Face Hunter is a symptom of a the problem that when a control deck gets behind, there are very few ways for it to truly come back and take over the game. When I play any sort of aggro or tempo deck I love when my opponents play Rag, Sneed and Ysera - I can just ignore them and end the game before they have enough time to make an impact. The only class with real "comeback" ability IMO is Druid no other class can consistently get immediate impact from their late game cards.
MTG has the opposite problem - you get into the late game and control decks play insane proactive cards like Cruel Ultimatum (if you don't play magic just look it up, you can figure out how insane it is) or just counter everything and turn off your deck. This is the main reason MTG players usually see aggro as the "good guys."
If Blizz can give all classes control cards that can just take over against any deck and more cheap anti-aggro like Zombie Chow, Face Hunter would be no more than a gimmick and almost all Hunter players would have to use their more powerful cards like Highmane. However be careful what you wish for - if the balance tilts in the other direction it will be even more rage inducing.
Wow, Cruel Ultimatum is insane. To be fair, though, a similar card in Hearthstone would be extremely impactful in a control vs. control matchup and against face hunter would just be like a slightly better Holy Fire.
But in general, you're absolutely right. Also, face hunter isn't the autopilot autowin deck people seem to think it is. It's pretty simple compared to the elaborate combo/control decks, but compared to other aggro and even midrange decks it actually requires a fair amount of skill. Mech mage/mech shaman is probably the face-rollingest thing we've seen so far in Hearthstone.
Control Hunter could work, but I doubt it'll catch on anytime soon. Just as in Gauntlet, the elf (Hunter) is fast and sometimes annoying, but as the game goes on you'll probably wish you had the spell power of a Wizard (Mage) or the strength and endurance of a Warrior. The Hero powers and class styles are about as balanced as it gets. You can reach Legend on ladder or go 12-0 in Arena with any class. Luck helps but I'd take skill any day.
The problem of this game is that blizzard encourage players for more board interactions while still overall health of heroes is 30 and it's simply not worth the effort. Changing all heroes health to 40 would have changed situation dramaticaly.
Oh im meant to change my deck as soon as I run into a Hunter? That's why im losing thanks man!!!!
No, you're not "meant" to do anything. There is just quite a big number of decks that are at least 50/50 against hunter and also some (Ctrl Warrior) where it's basically an auto-loss for hunter. It's your problem if you choose not to play them.
Oh im meant to change my deck as soon as I run into a Hunter? That's why im losing thanks man!!!!
No, you're not "meant" to do anything. There is just quite a big number of decks that are at least 50/50 against hunter and also some (Ctrl Warrior) where it's basically an auto-loss for hunter. It's your problem if you choose not to play them.
GvG was meant to give the hunter a couple of new tools for control to be viable. But instead of making at least one new card really good to push the archetype forward, Blizzard kind of stopped mid way. Steamwheedle Sniper is very slow and doesn't do much when played on curve. King of Beasts is flat out bad. Feign Death is a fun and gimmicky card that gets the "Baron Rivendare's special award for usefulness". Cobra Shot... well, I don't even know what this card does. Even having a late game powerhouse in the form of Ghaz'Rilla Hunter can't really pull this off with the minimal amount of good control cards he has.
The solution? Good control cards. That's all there is. Buff King of Beasts by 1 health, it's a class card, so what that it's better than Fen Creeper. Make Buzzard into a working card engine instead of an obsolete bullshit. Stuff like that.
Oh im meant to change my deck as soon as I run into a Hunter? That's why im losing thanks man!!!!
As soon as you run into a hunter? No, of course not. After you've lost five in a row to hunters? Yes.
And you lost nine in a row, so, yeah. Good job.
OMG this is sad I was only stating the fact I ran into 9 in a row I couldn't care less for losing ranks that's part of the game. Sorry almighty uber Hearthstone legend God of the universe
Hunter is quite like Warlock. They don't really fit into the definitions of most archetypes because of how exotic they are, and so they have rough equivalents of classic archetypes which play very differently.
Instead of aggro, Warlocks have Zoo, which uses an aggro-style deck to play a control game. Hunters have face hunter, which is a ridiculously fast variant of classic aggro.
Instead of midrange, Warlocks have Demonlock, which plays a tempo game until it gets the big beefcakes out and you get rekt. Hunters have Beast Hunter, which consistently buffs its minions, creating big threats which eventually overwhelm the opponent. Granted, Beast Hunter doesn't quite have the tools it needs, and so is scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point.
Instead of control, Warlocks have Handlock, which doesn't really need explaining, whereas Hunters have a Combo build which plays like control, but keeps mild pressure on the opponent's health with their hero power. Combo Hunter is pretty rare, but is remarkable in that it plays control, and at the drop of a hat extends its reach and kills you in 2 turns.
Hunter is already a non-aggro class. The real problem with Hunter is that its other archetypes are obscure and rarely used, so people just aren't familiar with the options the class has.
Hunter is quite like Warlock. They don't really fit into the definitions of most archetypes because of how exotic they are, and so they have rough equivalents of classic archetypes which play very differently.
Instead of aggro, Warlocks have Zoo, which uses an aggro-style deck to play a control game. Hunters have face hunter, which is a ridiculously fast variant of classic aggro.
Instead of midrange, Warlocks have Demonlock, which plays a tempo game until it gets the big beefcakes out and you get rekt. Hunters have Beast Hunter, which consistently buffs its minions, creating big threats which eventually overwhelm the opponent. Granted, Beast Hunter doesn't quite have the tools it needs, and so is scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point.
Instead of control, Warlocks have Handlock, which doesn't really need explaining, whereas Hunters have a Combo build which plays like control, but keeps mild pressure on the opponent's health with their hero power. Combo Hunter is pretty rare, but is remarkable in that it plays control, and at the drop of a hat extends its reach and kills you in 2 turns.
Hunter is already a non-aggro class. The real problem with Hunter is that its other archetypes are obscure and rarely used, so people just aren't familiar with the options the class has.
Face decks are still aggro. How can you type SO MUCH, but say nothing. It really baffles me.
Here we go yet again. Control Hunter could work if it had more reliable card draw. But Hunter is fast by nature. If you're tired of running into a dozen Face Hunters in a row like I do some days just build a deck specifically against it. Double Healbots, Deathlords, X-21s, plus all Paladin has to offer. Problem solved. Also works against Oil Rogue. There will always be Face Hunter. It's cheap, easy to play, and it wins. Don't hate what's popular. Build something better.
Hunter is quite like Warlock. They don't really fit into the definitions of most archetypes because of how exotic they are, and so they have rough equivalents of classic archetypes which play very differently.
Instead of aggro, Warlocks have Zoo, which uses an aggro-style deck to play a control game. Hunters have face hunter, which is a ridiculously fast variant of classic aggro.
Instead of midrange, Warlocks have Demonlock, which plays a tempo game until it gets the big beefcakes out and you get rekt. Hunters have Beast Hunter, which consistently buffs its minions, creating big threats which eventually overwhelm the opponent. Granted, Beast Hunter doesn't quite have the tools it needs, and so is scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point.
Instead of control, Warlocks have Handlock, which doesn't really need explaining, whereas Hunters have a Combo build which plays like control, but keeps mild pressure on the opponent's health with their hero power. Combo Hunter is pretty rare, but is remarkable in that it plays control, and at the drop of a hat extends its reach and kills you in 2 turns.
Hunter is already a non-aggro class. The real problem with Hunter is that its other archetypes are obscure and rarely used, so people just aren't familiar with the options the class has.
Face decks are still aggro. How can you type SO MUCH, but say nothing. It really baffles me.
I'm saying so much because there's so much to say about what Hunter can do. If you already knew about the unseen hunter archetypes, then congratulations, I would like to give you an award for being very smart.
Hunter is quite like Warlock. They don't really fit into the definitions of most archetypes because of how exotic they are, and so they have rough equivalents of classic archetypes which play very differently.
Instead of aggro, Warlocks have Zoo, which uses an aggro-style deck to play a control game. Hunters have face hunter, which is a ridiculously fast variant of classic aggro.
Instead of midrange, Warlocks have Demonlock, which plays a tempo game until it gets the big beefcakes out and you get rekt. Hunters have Beast Hunter, which consistently buffs its minions, creating big threats which eventually overwhelm the opponent. Granted, Beast Hunter doesn't quite have the tools it needs, and so is scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point.
Instead of control, Warlocks have Handlock, which doesn't really need explaining, whereas Hunters have a Combo build which plays like control, but keeps mild pressure on the opponent's health with their hero power. Combo Hunter is pretty rare, but is remarkable in that it plays control, and at the drop of a hat extends its reach and kills you in 2 turns.
Hunter is already a non-aggro class. The real problem with Hunter is that its other archetypes are obscure and rarely used, so people just aren't familiar with the options the class has.
Face decks are still aggro. How can you type SO MUCH, but say nothing. It really baffles me.
I'm saying so much because there's so much to say about what Hunter can do. If you already knew about the unseen hunter archetypes, then congratulations, I would like to give you an award for being very smart.
I have seen them and played them, the main problem with ALL of them the inconsistent card drawing. That's an even bigger problem as the hero power has no board effect, so as far as any form of board presence is concerned, you're playing without it. Also, any non-aggro, playable niche is done better by another class. It just doesn't have the tools for anything, but heavy aggression. Even the Hunter's Mark - Wild Pyromancer combo isn't enough to justify a control hunter.
I'm sorry if I sounded harsh earlier, but I've heard this argument too many times.
If you have a viable non aggro hunter deck to show off, I'd like to see it.
Full control hunter is difficult. It's like trying to make a 100% aggro face warrior. That doesn't really work either, as in, control warrior will always be stronger.
Perhaps there's a way, by making beast synergy better, to have a control hunter of sorts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Face Hunter is a symptom of a the problem that when a control deck gets behind, there are very few ways for it to truly come back and take over the game. When I play any sort of aggro or tempo deck I love when my opponents play Rag, Sneed and Ysera - I can just ignore them and end the game before they have enough time to make an impact. The only class with real "comeback" ability IMO is Druid no other class can consistently get immediate impact from their late game cards.
MTG has the opposite problem - you get into the late game and control decks play insane proactive cards like Cruel Ultimatum (if you don't play magic just look it up, you can figure out how insane it is) or just counter everything and turn off your deck. This is the main reason MTG players usually see aggro as the "good guys."
If Blizz can give all classes control cards that can just take over against any deck and more cheap anti-aggro like Zombie Chow, Face Hunter would be no more than a gimmick and almost all Hunter players would have to use their more powerful cards like Highmane. However be careful what you wish for - if the balance tilts in the other direction it will be even more rage inducing.
Wow, Cruel Ultimatum is insane. To be fair, though, a similar card in Hearthstone would be extremely impactful in a control vs. control matchup and against face hunter would just be like a slightly better Holy Fire.
But in general, you're absolutely right. Also, face hunter isn't the autopilot autowin deck people seem to think it is. It's pretty simple compared to the elaborate combo/control decks, but compared to other aggro and even midrange decks it actually requires a fair amount of skill. Mech mage/mech shaman is probably the face-rollingest thing we've seen so far in Hearthstone.
Control Hunter could work, but I doubt it'll catch on anytime soon. Just as in Gauntlet, the elf (Hunter) is fast and sometimes annoying, but as the game goes on you'll probably wish you had the spell power of a Wizard (Mage) or the strength and endurance of a Warrior. The Hero powers and class styles are about as balanced as it gets. You can reach Legend on ladder or go 12-0 in Arena with any class. Luck helps but I'd take skill any day.
https://www.twitch.tv/paulm80/profile
The Political Things, Night School, and f2p with HSThompson M-W-F after 10pm EST
The problem of this game is that blizzard encourage players for more board interactions while still overall health of heroes is 30 and it's simply not worth the effort. Changing all heroes health to 40 would have changed situation dramaticaly.
"The light shall burn you!" - heals face.
Feeling salty I vs 9 face hunters IN A ROW same deck much wow!
I love losing ranks
Good thing you love losing ranks, otherwise it might seem a little crazy to keep playing a deck that can't beat the meta over and over again.
Oh im meant to change my deck as soon as I run into a Hunter? That's why im losing thanks man!!!!
No, you're not "meant" to do anything. There is just quite a big number of decks that are at least 50/50 against hunter and also some (Ctrl Warrior) where it's basically an auto-loss for hunter. It's your problem if you choose not to play them.
Sarcasm*
GvG was meant to give the hunter a couple of new tools for control to be viable. But instead of making at least one new card really good to push the archetype forward, Blizzard kind of stopped mid way. Steamwheedle Sniper is very slow and doesn't do much when played on curve. King of Beasts is flat out bad. Feign Death is a fun and gimmicky card that gets the "Baron Rivendare's special award for usefulness". Cobra Shot... well, I don't even know what this card does. Even having a late game powerhouse in the form of Ghaz'Rilla Hunter can't really pull this off with the minimal amount of good control cards he has.
The solution? Good control cards. That's all there is. Buff King of Beasts by 1 health, it's a class card, so what that it's better than Fen Creeper. Make Buzzard into a working card engine instead of an obsolete bullshit. Stuff like that.
As soon as you run into a hunter? No, of course not. After you've lost five in a row to hunters? Yes.
And you lost nine in a row, so, yeah. Good job.
OMG this is sad I was only stating the fact I ran into 9 in a row I couldn't care less for losing ranks that's part of the game. Sorry almighty uber Hearthstone legend God of the universe
Hunter is quite like Warlock. They don't really fit into the definitions of most archetypes because of how exotic they are, and so they have rough equivalents of classic archetypes which play very differently.
Instead of aggro, Warlocks have Zoo, which uses an aggro-style deck to play a control game. Hunters have face hunter, which is a ridiculously fast variant of classic aggro.
Instead of midrange, Warlocks have Demonlock, which plays a tempo game until it gets the big beefcakes out and you get rekt. Hunters have Beast Hunter, which consistently buffs its minions, creating big threats which eventually overwhelm the opponent. Granted, Beast Hunter doesn't quite have the tools it needs, and so is scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point.
Instead of control, Warlocks have Handlock, which doesn't really need explaining, whereas Hunters have a Combo build which plays like control, but keeps mild pressure on the opponent's health with their hero power. Combo Hunter is pretty rare, but is remarkable in that it plays control, and at the drop of a hat extends its reach and kills you in 2 turns.
Hunter is already a non-aggro class. The real problem with Hunter is that its other archetypes are obscure and rarely used, so people just aren't familiar with the options the class has.
Rawr I'm a dinosaur
You'd have to change it's hero power, simple and as complicated as that.
How can we get people to stop Necro'ing Hunter threads?
Face decks are still aggro. How can you type SO MUCH, but say nothing. It really baffles me.
This is statement is false.
Here we go yet again. Control Hunter could work if it had more reliable card draw. But Hunter is fast by nature. If you're tired of running into a dozen Face Hunters in a row like I do some days just build a deck specifically against it. Double Healbots, Deathlords, X-21s, plus all Paladin has to offer. Problem solved. Also works against Oil Rogue. There will always be Face Hunter. It's cheap, easy to play, and it wins. Don't hate what's popular. Build something better.
https://www.twitch.tv/paulm80/profile
The Political Things, Night School, and f2p with HSThompson M-W-F after 10pm EST
I'm saying so much because there's so much to say about what Hunter can do. If you already knew about the unseen hunter archetypes, then congratulations, I would like to give you an award for being very smart.
Rawr I'm a dinosaur
I have seen them and played them, the main problem with ALL of them the inconsistent card drawing. That's an even bigger problem as the hero power has no board effect, so as far as any form of board presence is concerned, you're playing without it. Also, any non-aggro, playable niche is done better by another class. It just doesn't have the tools for anything, but heavy aggression. Even the Hunter's Mark - Wild Pyromancer combo isn't enough to justify a control hunter.
I'm sorry if I sounded harsh earlier, but I've heard this argument too many times.
If you have a viable non aggro hunter deck to show off, I'd like to see it.
This is statement is false.
Full control hunter is difficult. It's like trying to make a 100% aggro face warrior. That doesn't really work either, as in, control warrior will always be stronger.
Perhaps there's a way, by making beast synergy better, to have a control hunter of sorts.