I got taken down by sp0h in the round of 4, now that I see his decklist we were only a couple of cards different. O well, i'll get him next time.
Really. You think one SUnfury and one Claw would have made the difference. Then you two would just be playing the exact same deck to a T and it's be who draws what faster.
Boooooooooooooring. I'm glad they just print these stupid decklists and don't try to make us watch videos of this nonsense.
I got taken down by sp0h in the round of 4, now that I see his decklist we were only a couple of cards different. O well, i'll get him next time.
Really. You think one SUnfury and one Claw would have made the difference. Then you two would just be playing the exact same deck to a T and it's be who draws what faster.
Boooooooooooooring. I'm glad they just print these stupid decklists and don't try to make us watch videos of this nonsense.
"Just stop printing these stupid legendary-filled decklists. Then everyone just wants to dot.deck them in the game and it's what's making the game so incredibly dull and boring right now. Face a class, expect 4+ legendary plays. If you don't have that kind of income to dump into the game, then just expect to lose. A lot."
"Dear MLG,
Make a tournament where nobody's allowed to play legendaries. Then you will peak my interests. And you'll probably attract some players with actual talent and not just people winning with their wallets.
Sincerely, Bored"
"Oh look. Top deck only has seven legendaries in it. But, hey, game's totally not "pay to win" and legendaries are clearly not a huge advantage over everything else.
Right? Right?!?!?!
...right?"
Are you actually gonna write that kind of crap under every tournament decklist thread? These are the winners; i.e. the decks are optimized in order to compete at the highest level of play. If you're not willing to spend some cash or devote the time that is required to obtain the cards, play something else and please stop whining~~
I got taken down by sp0h in the round of 4, now that I see his decklist we were only a couple of cards different. O well, i'll get him next time.
Really. You think one SUnfury and one Claw would have made the difference. Then you two would just be playing the exact same deck to a T and it's be who draws what faster.
Boooooooooooooring. I'm glad they just print these stupid decklists and don't try to make us watch videos of this nonsense.
As much as you seem to like whining on the forums I can't say I disagree with you. With such a limited card base currently available in Hearthstone it's inevitable that a few decks will rise to the top as the most consistent winners, and of course they are going to include legendaries. What will differentiate players is the decisions they make and of course a bit of RNG.
I got taken down by sp0h in the round of 4, now that I see his decklist we were only a couple of cards different. O well, i'll get him next time.
Really. You think one SUnfury and one Claw would have made the difference. Then you two would just be playing the exact same deck to a T and it's be who draws what faster.
Boooooooooooooring. I'm glad they just print these stupid decklists and don't try to make us watch videos of this nonsense.
As much as you seem to like whining on the forums I can't say I disagree with you. With such a limited card base currently available in Hearthstone it's inevitable that a few decks will rise to the top as the most consistent winners, and of course they are going to include legendaries. What will differentiate players is the decisions they make and of course a bit of RNG.
That last bit about the decisions players make is the important part.
The best solution to this, in my opinion, is to limit the amount of Legendaries one can play in a given deck to 3. This would force players to strategically choose which 3 legendaries to use in a deck. No more would Druid dominate all the tournaments and ladder by just throwing every single great Legendary, the best spells and some other creatures to fill a deck.
Should I use Ragnaros, Sylvanas, and Thalnos? But what about Pagle, Tinkermaster, or the Black Knight? Tough choices would lead to much greater deck variety and an even playing field where much more creativeness and 'skill' would go into building and playing decks.
The best solution to this, in my opinion, is to limit the amount of Legendaries one can play in a given deck to 3. This would force players to strategically choose which 3 legendaries to use in a deck. No more would Druid dominate all the tournaments and ladder by just throwing every single great Legendary, the best spells and some other creatures to fill a deck.
Should I use Ragnaros, Sylvanas, and Thalnos? But what about Pagle, Tinkermaster, or the Black Knight? Tough choices would lead to much greater deck variety and an even playing field where much more creativeness and 'skill' would go into building and playing decks.
Who's with me?
I don't want to see any hard card limits added to the actual game beyond what is currently in place.
I think that's more something that should be left up to tournament organizers and the players themselves rather than imposed across the board.
The best solution to this, in my opinion, is to limit the amount of Legendaries one can play in a given deck to 3. This would force players to strategically choose which 3 legendaries to use in a deck. No more would Druid dominate all the tournaments and ladder by just throwing every single great Legendary, the best spells and some other creatures to fill a deck.
Should I use Ragnaros, Sylvanas, and Thalnos? But what about Pagle, Tinkermaster, or the Black Knight? Tough choices would lead to much greater deck variety and an even playing field where much more creativeness and 'skill' would go into building and playing decks.
Who's with me?
I don't want to see any hard card limits added to the actual game beyond what is currently in place.
I think that's more something that should be left up to tournament organizers and the players themselves rather than imposed across the board.
I expect we'll eventually see banned cards in tournaments. I also expect that as certain cards become ubiquitous (Nat Pagle, Bloodmage Thalnos, and Tinkmaster Overspark as some examples) will be nerfed one way or another.
I really believe in a cap on the amount of Legendaries one could use in a given deck. If not 3, 4 sounds right. This would still lead to some tough choices and more importantly a much wider variety of decks where your choices in Legendaries could separate even the most cookie cutter decks apart. Each of these powerful Legendaries has specific strengths but the problem is you don't have to pick which strengths you want in certain decks - instead, at the moment, you can just throw them all together and forget about synergy since they are all powerful in their own right.
This would open up a whole other realm of strategy and theorycrafting if a hard cap was introduced on Legenadaries. There would be strengths and weaknesses in picking some over others as you would benefit from your choices while missing out on others. If the game is about variety, or balance, or strengths and weaknesses then this would be it. Now - why choose Rock, Paper, or Scissors when instead you can instead have them all with no limit or control.
@TruePoindexter: Instead of nerfing those cards, they could keep them the same if a limit was imposed. Maybe a Shaman who would otherwise play Nat Pagle 100% of the time might think about a Mana Tide Totem as a replacement if he had to carefully choose which Legendaries to use in a deck. Or Bloodmage may be replaced by another +spell damage minion or even a Loot Hoarder. Tinkmaster is the ultimate silence/kill card... Bloodmage the best spell damage card, Pagle the best drawing card, Cairne the best value creature, etc. You should have to choose which categories you want to have the 'best of' in your deck strategically instead of being able to just have them all. See what I mean?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Confused - 1st Place:
[MG]spOh - 2nd Place:
[MG]Realz - 3rd/4th Place:
Shaymous - 3rd/4th Place:
I got taken down by sp0h in the round of 4, now that I see his decklist we were only a couple of cards different. O well, i'll get him next time.
Player name: Shaymous
Really. You think one SUnfury and one Claw would have made the difference. Then you two would just be playing the exact same deck to a T and it's be who draws what faster.
Boooooooooooooring. I'm glad they just print these stupid decklists and don't try to make us watch videos of this nonsense.
"Just stop printing these stupid legendary-filled decklists. Then everyone just wants to dot.deck them in the game and it's what's making the game so incredibly dull and boring right now. Face a class, expect 4+ legendary plays. If you don't have that kind of income to dump into the game, then just expect to lose. A lot."
"Dear MLG,
Make a tournament where nobody's allowed to play legendaries. Then you will peak my interests. And you'll probably attract some players with actual talent and not just people winning with their wallets.
Sincerely, Bored"
"Oh look. Top deck only has seven legendaries in it. But, hey, game's totally not "pay to win" and legendaries are clearly not a huge advantage over everything else.
Right? Right?!?!?!
...right?"
Are you actually gonna write that kind of crap under every tournament decklist thread? These are the winners; i.e. the decks are optimized in order to compete at the highest level of play. If you're not willing to spend some cash or devote the time that is required to obtain the cards, play something else and please stop whining~~
As much as you seem to like whining on the forums I can't say I disagree with you. With such a limited card base currently available in Hearthstone it's inevitable that a few decks will rise to the top as the most consistent winners, and of course they are going to include legendaries. What will differentiate players is the decisions they make and of course a bit of RNG.
Player name: Shaymous
That last bit about the decisions players make is the important part.
The best solution to this, in my opinion, is to limit the amount of Legendaries one can play in a given deck to 3. This would force players to strategically choose which 3 legendaries to use in a deck. No more would Druid dominate all the tournaments and ladder by just throwing every single great Legendary, the best spells and some other creatures to fill a deck.
Should I use Ragnaros, Sylvanas, and Thalnos? But what about Pagle, Tinkermaster, or the Black Knight? Tough choices would lead to much greater deck variety and an even playing field where much more creativeness and 'skill' would go into building and playing decks.
Who's with me?
I don't want to see any hard card limits added to the actual game beyond what is currently in place.
I think that's more something that should be left up to tournament organizers and the players themselves rather than imposed across the board.
I expect we'll eventually see banned cards in tournaments. I also expect that as certain cards become ubiquitous (Nat Pagle, Bloodmage Thalnos, and Tinkmaster Overspark as some examples) will be nerfed one way or another.
I really believe in a cap on the amount of Legendaries one could use in a given deck. If not 3, 4 sounds right. This would still lead to some tough choices and more importantly a much wider variety of decks where your choices in Legendaries could separate even the most cookie cutter decks apart. Each of these powerful Legendaries has specific strengths but the problem is you don't have to pick which strengths you want in certain decks - instead, at the moment, you can just throw them all together and forget about synergy since they are all powerful in their own right.
This would open up a whole other realm of strategy and theorycrafting if a hard cap was introduced on Legenadaries. There would be strengths and weaknesses in picking some over others as you would benefit from your choices while missing out on others. If the game is about variety, or balance, or strengths and weaknesses then this would be it. Now - why choose Rock, Paper, or Scissors when instead you can instead have them all with no limit or control.
@TruePoindexter: Instead of nerfing those cards, they could keep them the same if a limit was imposed. Maybe a Shaman who would otherwise play Nat Pagle 100% of the time might think about a Mana Tide Totem as a replacement if he had to carefully choose which Legendaries to use in a deck. Or Bloodmage may be replaced by another +spell damage minion or even a Loot Hoarder. Tinkmaster is the ultimate silence/kill card... Bloodmage the best spell damage card, Pagle the best drawing card, Cairne the best value creature, etc. You should have to choose which categories you want to have the 'best of' in your deck strategically instead of being able to just have them all. See what I mean?