Going back to my MTG days, Acolyte of Pain seemed very strong when I first found it, and Wild Pyromancer seemed like the obvious interaction. But I could never get it to work, and abandoned the idea as a gimmick. AND NOW SOMEBODY MADE IT WORK GREAT, albeit with 8 legendaries. Sweet, novel deck, congrats to Kisstafer for ingenuity and recognizing a good idea.
I think Thechiv was being sarcastic, no? If you look at the decks, there are some super legendary heavy decks, but there are some that only use a couple of heavily used legendary minions (Sylvanas [who is just good, and thus needed to be nerfed] and The Black Knight [which is so strong in the meta]).
You shouldn't expect a really budget deck to do too well in a tournament, to be honest. That being said, you don't really need to spend mounds of dust.Toban's, Forceflex's, and my own deck are reasonable on dust for tournament decks.
LuigEzz's deck could probably drop one or two legendaries without compromising it too much. The same could be said of Warelephant's deck; Sylvanas is the universal include, Nat Pagle could easily be replaced, and the Tinkermaster is just super popular right now, but I'm not sure how necessary it is to the function of the deck (I'm no shaman expert, It's my absolute least played class) and to me looks like a third hex(?).
What I mean is there was a time limited formated deck could actually win a swiss and or open. We saw this up to 3 weeks ago. Saddly though with the rise of the Druid came the need for cards like Tink Master Overspark and The Black Knight just to stay competitive. And of course Ragnaros....The reality is sure you can play a low cost deck and do go with it, but consistency is the issue. Look at the deck list for both our tournaments and go back 3 weeks. Most of those decks have 3 or more legendaries. Hell this week a warrior with 7 of them won...
The reason for this is people have a better collection now then they did say 60 days ago. People have bought more into the game. This is not a bad thing to say the least, Even Murlock decks require 2 epics and 1 legendary to be effective, not to mention the one that almost one the EU Swiss has 3 legendary cards in it.
And for the record the term budget as was coined in the early days of CBT stood for no epic or legendary cards. Not one legendary and 2 epics. Though I think in this meta Budget will come to me 2k or less dust.
And for the record the term budget as was coined in the early days of CBT stood for no epic or legendary cards. Not one legendary and 2 epics. Though I think in this meta Budget will come to me 2k or less dust.
Ahh, yes, I was thinking of 'budget' - in the context of the tournament scene - as an evolving dust total that will increase as more and more people acquire the 'must-have' legendaries like Sylvanas, Ragnaros, and the Black Knight. If these cards don't get nerfed (or the meta doesn't shift to discourage them), then we will see these pop up in most viable tournament decks artificially inflating what we might call a 'budget' tournament deck. The current druid meta really inflates how many legendaries you face, and it should be noted that there are plenty of druids (and others) running many legendaries who didn't even make it into top 8 this tournament or last.
To make an analogy to my old MTG days, you could build a surprisingly effective deck with 5 cent commons and 40 cent to a dollar uncommons for playing with your buddies. In the tournament scene (I played extended), you could still have a budget deck compared to players who are dropping $100s on cards, but your deck will end up costing like $40 - $50 (I played Stasis and Limited Resource lockdown decks in Extended in my day, and those decks cost me about that much each, although there was much overlap; I could consistently make top 8 in the most competitive FNM in my metropolitan region).
The winner has ... 8 Legendaries in his deck oh which I own ... one.
Pay to win. Seriously.
New players should not expect to be able to create tournament viable decks without dropping a fair bit of dust, but that amount of dust is often overstated by people whining about being smacked around by legendary heavy druids (I know Kisstafer is a warrior, but his deck isn't a common one ATM). Eventually, the druid heavy legendary deck will lose its dominance in the meta and I think that will be for the best, as the legendary counts in those decks are intimidating to new players (although, have hope! I beat 4 druids in the round robin part of this tournament with my no-legendary deck!).
The winner has ... 8 Legendaries in his deck oh which I own ... one.
Pay to win. Seriously.
lol @ people saying this about a card game. " OMG, Magic: The Gathering is soo pay to win omg you have to have the right cards to win". What about athletes? All that training is expensive too. This is capitalism, where money gives results... even then though, every single card in the game (except some joke cards) are accessible via earning them in-game. You'll make it somehow, and if suddenly you with your 1 legendary can't compete with championship-level players because of it, it doesn't make the game broken. Most players at the top-tiers are only running a couple legendaries in their decks anyways, and a lot of them (like Bloodmage) have reasonable replacements. I usually sit around rating 5 with my druid control deck, and the only legendary I run in it is Ragnaros.
THAT ALL SAID, I think that in the same manner that constructed allows only 1 of each legendary card, it should allow perhaps 3 legendaries total in each deck? :P
how do you play this deck? i have the feeling that its impossible to win vs any aggro deck, because you are soooooo slow. you do nothing than playing secrets and if you dont draw the guy who gets pumped by secrets, or if he gets removed somehow, you die before you can make a single point of damage to your opponent.
This deck has plenty of removal. It's all about being willing to take some damage and intelligently using your removal. While some forms of aggro are problematic - particularly rogues - I don't have much of a problem against even things like warlock-murloc on the ladder.
Kisstafer - 1st Place:
Forceflex - 2nd Place:
IV - 3rd Place:
Toban - 4th Place:
[MG]spOh - 5th Place:
warelephant - 5th Place:
[MG]LuigEzz - 5th Place:
WhaleCancer - 5th Place:
Congrats to Kisstafer. Boy I hope the kids in General don't come down stairs to see these decks haha.
My run for this FN Swiss:
First game has some sweet mirror entity plays.
Going back to my MTG days, Acolyte of Pain seemed very strong when I first found it, and Wild Pyromancer seemed like the obvious interaction. But I could never get it to work, and abandoned the idea as a gimmick. AND NOW SOMEBODY MADE IT WORK GREAT, albeit with 8 legendaries. Sweet, novel deck, congrats to Kisstafer for ingenuity and recognizing a good idea.
Saddly the age of budget builds being viable is over thus proving all those who screamed pay 2 win right.....
Time to start running 1 legendary deck tournaments:D
I think Thechiv was being sarcastic, no? If you look at the decks, there are some super legendary heavy decks, but there are some that only use a couple of heavily used legendary minions (Sylvanas [who is just good, and thus needed to be nerfed] and The Black Knight [which is so strong in the meta]).
You shouldn't expect a really budget deck to do too well in a tournament, to be honest. That being said, you don't really need to spend mounds of dust.Toban's, Forceflex's, and my own deck are reasonable on dust for tournament decks.
LuigEzz's deck could probably drop one or two legendaries without compromising it too much. The same could be said of Warelephant's deck; Sylvanas is the universal include, Nat Pagle could easily be replaced, and the Tinkermaster is just super popular right now, but I'm not sure how necessary it is to the function of the deck (I'm no shaman expert, It's my absolute least played class) and to me looks like a third hex(?).
good deck!
What I mean is there was a time limited formated deck could actually win a swiss and or open. We saw this up to 3 weeks ago. Saddly though with the rise of the Druid came the need for cards like Tink Master Overspark and The Black Knight just to stay competitive. And of course Ragnaros....The reality is sure you can play a low cost deck and do go with it, but consistency is the issue. Look at the deck list for both our tournaments and go back 3 weeks. Most of those decks have 3 or more legendaries. Hell this week a warrior with 7 of them won...
The reason for this is people have a better collection now then they did say 60 days ago. People have bought more into the game. This is not a bad thing to say the least, Even Murlock decks require 2 epics and 1 legendary to be effective, not to mention the one that almost one the EU Swiss has 3 legendary cards in it.
And for the record the term budget as was coined in the early days of CBT stood for no epic or legendary cards. Not one legendary and 2 epics. Though I think in this meta Budget will come to me 2k or less dust.
This video is of the finals between me and forceflex
http://www.twitch.tv/kisstafer/b/494322475
Ahh, yes, I was thinking of 'budget' - in the context of the tournament scene - as an evolving dust total that will increase as more and more people acquire the 'must-have' legendaries like Sylvanas, Ragnaros, and the Black Knight. If these cards don't get nerfed (or the meta doesn't shift to discourage them), then we will see these pop up in most viable tournament decks artificially inflating what we might call a 'budget' tournament deck. The current druid meta really inflates how many legendaries you face, and it should be noted that there are plenty of druids (and others) running many legendaries who didn't even make it into top 8 this tournament or last.
To make an analogy to my old MTG days, you could build a surprisingly effective deck with 5 cent commons and 40 cent to a dollar uncommons for playing with your buddies. In the tournament scene (I played extended), you could still have a budget deck compared to players who are dropping $100s on cards, but your deck will end up costing like $40 - $50 (I played Stasis and Limited Resource lockdown decks in Extended in my day, and those decks cost me about that much each, although there was much overlap; I could consistently make top 8 in the most competitive FNM in my metropolitan region).
New players should not expect to be able to create tournament viable decks without dropping a fair bit of dust, but that amount of dust is often overstated by people whining about being smacked around by legendary heavy druids (I know Kisstafer is a warrior, but his deck isn't a common one ATM). Eventually, the druid heavy legendary deck will lose its dominance in the meta and I think that will be for the best, as the legendary counts in those decks are intimidating to new players (although, have hope! I beat 4 druids in the round robin part of this tournament with my no-legendary deck!).
Awesome. Would love to see more people doing this.
2nd and 4th have a total of three between them. Not exactly pay-to-win.
lol @ people saying this about a card game. " OMG, Magic: The Gathering is soo pay to win omg you have to have the right cards to win". What about athletes? All that training is expensive too. This is capitalism, where money gives results... even then though, every single card in the game (except some joke cards) are accessible via earning them in-game. You'll make it somehow, and if suddenly you with your 1 legendary can't compete with championship-level players because of it, it doesn't make the game broken. Most players at the top-tiers are only running a couple legendaries in their decks anyways, and a lot of them (like Bloodmage) have reasonable replacements. I usually sit around rating 5 with my druid control deck, and the only legendary I run in it is Ragnaros.
THAT ALL SAID, I think that in the same manner that constructed allows only 1 of each legendary card, it should allow perhaps 3 legendaries total in each deck? :P
Physika #1165
This deck has plenty of removal. It's all about being willing to take some damage and intelligently using your removal. While some forms of aggro are problematic - particularly rogues - I don't have much of a problem against even things like warlock-murloc on the ladder.
Here's a Bo3 from a recent tournament vs. an aggro warlock: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvsGkaQlx-8.
I don't think you understand how to play it then, to be honest.
Edit: There is also a thread in the mage subforum about this deck. http://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/class-discussion/mage/4467-making-secret-centric-deck-work-ethereal-secrets