i think we pretty much all hate face hunter, its a deck with little to no skill in my opinion, but lets be honest, been aggro its the only way hunter can be viable, if blizzard takes away that part of the class it kills hunter and that its not healthy for the game, what im looking with this is to we as a community brainstorm ideas and help the class be viable in other ways.
Honestly the only way to make a Control Hunter prevalent is for Blizzard to buff/re-work the terrible assortment of Control-orientated cards that Hunters have and never use. As it stands; They're all really expensive and don't have enough impact on the board for what they cost e.g. Explosive Shot, Multi-Shot, Cobra Shot etc.
People will argue with you and say that a Control-style Hunter exists in the form of Midrange Hunter but frankly; Midrange Hunter is just Aggro Hunter with bigger minions and a very minimal amount of trading as opposed to Aggro hunter where there's no interaction with the board whatsoever.
Another reason why Aggro Hunter is the dominant archetype of Hunter (other than the fact that it's brain-dead easy to play) is that Hunter lacks a strong draw engine for a Control deck to be possible.
So my proposal is that Blizzard changes Starving Buzzard to work exactly like Cult Master but instead of a 4 mana 4/2, it should be a 3 mana 3/1. Cult Master is already a unique card in terms of what it does and having one more card just like it but in the form of a slightly stronger class card would be really nice. Not only does this change fit the flavor of Starving Buzzard (since Buzzards eat dead animals) but by making it like Cult Master, it promotes trading and interaction with the board in order to reap the effect of the card. Also, I don't think a 3 mana 3/1 that does the exact same thing as Cult Master but with Beasts is too out of line in terms of being over-powered.
Hah, Hunter was a fine control class until Blizzard neutered their card draw options. Cultmaster is a slight bit too cute for reliable card draw and Buzzard can't even be discussed. I would also argue that some of the defensive cards are just awful, looking at you Splitshot and King Of Beast. Hunter could also use a beast/healing card but that's just icing really, the source of the problem is card draw.
Aggro decks are an important part of any card game. We have 9 classes; There is absolutely nothing wrong with one of them being mostly aggro. If anything, trying to turn the only predominantly aggro class into exclusively non-aggro could be considered unhealthy.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't like a control deck for hunter; In fact, I'd love that because then I'd actually play hunter since aggro decks just don't suit me. I just don't think there is anything wrong with aggro hunters being more common than control hunters.
hunter is the class to have the most aggro hero power. the idea of hunter is to set traps and stuff to kill you slowly like he is actually hunting you. i would like to see some control support for hunter, but i dont believe he needs to change as a class. we have priest to be the heavy control and we have hunter to be the heavy aggro. thats called balance. there are some unbalanced cards in both control and aggro though, but i understand that blizzards policy is to change-nerf a card only when it becomes a major problem for the game.
the thing about control hunters is that it just doesnt work, why play a control hunter deck when you can play an aggro deck and do a 100 times better, i think playing aggro hunter should be an option not a requirement.
Just compare hunter with any other class and their decks,.
mage has mechs, secrets, aggro, control, fatigue, freeze, giants.
the thing about control hunters is that it just doesnt work, why play a control hunter deck when you can play an aggro deck and do a 100 times better, i think playing aggro hunter should be an option not a requirement.
Just compare hunter with any other class and their decks,.
mage has mechs, secrets, aggro, control, fatigue, freeze, giants.
priest: deathrattle, aggro(just kidding) (i need help in this one :/)
hunter: just different versions of aggro
That's just nonsense. If you consider otk warrior, mill decks, secrets mage and murloc sham viable, then Control Hunter is viable, too. You might as well include Beast Hunter while we're at it. You also forgot several actually quite strong decks, like Combo druid.
So my proposal is that Blizzard changes Starving Buzzard to work exactly like Cult Master but instead of a 4 mana 4/2, it should be a 3 mana 3/1. Cult Master is already a unique card in terms of what it does and having one more card just like it but in the form of a slightly stronger class card would be really nice. Not only does this change fit the flavor of Starving Buzzard (since Buzzards eat dead animals) but by making it like Cult Master, it promotes trading and interaction with the board in order to reap the effect of the card. Also, I don't think a 3 mana 3/1 that does the exact same thing as Cult Master but with Beasts is too out of line in terms of being over-powered.
I think hunter definitely needs better draw options for a control style to be viable, but I don't know if that's the way to go. What if Starving Buzzard drew a card for each other beast (or each other friendly beast) already in play? Essentially gives it the same synergy with UTH, but also makes it a decent play on any board with 2+ beasts left over from the previous turn.
the thing about control hunters is that it just doesnt work, why play a control hunter deck when you can play an aggro deck and do a 100 times better, i think playing aggro hunter should be an option not a requirement.
Just compare hunter with any other class and their decks,.
mage has mechs, secrets, aggro, control, fatigue, freeze, giants.
priest: deathrattle, aggro(just kidding) (i need help in this one :/)
hunter: just different versions of aggro
That's just nonsense. If you consider otk warrior, mill decks, secrets mage and murloc sham viable, then Control Hunter is viable, too. You might as well include Beast Hunter while we're at it. You also forgot several actually quite strong decks, like Combo druid.
Are we so salty we need a control hunter? Seriously? Let's add more control decks to hearthstone. So much fun playing a boring ass 20 minute match where you don't get to do anything fun. As it stands there is far to much "control" now. Remove BGH, fix mad scientist, how about fix half the crap "legendary" cards out there right now. Why is it so damn hard to let one class specialize in aggro? Why should people feel bad about playing something fun to them? If you seriously are still beating the dead horse of "face hunter is all over ranked" you should try moving up ranks. I can assure you face hunter gets rolled once you're not a shitlord at rank 20. I use it to get to rank 15 because of the lols. Then swap to mid hunter or druid once I have to play decent to mediocre players.
Adding a control hunter is dumb. The idea is dumb, the execution will assuredly be even worse than dumb. Luckily Blizzard doesn't listen to the crying about hunter because they have actual stats and realize most people complaining are scrubs who think they everyone should play how they deem "appropriate". I play the game to win and have fun. You should try doing the same and stop worrying about what other people play other than building your deck to handle them. If you can't handle a face hunter it's on you for being bad. Not the guy who tossed it together and has you dumbfounded enough to come piss and moan on a forum about how "op" it is. Call it cancer, call the players huntards all you want. Fact is you are bad at the game if you are still unable to handle hunter decks. And luckily no amount of qq is going to get blizzard to save you from your lack of skill.
Well, I red a post about this today, and there I saw some requirements that would be really good for a control hunter:
1-Cheap spell/weapon that deals 3 damage (you know: things like Mechwarper will otherwise be too sticky if you're not a pally). Could be done reworking Arcane Shot as "Deal 3 damage to a minion" or adding another card to cover that gap. Snip tries to solve that, but as it does'nt trigger in your turn, can backfire or really just hit something useless like a Leper Gnome, Thalnos or a Cogmaster.
2-Reliable card draw/more useful beasts for control Hunter. Flare is too situational being 2 mana, Tracking is clearly non-control and Call Beast will only be reliable enough when there's enough good beasts for control hunter. There could be something like 2 mana "Deal 2 damage to a minion. If it dies, draw a card" or something.
3-Reliable AoE (Explosive Shot is good, but all others are RNG dependant or trigger in the opponents turn). The one who lacks more of the viable control decks is control warrior, but they have 2-4 whirlwinds (deaths bite), brawl (does not matter if it has RNG, still really efficient). Doggies and Juggler/Kill Comand can try to solve this, but both of them need two cards to (maybe) work. maybe a beast can somehow solve that (like a mini-Geddon)?
I honestly think the entirety of the Hunter class needs to be re-worked from the ground up. We have several different deck variations from each class. Druid has Ramp and Token decks. Mage have Freeze, control, and mech. Warriors have control and enrage decks. Priest have midrange and control. Hunters have face hunter....and that's about it. Aside from the Fein Death Hunter that wont get you past rank 18. The major gimmick of the Hunter class is using Beast synergy cards, but outside of Animal Companion, Webspinner, and Savannah Highmane, what other Beast cards are popular in current decks? Strang Tiger and Jungle Panther maybe? The hero ability needs to be more conditional I feel. 2 Mana: Deal 1 damage to a player. Deal 2 if you control a Beast. Kill Command should only be able to target minions. Change the damage to be 4 or 6 if you control a beast. Just my opinion. :p
Mid Range Hunter ??? Hello? Why are we talking as if Mid Range Hunter doesn't exist, it's arguably stronger than Face Hunter anyway and can not be so easily countered. Mid Range Hunter is about board control and typically does not go for face when there's a board present. Most of the top Hunter decks over the last 2 months have been mid-range. So there you go.
I think the question really being asked here is, why is face Hunter so damn strong and to that I can not answer. The truth is, it shouldn't be. You should not be able to consistently win matches against good players by doing nothing but rushing the face. IMO Blizzard is at fault for making such an un-fun deck so powerful and then buffed it even more with Quick Shot. I really don't understand Blizzard logic when it comes to Hunter.
i think we pretty much all hate face hunter, its a deck with little to no skill in my opinion, but lets be honest, been aggro its the only way hunter can be viable, if blizzard takes away that part of the class it kills hunter and that its not healthy for the game, what im looking with this is to we as a community brainstorm ideas and help the class be viable in other ways.
Hunter is the arguably the only viable aggro class right now, and nerfing would make the meta unbalanced. Blizzard released some strong control cards in BRM and so gave hunter some options also to keep it viable. Can we please stop with the nerf hunter threads, you dont know what you are asking for. As soon as they nerf Hunter these same people will start complaining about how control decks are "un-fun", they are pay 2 win and just spam legendaries. Blizzard knows what they are doing with card balancing and they've been doing a surprisingly good job.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
i think we pretty much all hate face hunter, its a deck with little to no skill in my opinion, but lets be honest, been aggro its the only way hunter can be viable, if blizzard takes away that part of the class it kills hunter and that its not healthy for the game, what im looking with this is to we as a community brainstorm ideas and help the class be viable in other ways.
Let me start.
Steady shot: Deal 1 damage to an enemy.
Steamwheedle Sniper: Increases the damage of your hero power by one.
What's the difference of Steady Shot to Mage's Fireblast again? :X
Explosive Trap shouldn't hit face. That should be almost enough. Otherwise you could make the same adjustment to Kill Command.
I obviously mean his version of Steady Shot, but it seems you didn't read the OP.
* Remove the class from the game* Whispered the inner voice of every salty player. * you know it to be true, it's the only way to salvation*
=P
Honestly the only way to make a Control Hunter prevalent is for Blizzard to buff/re-work the terrible assortment of Control-orientated cards that Hunters have and never use. As it stands; They're all really expensive and don't have enough impact on the board for what they cost e.g. Explosive Shot, Multi-Shot, Cobra Shot etc.
People will argue with you and say that a Control-style Hunter exists in the form of Midrange Hunter but frankly; Midrange Hunter is just Aggro Hunter with bigger minions and a very minimal amount of trading as opposed to Aggro hunter where there's no interaction with the board whatsoever.
Another reason why Aggro Hunter is the dominant archetype of Hunter (other than the fact that it's brain-dead easy to play) is that Hunter lacks a strong draw engine for a Control deck to be possible.
So my proposal is that Blizzard changes Starving Buzzard to work exactly like Cult Master but instead of a 4 mana 4/2, it should be a 3 mana 3/1. Cult Master is already a unique card in terms of what it does and having one more card just like it but in the form of a slightly stronger class card would be really nice. Not only does this change fit the flavor of Starving Buzzard (since Buzzards eat dead animals) but by making it like Cult Master, it promotes trading and interaction with the board in order to reap the effect of the card. Also, I don't think a 3 mana 3/1 that does the exact same thing as Cult Master but with Beasts is too out of line in terms of being over-powered.
fix their already existing awful control cards
give them some sort of spell power weapon or minions
fix steamwheel sniper so it's actually useful
make king krush like grommash, where you can alex + massive finisher
Hah, Hunter was a fine control class until Blizzard neutered their card draw options. Cultmaster is a slight bit too cute for reliable card draw and Buzzard can't even be discussed. I would also argue that some of the defensive cards are just awful, looking at you Splitshot and King Of Beast. Hunter could also use a beast/healing card but that's just icing really, the source of the problem is card draw.
Aggro decks are an important part of any card game. We have 9 classes; There is absolutely nothing wrong with one of them being mostly aggro. If anything, trying to turn the only predominantly aggro class into exclusively non-aggro could be considered unhealthy.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't like a control deck for hunter; In fact, I'd love that because then I'd actually play hunter since aggro decks just don't suit me. I just don't think there is anything wrong with aggro hunters being more common than control hunters.
hunter is the class to have the most aggro hero power. the idea of hunter is to set traps and stuff to kill you slowly like he is actually hunting you. i would like to see some control support for hunter, but i dont believe he needs to change as a class. we have priest to be the heavy control and we have hunter to be the heavy aggro. thats called balance. there are some unbalanced cards in both control and aggro though, but i understand that blizzards policy is to change-nerf a card only when it becomes a major problem for the game.
the thing about control hunters is that it just doesnt work, why play a control hunter deck when you can play an aggro deck and do a 100 times better, i think playing aggro hunter should be an option not a requirement.
Just compare hunter with any other class and their decks,.
mage has mechs, secrets, aggro, control, fatigue, freeze, giants.
warlock has zoo, handlock and now demonlock.
rogue had miracle and mill, now they have oil,
paladin: shockadin, control/heal
warrior: control, otk(wargen + charge + inner rage)
druid: token, ramp, mill.
shaman: mechs, control, murloc(maybe??)
priest: deathrattle, aggro(just kidding) (i need help in this one :/)
hunter: just different versions of aggro
That's just nonsense. If you consider otk warrior, mill decks, secrets mage and murloc sham viable, then Control Hunter is viable, too. You might as well include Beast Hunter while we're at it. You also forgot several actually quite strong decks, like Combo druid.
Let's just look at TempoStorm's latest Meta Report Tier 1 - 3 decks for a relatively unbiased opinion on which decks are currently decent(https://tempostorm.com/articles/the-meta-snapshot-9-tempo-storms-gvg-ladder-tier-list-the-beginning-of-gvgs-end):
Mage: Mech & Freeze
Warlock: Handlock & Demon
Rogue: Oil
Paladin: Midrange & Control (though they're both quite similar imo)
Warrior: Control
Druid: Combo, Ramp & Mech (though I consider Mech quite gimmicky)
Shaman: Midrange & Mech
Priest: Control
Hunter: Midrange & Aggro (though again they're both quite similar)
To me, that doesn't look like Hunter has much less variety than most other classes. The majority of classes has either only 1 or 2 truly strong decks.
I think hunter definitely needs better draw options for a control style to be viable, but I don't know if that's the way to go. What if Starving Buzzard drew a card for each other beast (or each other friendly beast) already in play? Essentially gives it the same synergy with UTH, but also makes it a decent play on any board with 2+ beasts left over from the previous turn.
you are right but my intention was to mention the variety of decks and playstyles that those decks have.
Are we so salty we need a control hunter? Seriously? Let's add more control decks to hearthstone. So much fun playing a boring ass 20 minute match where you don't get to do anything fun. As it stands there is far to much "control" now. Remove BGH, fix mad scientist, how about fix half the crap "legendary" cards out there right now. Why is it so damn hard to let one class specialize in aggro? Why should people feel bad about playing something fun to them? If you seriously are still beating the dead horse of "face hunter is all over ranked" you should try moving up ranks. I can assure you face hunter gets rolled once you're not a shitlord at rank 20. I use it to get to rank 15 because of the lols. Then swap to mid hunter or druid once I have to play decent to mediocre players.
Adding a control hunter is dumb. The idea is dumb, the execution will assuredly be even worse than dumb. Luckily Blizzard doesn't listen to the crying about hunter because they have actual stats and realize most people complaining are scrubs who think they everyone should play how they deem "appropriate". I play the game to win and have fun. You should try doing the same and stop worrying about what other people play other than building your deck to handle them. If you can't handle a face hunter it's on you for being bad. Not the guy who tossed it together and has you dumbfounded enough to come piss and moan on a forum about how "op" it is. Call it cancer, call the players huntards all you want. Fact is you are bad at the game if you are still unable to handle hunter decks. And luckily no amount of qq is going to get blizzard to save you from your lack of skill.
Well, I red a post about this today, and there I saw some requirements that would be really good for a control hunter:
1-Cheap spell/weapon that deals 3 damage (you know: things like Mechwarper will otherwise be too sticky if you're not a pally). Could be done reworking Arcane Shot as "Deal 3 damage to a minion" or adding another card to cover that gap. Snip tries to solve that, but as it does'nt trigger in your turn, can backfire or really just hit something useless like a Leper Gnome, Thalnos or a Cogmaster.
2-Reliable card draw/more useful beasts for control Hunter. Flare is too situational being 2 mana, Tracking is clearly non-control and Call Beast will only be reliable enough when there's enough good beasts for control hunter. There could be something like 2 mana "Deal 2 damage to a minion. If it dies, draw a card" or something.
3-Reliable AoE (Explosive Shot is good, but all others are RNG dependant or trigger in the opponents turn). The one who lacks more of the viable control decks is control warrior, but they have 2-4 whirlwinds (deaths bite), brawl (does not matter if it has RNG, still really efficient). Doggies and Juggler/Kill Comand can try to solve this, but both of them need two cards to (maybe) work. maybe a beast can somehow solve that (like a mini-Geddon)?
Click to see my Hearthstone projects:
Why exactly the Dummys and Footmen, may I ask? Would not be better another explosive and Companion or something that way?
Click to see my Hearthstone projects:
I honestly think the entirety of the Hunter class needs to be re-worked from the ground up. We have several different deck variations from each class. Druid has Ramp and Token decks. Mage have Freeze, control, and mech. Warriors have control and enrage decks. Priest have midrange and control. Hunters have face hunter....and that's about it. Aside from the Fein Death Hunter that wont get you past rank 18. The major gimmick of the Hunter class is using Beast synergy cards, but outside of Animal Companion, Webspinner, and Savannah Highmane, what other Beast cards are popular in current decks? Strang Tiger and Jungle Panther maybe? The hero ability needs to be more conditional I feel. 2 Mana: Deal 1 damage to a player. Deal 2 if you control a Beast. Kill Command should only be able to target minions. Change the damage to be 4 or 6 if you control a beast. Just my opinion. :p
Mid Range Hunter ??? Hello? Why are we talking as if Mid Range Hunter doesn't exist, it's arguably stronger than Face Hunter anyway and can not be so easily countered. Mid Range Hunter is about board control and typically does not go for face when there's a board present. Most of the top Hunter decks over the last 2 months have been mid-range. So there you go.
I think the question really being asked here is, why is face Hunter so damn strong and to that I can not answer. The truth is, it shouldn't be. You should not be able to consistently win matches against good players by doing nothing but rushing the face. IMO Blizzard is at fault for making such an un-fun deck so powerful and then buffed it even more with Quick Shot. I really don't understand Blizzard logic when it comes to Hunter.
How about:
"Un"steady Shot: Deal 1-2 damage to a random enemy.
Steamwheedle Sniper: Your hero power deals 1 extra damage. You control the target of your hero power.
Hunter is the arguably the only viable aggro class right now, and nerfing would make the meta unbalanced. Blizzard released some strong control cards in BRM and so gave hunter some options also to keep it viable. Can we please stop with the nerf hunter threads, you dont know what you are asking for. As soon as they nerf Hunter these same people will start complaining about how control decks are "un-fun", they are pay 2 win and just spam legendaries. Blizzard knows what they are doing with card balancing and they've been doing a surprisingly good job.