like the nerfs never happened.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
" If only I had a dollar for each thread about hunter" Yes, I never mentioned any specific time or month for these threads, so yes, having a dollar for each thread about hunter would net me quite a bit of money. 1 thread a week about the same topic every single time, is tiring. You're part of the problem, if you're going to make one of these garbage threads, at least try something new.
You misunderstood. Nobody sane gives a flying fuck about etchis and moral values anymore...except for a raging lunatic who can't git gud so he spews reddit philisophy and considers hs devs the root of all evil in the world.
Dude isnt even a legend and thinks his deck is OP...
Kids these days, no brain.
LMAO. XD
Do you know how to beat or counter spellhunter without playing hunter yourself? because over my last 30 games 75% have been hunter :(
I've been feasting on Hunters with Odd Quest Warrior, even before Zul'jin came along. The only deck I hade problems with was Deathrattle Hunter and their sticky boards, but all the other archetypes are very manageable and actually predictable to play against, especially Spell Hunter. Just keep one board clear for your opening hand, and save one again for the inevitable Zul'jin board refill.
Can i have your deck code? I want to try it out
Can’t wait for DK rexxar to rotate. Too much value generation with the current card pool. A single card can outvalue an entire control deck in standard. The card pool is simply too strong.
That dead horse is thoroughly flogged.
Dibbity don't touch that!
Hunter is just insane. Correct me if I am wrong.
What did blizzard expect? They printed with rexxar a fairly cheap death knight. Included four expansions of insane beasts for his heropower for nearly unlimited versatile value.
Printed cards to make spellhunter viable (Rhok`delar, spellstone, wandering monster, crushing walls).
This expansion they added a new neutral minion that recruits a beast from your hand for recruit hunter. For the spellhunter friends they just included a new HERO, that fits perfectly into the deck and the other very good spells hunter has already.
Lastly they nerfed druid insanely untimely into the ground when it didn't even have a tier 1 deck. They reasoned that everybody would include the same op cards in druid (hello rexxar, hello candleshot, hello hunters mark, hello unleash the Hounds).
As a result we got a new hunter meta that polarises between hunters, hard counters and hunted. This is actually worse that witchwood. Before, you met the same 6 decks all the time. Now you meet a hunter every third game on average.
Team5 actually don't have a clue about their own f**ing game. They couldn't have made it more retarded if they'd intended it.
Well, Rexxar did almost nothing to improve the hunter class when it was printed or the expansion after(no new beasts added to rexxar pool). I can't blame them for deliberately improving his beast pool either considering how little impact he had on the game.
Spellhunter too had little to go on at first. Being nothing special upon release, it lost 3 sets of cards the following expansion while only gaining 2 possible deck additions, 1 of which actually put minions into your deck. So again, adding more cards to the game that improved an average deck probably wasn't much of a concern for them.
Oondasta was almost certainly not designed specifically for recruit hunter. Sets are created 2 expansions in advance after all. Zul'jin on the other hand was likely created with spell hunter in mind. The card is very strong, often game winning in some matchups, while doing little more than force the opponent to save a board clear in others.
The druid nerfs might seem untimely to some given how druid wasn't the dominant class of the current 2 week old expansion, but I can't remember an expansion where they weren't floating around the top tier sooner or later. I love it when a class has enough good options to make multiple strong decks. It's frustrating having to wait until my opponent has zero cards remaining in his deck before being able identify what they are playing though. Along those lines I agree with the nerfs. Of the hunter cards you mentioned, only 2 will remain in standard. Release the hounds and hunter's don't compare to wild growth and nourish IMO. Hunter's mark saw an average amount of play at best before candle shot. My only complaint about rexxar is how random it is. This amount of randomness from a single card over a long game is not a great design. Repeatedly failing to get the beasts you need or being on the receiving end of the perfect zombeast turn after turn is a miserable experience.
Is this "Hunter Meta" really worse than Meta's in the past? Decks like pirate warrior, jade druid, raza priest, cubelock and others were all dominant at times. If there is a perceived best deck, a lot of people will play it and these were all popular enough to queue into 1/3 of the time. Except these were decks and not just a class. Hunters have 5 decks atm with a winrate over 50%. I do face a lot of hunters, but rarely the same deck twice in a row. Is the problem that you have to guess when you mulligan?
Personally I think hunter is in a great spot atm, all their good decks have a reasonable amount of counters(all of which are fine in their own right). When classes have only 1 playable archetype for a long time, that's when I feel the design team has failed.
anecdotal poppycock != actual statistics. Yep you are wrong. Decks beat it, decks win more than it. Sorry bout your deck, but taking turns is the Blizzard way and your turn over.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I'm really not sure why people don't just tech in chief inspectors. They are good statted minions and every deck has room for a couple tech cards. Remember when every deck had a golakka crawler in it? Just put this guy in, burn three secrets, and it's basically an auto win. Literally all you need to beat hunter at this point is two chief inspectors and two 3 damage aoe spells. Use the other 26 cards however you please.
Hunter is the best deck out there but it isnt suffocating the meta at all. It's not like cubelock was, or razakus priest. It's good, and easily beaten. I'd argue it's the least oppressive #1 deck since before ungoro.
Playing DR hunter, I considered Flare, but a quick analysis showed it would at best be a wash, and most likely weaken the deck. Most of the grumbles on the forum are from ex Kingsbane and ex Druid players and based in emotion.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
The insane amount of hunter in ladder is just a coincidence then? All complains have no reason? Really?
Really I think that many players here are just insisting on playing decks that are bad match-ups against hunter while also avoiding playing decks that do well against them.
If only warlocks had 3 damage AoE & a board swarm that instantly out tempoed almost any slow zombeast. Hmmm...
If only mages had multiple wide AND tall aoes to deal with insane amounts of threats. Hmmm...
If only paladins both board clears for any type of board and had combo win conditions that didn't care about trying to out value Rexxar.
If only priests had a 3 damage aoe to deal with wolves and a 7 mana aoe to deal with Zul'Jin instantly. Hmmm...
Decks that have answers to hunter and have actual win conditions aren't complaining about hunter. Either you're playing a deck that doesn't have an answer so you just resort to saying hunter is unbeatable or you are playing one of the above classes and do not understand how to work the match-up.
Oh, they are certainly popular on the ladder, winning is a different story. At rank 20, sure, secret hunter is S-tier. By rank 17, warrior and shaman take over, which brings a tear to my eye.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
Funny. My profile says otherwise.