Ok, I already know what you are thinking, "the eff is this guy thinking?" But bear with me. We all dislike face decks. About 70-80% of those are hunters. I love hunters. Always have, but what I do not like is how they have been forced into playing Aggro style decks. I know there are some brilliant deck building masterminds. Let's build a successful, plausible, and playable control Hunter!
Well doesn't that midrange have to feign being a rush deck which causes opponents to play differently?
No, midrange's opener is webspinner, not Leper Gnome / Worgen into Glaivezooka. You can almost always tell within 1 or 2 turns which type of hunter you are facing.
I hate your idea that nobody likes face decks. Vast majority of players, LOVE FACE DECKS. It's the vocal minority that hates them.
People hate freeze mage/patron/control warrior far more.
That being said, I would like to hear discussion on what a viable control hunter would look like, and I don't mean "SMOrc WHO CONTROL FACE CONTROL UNIVERSE SMOrc".
I think a better title would be "What would a viable control hunter look like". I tried it a several times, but each time it felt like playing druid without wild growth or innervate with worse swipe and no savage roar. Once I realized this, i immediatly stopped building the deck, knowing it would lose to face, it would lose to control, it would lose to midrange. It's hard to envision a viable control hunter.
The closest hunter came to controlling the meta was through Sunshine Hunter, and it wasn't as much of a control hunter as a combo hunter, but it's far closer than our current variants.
The answer may lie in the idea that hunter has no real draw mechanics, and no real power control cards, as well as no stall or tools to heal themselves. The only way hunter can survive in the meta is by protecting their face by making opponent too busy to hit yours. Hence, ALL HUNTERS, MUST BE FACE HUNTERS, TO EXIST. If you do not threaten their face, they theaten yours, and your draw is not good enough to run heals, because a healbot on turn 5 empty board is... not going to protect your face.
Hunters are between druids without wild growth/innervate and rogues at the moment. Their hero power does not heal them, but damages enemy face. Rogues damage their own face by hitting creatures, but this reduces ongoing threats from hitting your face every turn, and even then they get faced down.
Hunters don't have tempo cards to establish themselves, so they use what they have: threatening lethal enough to make opponent too scared to hit your face. Even then, that is sometimes not enough against assassin's blade, or against worgen otk, or against zoo, or similar... Survival through outlasting is not realistic, Survival through hitting face, is very real.
No matter what hunter deck you play, it's immediatly obvious that you are LOSING every single turn. You are losing health with no means of recovery. You are losing cards with no means of recovery. You are developing as strong of a board as possible, which is barely enough to stay there until you have enough burst in your hand to finish off opponent after they wipe your board.
I just want to play a deck that is not a slight vaiation of another, it is so sad that neither ghaz nor crush see play. so many cool class legendaries that hardly see play
I hate your idea that nobody likes face decks. Vast majority of players, LOVE FACE DECKS. It's the vocal minority that hates them.
People hate freeze mage/patron/control warrior far more.
That being said, I would like to hear discussion on what a viable control hunter would look like, and I don't mean "SMOrc WHO CONTROL FACE CONTROL UNIVERSE SMOrc".
I think a better title would be "What would a viable control hunter look like". I tried it a several times, but each time it felt like playing druid without wild growth or innervate with worse swipe and no savage roar. Once I realized this, i immediatly stopped building the deck, knowing it would lose to face, it would lose to control, it would lose to midrange. It's hard to envision a viable control hunter.
The closest hunter came to controlling the meta was through Sunshine Hunter, and it wasn't as much of a control hunter as a combo hunter, but it's far closer than our current variants.
The answer may lie in the idea that hunter has no real draw mechanics, and no real power control cards, as well as no stall or tools to heal themselves. The only way hunter can survive in the meta is by protecting their face by making opponent too busy to hit yours. Hence, ALL HUNTERS, MUST BE FACE HUNTERS, TO EXIST. If you do not threaten their face, they theaten yours, and your draw is not good enough to run heals, because a healbot on turn 5 empty board is... not going to protect your face.
I agree, I just want to see a deck that has a viable late game presence. It could just be a completely different take on hunter. like spell damage hunter! what i am saying is that it does not necessarily have to be control hunter, but just something different that is also viable on ladder
I hate your idea that nobody likes face decks. Vast majority of players, LOVE FACE DECKS. It's the vocal minority that hates them.
People hate freeze mage/patron/control warrior far more.
That being said, I would like to hear discussion on what a viable control hunter would look like, and I don't mean "SMOrc WHO CONTROL FACE CONTROL UNIVERSE SMOrc".
I think a better title would be "What would a viable control hunter look like". I tried it a several times, but each time it felt like playing druid without wild growth or innervate with worse swipe and no savage roar. Once I realized this, i immediatly stopped building the deck, knowing it would lose to face, it would lose to control, it would lose to midrange. It's hard to envision a viable control hunter.
The closest hunter came to controlling the meta was through Sunshine Hunter, and it wasn't as much of a control hunter as a combo hunter, but it's far closer than our current variants.
The answer may lie in the idea that hunter has no real draw mechanics, and no real power control cards, as well as no stall or tools to heal themselves. The only way hunter can survive in the meta is by protecting their face by making opponent too busy to hit yours. Hence, ALL HUNTERS, MUST BE FACE HUNTERS, TO EXIST. If you do not threaten their face, they theaten yours, and your draw is not good enough to run heals, because a healbot on turn 5 empty board is... not going to protect your face.
I agree, I just want to see a deck that has a viable late game presence. It could just be a completely different take on hunter. like spell damage hunter! what i am saying is that it does not necessarily have to be control hunter, but just something different that is also viable on ladder
Lothar was playing a Malygos hunter a while ago from rank 10 to 5. It was OKAY but not particularly overwhelming. It is definitely really cool and interesting though, you can check it out here.
I have to do a Control Deck for my thread, so here goes, doesn't take long to calculate approximate value of cards, and even though Hunter is designer for face, and as a control is pretty weak, I can give you what I think might be the best control hunter deck possible with what there is avaible.
The point of control deck is to win, not to hit the board. Hunter can hit the board. Arguably worse than a druid without wild growth, without innervate, and without savage roar. But it can hit board. BY DOING SO, YOU ARE LOSING (1) Health (2) Cards (3) Win Conditions.
Your deck is just an extra-bad-vs-face-hunter Midrange hunter that has a bit more tools to carry it into the lategame, but the lack of draw means your emperor is going to hit wrong cards...
There are also other implications I am not thinking of. The deck could win games probably, that's not in question. The question is, compared to ramp druid, what does this deck offer? Other than getting to play Gahz'rilla (which is okay because Gahz'rilla is awesome), but still, not very satisfying.
I hate your idea that nobody likes face decks. Vast majority of players, LOVE FACE DECKS. It's the vocal minority that hates them.
People hate freeze mage/patron/control warrior far more.
That being said, I would like to hear discussion on what a viable control hunter would look like, and I don't mean "SMOrc WHO CONTROL FACE CONTROL UNIVERSE SMOrc".
I think a better title would be "What would a viable control hunter look like". I tried it a several times, but each time it felt like playing druid without wild growth or innervate with worse swipe and no savage roar. Once I realized this, i immediatly stopped building the deck, knowing it would lose to face, it would lose to control, it would lose to midrange. It's hard to envision a viable control hunter.
The closest hunter came to controlling the meta was through Sunshine Hunter, and it wasn't as much of a control hunter as a combo hunter, but it's far closer than our current variants.
The answer may lie in the idea that hunter has no real draw mechanics, and no real power control cards, as well as no stall or tools to heal themselves. The only way hunter can survive in the meta is by protecting their face by making opponent too busy to hit yours. Hence, ALL HUNTERS, MUST BE FACE HUNTERS, TO EXIST. If you do not threaten their face, they theaten yours, and your draw is not good enough to run heals, because a healbot on turn 5 empty board is... not going to protect your face.
I agree, I just want to see a deck that has a viable late game presence. It could just be a completely different take on hunter. like spell damage hunter! what i am saying is that it does not necessarily have to be control hunter, but just something different that is also viable on ladder
Lothar was playing a Malygos hunter a while ago from rank 10 to 5. It was OKAY but not particularly overwhelming. It is definitely really cool and interesting though, you can check it out here.
I have to do a Control Deck for my thread, so here goes, doesn't take long to calculate approximate value of cards, and even though Hunter is designer for face, and as a control is pretty weak, I can give you what I think might be the best control hunter deck possible with what there is avaible.
The point of control deck is to win, not to hit the board. Hunter can hit the board. Arguably worse than a druid without wild growth, without innervate, and without savage roar. But it can hit board. BY DOING SO, YOU ARE LOSING (1) Health (2) Cards (3) Win Conditions.
Your deck is just an extra-bad-vs-face-hunter Midrange hunter that has a bit more tools to carry it into the lategame, but the lack of draw means your emperor is going to hit wrong cards...
There are also other implications I am not thinking of. The deck could win games probably, that's not in question. The question is, compared to ramp druid, what does this deck offer? Other than getting to play Gahz'rilla (which is okay because Gahz'rilla is awesome), but still, not very satisfying.
and THAT exact point concerning his deck is what I want to change. Blizzard please... even most of the TGT cards are still pushing hunter closer into aggro. Lock n load could be fun in tha hunter spell damage deck.
Actually lock and load will enable a combo hunter more than control hunter, and to be fair people like combo much more than control nowadays.
I mean, nobody likes control, patron is kinda cool, overplayed but cool.
I don't think they are trying to make the deck control based. Control design space is so narrow, one deck ends up being on top and its just not fun to play or play against.
Actually lock and load will enable a combo hunter more than control hunter, and to be fair people like combo much more than control nowadays.
I mean, nobody likes control, patron is kinda cool, overplayed but cool.
I don't think they are trying to make the deck control based. Control design space is so narrow, one deck ends up being on top and its just not fun to play or play against.
Speak for yourself and some others, me and plenty others still love control. Good old fatigue with always a big legendary in the topdecks, intense, fun, long but satisfying. As combo decks what I like most it's Malygos decks, nothing like an OTK because to hell with your deck, I have the spells I make the rules.
Yeah that's fun, until everyone on the ladder plays that and then it ends up being as hated as any other archetype.
It's hard to balance to make that not happen, aggro being viable and accessible makes control still loved. It's actually fascinating
He does have a point, most combo decks can win without even having a board presence the turn before, it is like why even bother trying to play a well rounded deck when there are things like freeze mage, patron, and combo druid. Not to mention if you happen to have a deck that is decent against those decks it is almost always more "gimmick-ier" than they are. It just blows man. I like gimmicks, but I do not like when a meta is over run with them. I thibk it will be a problem until the card pool is enlarged significantly
What's more annoying? Getting hit consistantly from early to dead, Everything you play being denied/destroyed/undone, or winning then dying to a combo from behind taunt.
I think the most annoying ones are the ones you face the most, and the ones you face less are more tolorable.
Some people absolutely hate mill, you can't do anything against it when you play freeze mage, handlock, or control warrior, all your legendaries get shred to pieces.
You know what protects your control decks from being ripped apart by mill rogues? Combo and aggro decks, and only them.
I agree that the same hate will go to control if all of a sudden the meta slowed down tremendously. If I had to face 4 grinder/freeze mages in a row, I'd have an aneurysm because of the sheer amount of time it takes to complete each game. Not that I'd much prefer facing 4 face hunters in a row but my point is aggressive decks have a place in the game and it keeps the game interesting.
Once you've dug your way past the lower ranks or the first few days of the new season where aggro decks dominate, I think there will be a relatively healthy mix of deck archetypes.
That tomorrow already exists you dingus, Midrange Hunter is an all-around better deck than face.
Midrange hunter IS FACE hunter.
It uses aggressive on-curve minions to THREATEN THE FACE to mitigate damage from YOUR OWN FACE.
A CONTROL deck is not AGGRESSIVE. A combo deck like patron CAN be aggressive, but a CONTROL deck tries to be centered around beginning it's presence on around turns 4+. Midrange hunter is a face hunter variant that attempts to overcome its weakness to more powerful control decks, and the modern PURE face hunter has already learned to maintain a positive winrate against theses decks anyway.
I think OP is referring to control as in Control warrior-like, rather than control as in "doesn't have to only hit face".
Midrange, Hybrid, and Face hunter are ALL Face hunter variants. They are not Control Hunters. They are merely Face hunters that can afford to trade and still win.
Though it gets ripped by any Control deck... Like Control Warrior, Control Paladin, you name it.
Not quite true. All hunters at the moment, if built and played correctly, will beat Control Warrior and Control Paladin. It takes a lot of practice and a very specific playstyle, mostly involving accumulating burst rather than playing out your hand. But overall, hunter only struggles against tempo mage and freeze mage the most. The other decks are a lot more beatable from my experience (over 600 hunter games).
Actually lock and load will enable a combo hunter more than control hunter, and to be fair people like combo much more than control nowadays.
I mean, nobody likes control, patron is kinda cool, overplayed but cool.
I don't think they are trying to make the deck control based. Control design space is so narrow, one deck ends up being on top and its just not fun to play or play against.
Speak for yourself and some others, me and plenty others still love control. Good old fatigue with always a big legendary in the topdecks, intense, fun, long but satisfying. As combo decks what I like most it's Malygos decks, nothing like an OTK because to hell with your deck, I have the spells I make the rules.
Me too. Battles between controls are Hearthstone finest, imo. Just look at the fight between a priest and a warrior, and compare it to a fight between two hunters. The former is much more exciting.
I particularly love my Demon Handlock rightnow. I love dropping to 12 health and let the opponent believe they already won the game, only to turn everything upside down.
Ahh good old fights of control warrior vs acolyte priest where the warrior gets to 60 armor and clears your whole board over and over, while you heal his face in the first few turns, then end up healing your own most of the time. Then they alextrasza your face for 15 damage and hit you in the face with death bite and 12 damage grommash.
I don't think it's as fun as you make it up to be.
In fact, I think hunter vs hunter has a lot more skill involved and is a lot less one-sided. Believe it or not, it involves board control and decisions to play or not play cards. Of course I mean face vs face, or midrange vs midrange. Of course you hit the face vs midrange, thats how you win, granted you try to play around houndmaster, but still, you play to win, not to respect opponent's board. Otherwise we'd have pokemon, where when you have no board, you lose. This is not pokemon.
Ok, I already know what you are thinking, "the eff is this guy thinking?" But bear with me. We all dislike face decks. About 70-80% of those are hunters. I love hunters. Always have, but what I do not like is how they have been forced into playing Aggro style decks. I know there are some brilliant deck building masterminds. Let's build a successful, plausible, and playable control Hunter!
FYI, midrange hunter is the strongest hunter deck, not facehunter. So i guess the future is now?
"Put your face in the light!" - Tirion Fordring
Wait til TGT comes out.
Have a great deck that's really, really cheap? Help the new players out
Well doesn't that midrange have to feign being a rush deck which causes opponents to play differently?
No, midrange's opener is webspinner, not Leper Gnome / Worgen into Glaivezooka. You can almost always tell within 1 or 2 turns which type of hunter you are facing.
Have a great deck that's really, really cheap? Help the new players out
I hate your idea that nobody likes face decks. Vast majority of players, LOVE FACE DECKS. It's the vocal minority that hates them.
People hate freeze mage/patron/control warrior far more.
That being said, I would like to hear discussion on what a viable control hunter would look like, and I don't mean "SMOrc WHO CONTROL FACE CONTROL UNIVERSE SMOrc".
I think a better title would be "What would a viable control hunter look like". I tried it a several times, but each time it felt like playing druid without wild growth or innervate with worse swipe and no savage roar. Once I realized this, i immediatly stopped building the deck, knowing it would lose to face, it would lose to control, it would lose to midrange. It's hard to envision a viable control hunter.
The closest hunter came to controlling the meta was through Sunshine Hunter, and it wasn't as much of a control hunter as a combo hunter, but it's far closer than our current variants.
The answer may lie in the idea that hunter has no real draw mechanics, and no real power control cards, as well as no stall or tools to heal themselves. The only way hunter can survive in the meta is by protecting their face by making opponent too busy to hit yours. Hence, ALL HUNTERS, MUST BE FACE HUNTERS, TO EXIST. If you do not threaten their face, they theaten yours, and your draw is not good enough to run heals, because a healbot on turn 5 empty board is... not going to protect your face.
Hunters are between druids without wild growth/innervate and rogues at the moment. Their hero power does not heal them, but damages enemy face. Rogues damage their own face by hitting creatures, but this reduces ongoing threats from hitting your face every turn, and even then they get faced down.
Hunters don't have tempo cards to establish themselves, so they use what they have: threatening lethal enough to make opponent too scared to hit your face. Even then, that is sometimes not enough against assassin's blade, or against worgen otk, or against zoo, or similar... Survival through outlasting is not realistic, Survival through hitting face, is very real.
No matter what hunter deck you play, it's immediatly obvious that you are LOSING every single turn. You are losing health with no means of recovery. You are losing cards with no means of recovery. You are developing as strong of a board as possible, which is barely enough to stay there until you have enough burst in your hand to finish off opponent after they wipe your board.
I just want to play a deck that is not a slight vaiation of another, it is so sad that neither ghaz nor crush see play. so many cool class legendaries that hardly see play
I agree, I just want to see a deck that has a viable late game presence. It could just be a completely different take on hunter. like spell damage hunter! what i am saying is that it does not necessarily have to be control hunter, but just something different that is also viable on ladder
Lothar was playing a Malygos hunter a while ago from rank 10 to 5. It was OKAY but not particularly overwhelming. It is definitely really cool and interesting though, you can check it out here.
The point of control deck is to win, not to hit the board. Hunter can hit the board. Arguably worse than a druid without wild growth, without innervate, and without savage roar. But it can hit board. BY DOING SO, YOU ARE LOSING (1) Health (2) Cards (3) Win Conditions.
Your deck is just an extra-bad-vs-face-hunter Midrange hunter that has a bit more tools to carry it into the lategame, but the lack of draw means your emperor is going to hit wrong cards...
There are also other implications I am not thinking of. The deck could win games probably, that's not in question. The question is, compared to ramp druid, what does this deck offer? Other than getting to play Gahz'rilla (which is okay because Gahz'rilla is awesome), but still, not very satisfying.
and THAT exact point concerning his deck is what I want to change. Blizzard please... even most of the TGT cards are still pushing hunter closer into aggro. Lock n load could be fun in tha hunter spell damage deck.
Actually lock and load will enable a combo hunter more than control hunter, and to be fair people like combo much more than control nowadays.
I mean, nobody likes control, patron is kinda cool, overplayed but cool.
I don't think they are trying to make the deck control based. Control design space is so narrow, one deck ends up being on top and its just not fun to play or play against.
Yeah that's fun, until everyone on the ladder plays that and then it ends up being as hated as any other archetype.
It's hard to balance to make that not happen, aggro being viable and accessible makes control still loved. It's actually fascinating
He does have a point, most combo decks can win without even having a board presence the turn before, it is like why even bother trying to play a well rounded deck when there are things like freeze mage, patron, and combo druid. Not to mention if you happen to have a deck that is decent against those decks it is almost always more "gimmick-ier" than they are. It just blows man. I like gimmicks, but I do not like when a meta is over run with them. I thibk it will be a problem until the card pool is enlarged significantly
and honestly if we could find a middle ground between combo and control, perfect.
That's debatable.
What's more annoying? Getting hit consistantly from early to dead, Everything you play being denied/destroyed/undone, or winning then dying to a combo from behind taunt.
I think the most annoying ones are the ones you face the most, and the ones you face less are more tolorable.
Some people absolutely hate mill, you can't do anything against it when you play freeze mage, handlock, or control warrior, all your legendaries get shred to pieces.
You know what protects your control decks from being ripped apart by mill rogues? Combo and aggro decks, and only them.
That tomorrow already exists you dingus, Midrange Hunter is an all-around better deck than face.
I agree that the same hate will go to control if all of a sudden the meta slowed down tremendously. If I had to face 4 grinder/freeze mages in a row, I'd have an aneurysm because of the sheer amount of time it takes to complete each game. Not that I'd much prefer facing 4 face hunters in a row but my point is aggressive decks have a place in the game and it keeps the game interesting.
Once you've dug your way past the lower ranks or the first few days of the new season where aggro decks dominate, I think there will be a relatively healthy mix of deck archetypes.
Midrange hunter IS FACE hunter.
It uses aggressive on-curve minions to THREATEN THE FACE to mitigate damage from YOUR OWN FACE.
A CONTROL deck is not AGGRESSIVE. A combo deck like patron CAN be aggressive, but a CONTROL deck tries to be centered around beginning it's presence on around turns 4+. Midrange hunter is a face hunter variant that attempts to overcome its weakness to more powerful control decks, and the modern PURE face hunter has already learned to maintain a positive winrate against theses decks anyway.
I think OP is referring to control as in Control warrior-like, rather than control as in "doesn't have to only hit face".
Midrange, Hybrid, and Face hunter are ALL Face hunter variants. They are not Control Hunters. They are merely Face hunters that can afford to trade and still win.
Not quite true. All hunters at the moment, if built and played correctly, will beat Control Warrior and Control Paladin. It takes a lot of practice and a very specific playstyle, mostly involving accumulating burst rather than playing out your hand. But overall, hunter only struggles against tempo mage and freeze mage the most. The other decks are a lot more beatable from my experience (over 600 hunter games).
Me too. Battles between controls are Hearthstone finest, imo. Just look at the fight between a priest and a warrior, and compare it to a fight between two hunters. The former is much more exciting.
I particularly love my Demon Handlock rightnow. I love dropping to 12 health and let the opponent believe they already won the game, only to turn everything upside down.
Ahh good old fights of control warrior vs acolyte priest where the warrior gets to 60 armor and clears your whole board over and over, while you heal his face in the first few turns, then end up healing your own most of the time. Then they alextrasza your face for 15 damage and hit you in the face with death bite and 12 damage grommash.
I don't think it's as fun as you make it up to be.
In fact, I think hunter vs hunter has a lot more skill involved and is a lot less one-sided. Believe it or not, it involves board control and decisions to play or not play cards. Of course I mean face vs face, or midrange vs midrange. Of course you hit the face vs midrange, thats how you win, granted you try to play around houndmaster, but still, you play to win, not to respect opponent's board. Otherwise we'd have pokemon, where when you have no board, you lose. This is not pokemon.