For Fire Plume's Heart, it says the deck wins 55% of the time, but the deck wins when Fire Plume's is played 53% of the time. This says to me that the Quest Warrior is more likely to win in games where it mulligans the quest.
So I'm trying to decide if the quest is worth crafting. In games where you don't think the game will last long enough to complete the quest, you are more likely to win without having the quest in the deck. And then there simply is a lower winrate against mirrors and control decks. I guess having not played the deck yet (having not crafted the card) I don't understand when or why you would mulligan the quest.
For Fire Plume's Heart, it says the deck wins 55% of the time, but the deck wins when Fire Plume's is played 53% of the time. This says to me that the Quest Warrior is more likely to win in games where it mulligans the quest.
So I'm trying to decide if the quest is worth crafting. In games where you don't think the game will last long enough to complete the quest, you are more likely to win without having the quest in the deck. And then there simply is a lower winrate against mirrors and control decks. I guess having not played the deck yet (having not crafted the card) I don't understand when or why you would mulligan the quest.
The deck is significantly weaker without the quest. The results you are seeing are due to players not understanding the aggro matchup.
Ask yourself: Against which decks is taunt warrior strongest? Against which decks might quest warrior mulligan the quest? And lastly, does that mean that against decks where it doesn't mulligan the quest normally, it would be stronger without it?
What you need to compare isn't whether the quest is played or not, because that data is skewed by the decks where you play it or not, you need to compare decks that are entirely without it vs decks that have it. And I'm willing to bet that it's significantly better with the quest.
For Fire Plume's Heart, it says the deck wins 55% of the time, but the deck wins when Fire Plume's is played 53% of the time. This says to me that the Quest Warrior is more likely to win in games where it mulligans the quest.
So I'm trying to decide if the quest is worth crafting. In games where you don't think the game will last long enough to complete the quest, you are more likely to win without having the quest in the deck. And then there simply is a lower winrate against mirrors and control decks. I guess having not played the deck yet (having not crafted the card) I don't understand when or why you would mulligan the quest.
The deck is significantly weaker without the quest. The results you are seeing are due to players not understanding the aggro matchup.
Why do you think so? I'd say it's better to mulligan the quest against aggro. If you get that far you have won anyway, and random 8 dmg doesn't save your face anyway. A bunch of taunts + the normal hero power do, however.
Ask yourself: Against which decks is taunt warrior strongest? Against which decks might quest warrior mulligan the quest? And lastly, does that mean that against decks where it doesn't mulligan the quest normally, it would be stronger without it?
What you need to compare isn't whether the quest is played or not, because that data is skewed by the decks where you play it or not, you need to compare decks that are entirely without it vs decks that have it. And I'm willing to bet that it's significantly better with the quest.
For Fire Plume's Heart, it says the deck wins 55% of the time, but the deck wins when Fire Plume's is played 53% of the time. This says to me that the Quest Warrior is more likely to win in games where it mulligans the quest.
So I'm trying to decide if the quest is worth crafting. In games where you don't think the game will last long enough to complete the quest, you are more likely to win without having the quest in the deck. And then there simply is a lower winrate against mirrors and control decks. I guess having not played the deck yet (having not crafted the card) I don't understand when or why you would mulligan the quest.
The deck is significantly weaker without the quest. The results you are seeing are due to players not understanding the aggro matchup.
Why do you think so? I'd say it's better to mulligan the quest against aggro. If you get that far you have won anyway, and random 8 dmg doesn't save your face anyway. A bunch of taunts + the normal hero power do, however.
You didn't understand my comment. The DECK (meaning the build of the deck not the hand) is significantly weaker without the quest because you have 0 chance against decks that aren't aggro.
Ask yourself: Against which decks is taunt warrior strongest? Against which decks might quest warrior mulligan the quest? And lastly, does that mean that against decks where it doesn't mulligan the quest normally, it would be stronger without it?
What you need to compare isn't whether the quest is played or not, because that data is skewed by the decks where you play it or not, you need to compare decks that are entirely without it vs decks that have it. And I'm willing to bet that it's significantly better with the quest.
For Fire Plume's Heart, it says the deck wins 55% of the time, but the deck wins when Fire Plume's is played 53% of the time. This says to me that the Quest Warrior is more likely to win in games where it mulligans the quest.
So I'm trying to decide if the quest is worth crafting. In games where you don't think the game will last long enough to complete the quest, you are more likely to win without having the quest in the deck. And then there simply is a lower winrate against mirrors and control decks. I guess having not played the deck yet (having not crafted the card) I don't understand when or why you would mulligan the quest.
The deck is significantly weaker without the quest. The results you are seeing are due to players not understanding the aggro matchup.
Why do you think so? I'd say it's better to mulligan the quest against aggro. If you get that far you have won anyway, and random 8 dmg doesn't save your face anyway. A bunch of taunts + the normal hero power do, however.
You didn't understand my comment. The DECK (meaning the build of the deck not the hand) is significantly weaker without the quest because you have 0 chance against decks that aren't aggro.
Ah ok, I misunderstood the second sentence. "People not understanding the aggro matchup" somehow implied to me that people mulligan the quest against aggro and you think that's wrong. But great, that means that we have the same opinion anyway.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I know the answer is probably no, but I was wondering since I was looking at this: https://hsreplay.net/cards/#rarity=LEGENDARY&sortBy=playedWinrate
For Fire Plume's Heart, it says the deck wins 55% of the time, but the deck wins when Fire Plume's is played 53% of the time. This says to me that the Quest Warrior is more likely to win in games where it mulligans the quest.
So I'm trying to decide if the quest is worth crafting. In games where you don't think the game will last long enough to complete the quest, you are more likely to win without having the quest in the deck. And then there simply is a lower winrate against mirrors and control decks. I guess having not played the deck yet (having not crafted the card) I don't understand when or why you would mulligan the quest.
Ask yourself: Against which decks is taunt warrior strongest? Against which decks might quest warrior mulligan the quest? And lastly, does that mean that against decks where it doesn't mulligan the quest normally, it would be stronger without it?
What you need to compare isn't whether the quest is played or not, because that data is skewed by the decks where you play it or not, you need to compare decks that are entirely without it vs decks that have it. And I'm willing to bet that it's significantly better with the quest.