• 1

    posted a message on If legend is a no skill grind, then what is the rest of Hearthstone?

    Seeing as legend is the apex of Hearthstone, if we follow the logic of the people who make this claim, we can make certain inferences about the rest of the ladder. If legend is a no skill grind, then what is the rest of the hearthstone? Absolute trash?

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Standard didn't really change the meta

    If we compare pre-standard decks (wild) and post-standard (standard mode), they are actually pretty similar. Standard mode hasn't really changed much. It was the nerfs to keeper, BGH, lore and molten that caused fluctuations in the meta. Without these nerfs, druid would be tier 1, renolock tier 2 and the meta would look almost identical (mainly minor shifts in power rankings).

    Note pirate/tempo warrior is also played as a tier 2 deck in wild now.

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Skills, Legend and Blizzard
    Quote from silvsilvsilv >>
    Quote from vikan >>
    Quote from silvsilvsilv >>
    Quote from vikan >>
    Quote from silvsilvsilv >>
    Quote from nagashbg >>

    everyone knows that skill doesn't play a major role in HS, the best players have like what, 60% winrate in tournaments? The best player in a skill game could reach 100%, but that will never be the case in HS. The game winrate is then decided by a deck/RNG 80% of times, and 20% of times by players' skills

     How come the top ranked chess player in the world only has a win rating of just over 60%? 
     Thats interesting. Sauce? Oo
     Look up "Magnus Carlsen FIDE rating"
     Alright the comparrisson is very strange anyway. Sure its reasonable that both chess masters and HS pros have 60% win rate in tournaments but then HS pros should have 99% win rate on ladders when not facing pro players.. which they dont all the time. Why? If Magnus Carlsen played alot of matches against "normal" chess players that were not pros, I am sure he would have close to 100% win rate. How high win rate does HS pros have on ladder? 70% at best?
     The point of the ladder system is that you continually face people about the same skill level as you. That's why most legend players breeze through ranks 18-5 at the start of the season. If your winrate is high, it simply means you are not at your skill level yet, which is why you will advance through the ranks quickly.
    The best player in the world is actually Gary (he's retired now). Did you know Gary held the #1 title in chess for 18.75 years? Has there been a single Hearthstone player that has held such a title for nearly as along? Chess and Hearthstone are slightly similar conceptually but they are not the same. One takes much more skill and intelligence than the other. The top chess players are literally prodigies who entered in the chess scene at the age of 13. Strategies in chess have been in continuous development for over 2000 years. Hearthstone gets outdated in 2 months and requires quarterly expansions.
    Some other facts:
    Gary has a 70.1% winrate.
    Fischer has a 72.2% winrate.
    Both of these are higher than any competitive Hearthstone player.
    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on [29.05.2016] Meta Snapshot by TempoStorm

    Miracle is out because the tier 1 decks beat it.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 3

    posted a message on Group therapy! Need to blow off steam? Mega salty? Here is the place!

    Lol legend players get tilted so easily. I won 5 times by bming when I didn't even have lethal.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Group therapy! Need to blow off steam? Mega salty? Here is the place!

    Why can't I be bad like all the players here and not hit top 100 legend :(. I wish I could cry and blame everything but my lack of skill :(((

    And no, I did not spend 20 hours every day grinding for it. It took me around 10 hours of gameplay over 2 days using my own handcrafted deck.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Why do people play Aggro? What is in it for them?

    Hi, top 100 legend player here. I'll give you my input on what I think the skill requirement of some of the currently popular decks.

    1. Zoo; Skill rating:100/100

    Zoo is currently the most difficult deck to play right now. It required you to make an enormous amount of decisions each turn. I rope almost all my turns playing zoo. I rope on turn 1 debating on whether to play possessed villager or voidwalker.

    a. You have so many similarly good plays almost every turn and you have to decide which is the best. For example, you have 3 mana and you will have to choose whether to play your councilman, impgang boss, play 2 and a 1 and so on.

    b. You have to think many turns ahead. Zoo is heavily a minion based deck. This means you won't have spells to bail you out if you fuck up. You also have the option to tap. As a zoo, you draw more cards then most decks. This means you have to think about what you can draw more often. You also have to think into the future about unit placement. One poorly placed unit can cause you to lose lethal or form a weaker board. You play minions every turn so you are required to think ahead about every minion you play.

    c. You have to understand when to tap and if you should tap. Zoo has the option of tapping every turn, which is another thing to think about. Tapping requires you to think about the board state, the future, risk, reward and the matchup.

    d. Thinking about when to discard i.e play doomguard or soulfire is important. These fast cards can be used to gain lethal or as a quick solution. You have to think about what you are discarding and whether it is worth it to play these cards over the other options. The discard mechanic also forces you to think about how to avoid getting a double doomguard or discarding cards in general.

    e. You have to think more about removal, such as board clears. Zoo as a minion deck is much more susceptible to aoe. One aoe can ruin your board. It's a risk and reward thing. It also involves thinking about whether your opponent would have used "X" card if he had it.

    f. The mulligan is very different for each matchup and there are an abundance of cards you have to think about when mulliganing since you have more early game cards.

    In general, the deck that more has more to think about , which to me is a deck that has more options and the need to think into the future, is the harder deck. Heavy late game control decks in particular hard aren't to play. The mulligan and game plan is very clear cut. There are maybe 1 or 2  options or nothing to think about each turn.

    2. Freeze mage- 75

    3. Patron 75

    4. Miracle rogue 70

    5. Tempo warrior 66

    6.Tempo mage 55

    7. Nzoth paladin 50

    8. Control warrior 50

    9. Aggro shaman/midrange shaman  45

    This deck requires skill to learn but once you do, it's mostly luck.

    10. Fandrel druid 43

    11. Cthune druid and ramp 35

    12. Pirate warrior 35

    100=challenging

    70-80=hard

    60-70= moderately difficult
    50-60=requires 30 seconds of critical thinking per turn

    30-40=Requires 20 seconds of critical thinking per turn

    0-30 brain dead

    So, no decks are brain dead really.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Your top 3 card backs?

    People actually care about card backs?

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Rank 20 wild is true rank 20?

    Contrary to popular belief, wild is actually more noob-friendly than standard. If you play in the lower ranks that is around rank 20, you will find most decks are hand-crafted decks of which half are budget decks. You'll see decks that run amani berserker and chillwind yeti. Hand-crafted decks, in general are horrible, especially when made by rank 20s. My experience so far has been free from net decks including mysterious challenger. If you think about it, all the net decks are being built for standard including the popular meta snapshots. This encourages players to build their own deck and test them in their own environment.

    TLDR: Players who complain about net decks in rank 20. Play Wild.

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Aggro shaman is just a worse zoo?

    Zoo pretty much beats every matchup aggro shaman does and more frequently.

    Zoo doesn't struggle as much against  nzoth paladin and patron like aggro shaman does.

    Aggro shaman is dependant on doomhammer and gets hard countered by harrison/ooze. Zoo doesn't.

    Finally, zoo beats aggro shaman.

    So, aggro shaman players, why aren't you playing zoo?

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.