aggro decks is where missplays matter cuz your resources are limited. With control you just wait until full clear and then blame bad rng when opponent outvalues. (after 20 minutes of a game)
I really disagree with this statement. Aggro decks are made for "face is the place" strategy and good enough opener to win turn 5. If bad card draw and no win condition turn <5, concede, next game. That is what I call braindead and unhealthy for the game.
LoL at people calling what they don't understand "braindead" again. there is a lot more to aggro and tempo then just"smorc". Yeah there are true smorc decks, but that's pretty much just specialised hunter decks, and that's pretty much down to the hunter hero power being the least versatile of the bunch.
Zoo, tempo rogue, murloc pally all take careful consideration. yeah you can get games where you steamroll the opponent, but the same applies to all well built decks.
Also token shaman requires perfect RNG and a ton of pre planning as well. you only steam roll if the opponent plays bad or gets terrible RNG. it's really easy to ruin that decks day if you don't get your minions to stick and then draw buffs in time. Also control decks will just board clear you so you loose. you have to play around all these clears and tech for things like doomsayer... definitely not "braindead" just powerful when played well and paired with good RNG.
Never said that evolve shaman is braindead but pirat warrior for sure is.
aggro decks is where missplays matter cuz your resources are limited. With control you just wait until full clear and then blame bad rng when opponent outvalues. (after 20 minutes of a game)
I really disagree with this statement. Aggro decks are made for "face is the place" strategy and good enough opener to win turn 5. If bad card draw and no win condition turn <5, concede, next game. That is what I call braindead and unhealthy for the game.
LoL at people calling what they don't understand "braindead" again. there is a lot more to aggro and tempo then just"smorc". Yeah there are true smorc decks, but that's pretty much just specialised hunter decks, and that's pretty much down to the hunter hero power being the least versatile of the bunch.
Zoo, tempo rogue, murloc pally all take careful consideration. yeah you can get games where you steamroll the opponent, but the same applies to all well built decks.
Also token shaman requires perfect RNG and a ton of pre planning as well. you only steam roll if the opponent plays bad or gets terrible RNG. it's really easy to ruin that decks day if you don't get your minions to stick and then draw buffs in time. Also control decks will just board clear you so you loose. you have to play around all these clears and tech for things like doomsayer... definitely not "braindead" just powerful when played well and paired with good RNG.
Never said that evolve shaman is braindead but pirat warrior for sure is.
Well token shaman is aggro, pirate warrior is rush/face. You generalize by saying that aggro decks only go face. Real aggro deck actually win by getting board control early so They can finish the game relatively quickly with their big board of small minions. Pirate warrior doesnt't care much about board after turn 4, it kills you with chargers and arcanite reapers. It's a face deck. Their playstile is different. Token druid, Token shaman and zoolock are aggro decks (even if it's shifting a bit into a midrange now). Pirate warrior and the old face hunter are rush decks. They're all called aggro but the way you play those are really different.
aggro decks is where missplays matter cuz your resources are limited. With control you just wait until full clear and then blame bad rng when opponent outvalues. (after 20 minutes of a game)
I really disagree with this statement. Aggro decks are made for "face is the place" strategy and good enough opener to win turn 5. If bad card draw and no win condition turn <5, concede, next game. That is what I call braindead and unhealthy for the game.
LoL at people calling what they don't understand "braindead" again. there is a lot more to aggro and tempo then just"smorc". Yeah there are true smorc decks, but that's pretty much just specialised hunter decks, and that's pretty much down to the hunter hero power being the least versatile of the bunch.
Zoo, tempo rogue, murloc pally all take careful consideration. yeah you can get games where you steamroll the opponent, but the same applies to all well built decks.
Also token shaman requires perfect RNG and a ton of pre planning as well. you only steam roll if the opponent plays bad or gets terrible RNG. it's really easy to ruin that decks day if you don't get your minions to stick and then draw buffs in time. Also control decks will just board clear you so you loose. you have to play around all these clears and tech for things like doomsayer... definitely not "braindead" just powerful when played well and paired with good RNG.
Never said that evolve shaman is braindead but pirat warrior for sure is.
Well token shaman is aggro, pirate warrior is rush/face. You generalize by saying that aggro decks only go face. Real aggro deck actually win by getting board control early so They can finish the game relatively quickly with their big board of small minions. Pirate warrior doesnt't care much about board after turn 4, it kills you with chargers and arcanite reapers. It's a face deck. Their playstile is different. Token druid, Token shaman and zoolock are aggro decks (even if it's shifting a bit into a midrange now). Pirate warrior and the old face hunter are rush decks. They're all called aggro but the way you play those are really different.
I agree with that. I'm absolutly okay with token or zoo decks. There is an interaction between the players. Maybe I should have said that face decks are braindead ;)
aggro decks is where missplays matter cuz your resources are limited. With control you just wait until full clear and then blame bad rng when opponent outvalues. (after 20 minutes of a game)
I really disagree with this statement. Aggro decks are made for "face is the place" strategy and good enough opener to win turn 5. If bad card draw and no win condition turn <5, concede, next game. That is what I call braindead and unhealthy for the game.
Yeah, but you do not seem to know how to play aggro or aggressive midrange decks.The scenario when you just snowball a game surely happens. But also the opposite, when the beatdown player fills up the board and every threat gets removed until control drops the big minions and the beatdown gets outvalued.
The amount of decisions over the playtime is probably very similar to control decks. Just that the decisions are distributed over more games for aggro. In control vs aggro, the roles are pretty clear for both sides and not many decisions are made. There are some decisions concerning overextending/baiting out more minions (depends from which side you're looking at it), but generally the aggressive deck has to close the game out rather sooner than later or it will lose.
The most skill is aggro vs. aggro or control vs. control since in these matchups the role can change. In aggro vs aggro (or midrange vs midrange as presently there is only one good aggro deck on ladder anyways) a single wrong trade or non-trade can cost you the game. You need to seize your chance to win as soon as it pops up, but be aware of the damage the opponent can do as well. In control, the early game is super boring. Noone does anything and the decisions come towards the mid and lategame which cards do throw away, whether this game is going to fatigue or whether one side can outtempo the opponent. Except of course in control vs. combo/control. Exodia mage is basically the control role against every other deck. If they get the time, they will win so there the roles are also pretty defined.
The believe that aggro is just stupid face smashing is pretty famous in Hearthpwn, but as wrong as saying control is just remove, remove, remove and drop the big guys. There are a lot of strategies in heartstone from hyper aggressive over ramp to attrition and pure combo or combo oriented control. And some matchups are simply straightforward, others demand hard decisions.
Nah, this assumes that all aggro decks require the same skill level to pilot, but since the birth or hearthstone there have been aggro decks that just chip away at you from the hand once past turn 3, no skill required. Not all aggro decks are equals, some require a decent amount of prediction, resource management and maths, some don't. Compared with the other game archetypes, there are more bottom feeders running aggro. though there have been a few pure curvestone mid-range decks down the years that are as bad.
aggro decks is where missplays matter cuz your resources are limited. With control you just wait until full clear and then blame bad rng when opponent outvalues. (after 20 minutes of a game)
I really disagree with this statement. Aggro decks are made for "face is the place" strategy and good enough opener to win turn 5. If bad card draw and no win condition turn <5, concede, next game. That is what I call braindead and unhealthy for the game.
Yeah, but you do not seem to know how to play aggro or aggressive midrange decks.The scenario when you just snowball a game surely happens. But also the opposite, when the beatdown player fills up the board and every threat gets removed until control drops the big minions and the beatdown gets outvalued.
The amount of decisions over the playtime is probably very similar to control decks. Just that the decisions are distributed over more games for aggro. In control vs aggro, the roles are pretty clear for both sides and not many decisions are made. There are some decisions concerning overextending/baiting out more minions (depends from which side you're looking at it), but generally the aggressive deck has to close the game out rather sooner than later or it will lose.
The most skill is aggro vs. aggro or control vs. control since in these matchups the role can change. In aggro vs aggro (or midrange vs midrange as presently there is only one good aggro deck on ladder anyways) a single wrong trade or non-trade can cost you the game. You need to seize your chance to win as soon as it pops up, but be aware of the damage the opponent can do as well. In control, the early game is super boring. Noone does anything and the decisions come towards the mid and lategame which cards do throw away, whether this game is going to fatigue or whether one side can outtempo the opponent. Except of course in control vs. combo/control. Exodia mage is basically the control role against every other deck. If they get the time, they will win so there the roles are also pretty defined.
The believe that aggro is just stupid face smashing is pretty famous in Hearthpwn, but as wrong as saying control is just remove, remove, remove and drop the big guys. There are a lot of strategies in heartstone from hyper aggressive over ramp to attrition and pure combo or combo oriented control. And some matchups are simply straightforward, others demand hard decisions.
Nah, this assumes that all aggro decks require the same skill level to pilot, but since the birth or hearthstone there have been aggro decks that just chip away at you from the hand once past turn 3, no skill required. Not all aggro decks are equals, some require a decent amount of prediction, resource management and maths, some don't. Compared with the other game archetypes, there are more bottom feeders running aggro. though there have been a few pure curvestone mid-range decks down the years that are as bad.
I would call these either face or smorc decks.. they pretty much only exist within the hunter class though as the hero power is tailor made for it. I did play an aggro/pirate warrior last year though that wanted to smash face pretty quick. most other decks will want to value trade though to contest the board where as smorc hunter just ignores your minions and goes face mostly.
aggro decks is where missplays matter cuz your resources are limited. With control you just wait until full clear and then blame bad rng when opponent outvalues. (after 20 minutes of a game)
I really disagree with this statement. Aggro decks are made for "face is the place" strategy and good enough opener to win turn 5. If bad card draw and no win condition turn <5, concede, next game. That is what I call braindead and unhealthy for the game.
Yeah, but you do not seem to know how to play aggro or aggressive midrange decks.The scenario when you just snowball a game surely happens. But also the opposite, when the beatdown player fills up the board and every threat gets removed until control drops the big minions and the beatdown gets outvalued.
The amount of decisions over the playtime is probably very similar to control decks. Just that the decisions are distributed over more games for aggro. In control vs aggro, the roles are pretty clear for both sides and not many decisions are made. There are some decisions concerning overextending/baiting out more minions (depends from which side you're looking at it), but generally the aggressive deck has to close the game out rather sooner than later or it will lose.
The most skill is aggro vs. aggro or control vs. control since in these matchups the role can change. In aggro vs aggro (or midrange vs midrange as presently there is only one good aggro deck on ladder anyways) a single wrong trade or non-trade can cost you the game. You need to seize your chance to win as soon as it pops up, but be aware of the damage the opponent can do as well. In control, the early game is super boring. Noone does anything and the decisions come towards the mid and lategame which cards do throw away, whether this game is going to fatigue or whether one side can outtempo the opponent. Except of course in control vs. combo/control. Exodia mage is basically the control role against every other deck. If they get the time, they will win so there the roles are also pretty defined.
The believe that aggro is just stupid face smashing is pretty famous in Hearthpwn, but as wrong as saying control is just remove, remove, remove and drop the big guys. There are a lot of strategies in heartstone from hyper aggressive over ramp to attrition and pure combo or combo oriented control. And some matchups are simply straightforward, others demand hard decisions.
Nah, this assumes that all aggro decks require the same skill level to pilot, but since the birth or hearthstone there have been aggro decks that just chip away at you from the hand once past turn 3, no skill required. Not all aggro decks are equals, some require a decent amount of prediction, resource management and maths, some don't. Compared with the other game archetypes, there are more bottom feeders running aggro. though there have been a few pure curvestone mid-range decks down the years that are as bad.
Generally, the quicker deck has to kill the slower one. Since face decks are among the quickest decks, their strategy is often straightforward. But also pirate warrior has and face hunter had to decide whether they need to trade or not. But their role is clear in most matchups. And again, in a mirror one mistake can change the game. Also with PW.
Admitted, the skill floor is lower in some decks and you can climb to a certain rank with face only, but as soon as you meet skillful players, that strategy does not consistently work.
Face decks isn't fastest decks, face decks are essentially burn decks. They win if they aren't killed faster than they burn opponents face (in case face doesn't taunt or heal).
Face decks isn't fastest decks, face decks are essentially burn decks. They win if they aren't killed faster than they burn opponents face (in case face doesn't taunt or heal).
So they aren’t the fastest but you tell me it’s essentially a Race to the face? That sounds contradictory to me. And it is since the race is not „kill the face deck quicker“ as you admit yourself. Control or midrange win against face decks by healing and protecting themselves until the face deck runs out of gas.
The only Face deck I remember that wasn’t fast is burn Mage because they slowed the opponent down by using freeze and mirror images (but had a different gameplay than freeze Mage which is also a burn deck but way slower). Face hunter and pirate warrior were the fastest decks in hearthstone, maybe with aggro shaman. And if you play midrange or control, you will mostly perceive that they “always go face“ which is often right, but not always the winning play. And the reason is that they have the beatdown role in all matchups, except against themselves.
Rouge is the fastest now. Turn 2 14/14 vancleef. Turn 3 Devine shield wind fury taunt card. Turn 2 double/triple keleseth. I’ve lost by turn 3-4 many times to this seasons “tempo rouge”
I doubt any midrange or even aggro deck can survive a CW deck with cheap poweful board clears like 1 fish, 2 brawl and 2 reckless flurry. This that too much. Again other control deck with weaker boardclear like Controk Mage, Control Warlock and Control Paladin midrange still have a slight edge, but it getting harder now.
You should play at rank 5. CW is garbage. Even if you draw those clears, rouge and warlock fill the board and buff with scalebane and bomemare and gg. 1/5 chance for CW to win
You should play at rank 5. CW is garbage. Even if you draw those clears, rouge and warlock fill the board and buff with scalebane and bomemare and gg. 1/5 chance for CW to win
The last time i checked There is no reckless flurry in Warrior list now lolz. Ofc I am talking about the next expansion . Can you fill the board for ever to last 5 board wipe. Dont think so
I don’t think you play CW. I think you play midrange. Because if you played CW you would know how bad brawl and fishes is right now. Doesn’t look likes it getting any better.
And brawl and fishes are horrible right now.
Fishes is kill some minions discard you hand.
Braw is leave 1 minion alive to get buffed and watch them fill the board with at least 2 other big guys.
Face decks isn't fastest decks, face decks are essentially burn decks. They win if they aren't killed faster than they burn opponents face (in case face doesn't taunt or heal).
So they aren’t the fastest but you tell me it’s essentially a Race to the face? That sounds contradictory to me. And it is since the race is not „kill the face deck quicker“ as you admit yourself. Control or midrange win against face decks by healing and protecting themselves until the face deck runs out of gas.
The only Face deck I remember that wasn’t fast is burn Mage because they slowed the opponent down by using freeze and mirror images (but had a different gameplay than freeze Mage which is also a burn deck but way slower). Face hunter and pirate warrior were the fastest decks in hearthstone, maybe with aggro shaman. And if you play midrange or control, you will mostly perceive that they “always go face“ which is often right, but not always the winning play. And the reason is that they have the beatdown role in all matchups, except against themselves.
There is no contradiction:
Aggro tries to build early board to translate that into damage; Burn tries to directly damage the face; Face-decks run shittons of charge minions to do both (and some aggro package too, just to deal free extra game-opener damage).
That's why face isn't aggro. It doesn't trade because it doesn't care about minions, it cares only about burning opponent down. Back in facehunter times, there were no true aggro decks, and facehunter arsenal was plain out broken. Now, aggro druid or aggro warlock just kills facedeck faster then it burns opponent down (which is actually very-very consistent and good design).
So facedeck basically have good matchup of midrange (no heal) and greedy control with no heal.
Face decks isn't fastest decks, face decks are essentially burn decks. They win if they aren't killed faster than they burn opponents face (in case face doesn't taunt or heal).
So they aren’t the fastest but you tell me it’s essentially a Race to the face? That sounds contradictory to me. And it is since the race is not „kill the face deck quicker“ as you admit yourself. Control or midrange win against face decks by healing and protecting themselves until the face deck runs out of gas.
The only Face deck I remember that wasn’t fast is burn Mage because they slowed the opponent down by using freeze and mirror images (but had a different gameplay than freeze Mage which is also a burn deck but way slower). Face hunter and pirate warrior were the fastest decks in hearthstone, maybe with aggro shaman. And if you play midrange or control, you will mostly perceive that they “always go face“ which is often right, but not always the winning play. And the reason is that they have the beatdown role in all matchups, except against themselves.
There is no contradiction:
Aggro tries to build early board to translate that into damage; Burn tries to directly damage the face; Face-decks run shittons of charge minions to do both (and some aggro package too, just to deal free extra game-opener damage).
That's why face isn't aggro. It doesn't trade because it doesn't care about minions, it cares only about burning opponent down. Back in facehunter times, there were no true aggro decks, and facehunter arsenal was plain out broken. Now, aggro druid or aggro warlock just kills facedeck faster then it burns opponent down (which is actually very-very consistent and good design).
So facedeck basically have good matchup of midrange (no heal) and greedy control with no heal.
The contradiction is that you state that facedecks are not the fastest decks, but simultaneously claim that they want to kill you asap. They do want to do that. And to do that, they are quick.
and both decks, pw and face hunter (when he was viable) build an early board. And they also try to keep it, if possible. Even facehunter traded with glaivezooka to protect the 3/1 leper gnome. They close the game with burn by weapon, charge or spells. And both decks are pure aggro decks. Face is the quintessence of aggro. There is nothing more aggressive than face damage.
Edit: and no, zoo and aggro Druid do not kill pirate warrior faster because they’re slower decks (when savage roar in hand, Druid might be able to win the race). They win because they are better at board control and can protect themselves with taunts. You’re right that aggro Druid wins against pw (at least in my experience even pre nerf) but they do not outrage them. The kill their stuff, try to slow them down and build a board. If I would’ve let the pirate warrior just punch my face with everything he had on board, I would’ve lost every game. And if the pirate warrior wouldn’t have traded his weapon with my minions, I would’ve won more games against them due to more favorable trades.
Face decks isn't fastest decks, face decks are essentially burn decks. They win if they aren't killed faster than they burn opponents face (in case face doesn't taunt or heal).
So they aren’t the fastest but you tell me it’s essentially a Race to the face? That sounds contradictory to me. And it is since the race is not „kill the face deck quicker“ as you admit yourself. Control or midrange win against face decks by healing and protecting themselves until the face deck runs out of gas.
The only Face deck I remember that wasn’t fast is burn Mage because they slowed the opponent down by using freeze and mirror images (but had a different gameplay than freeze Mage which is also a burn deck but way slower). Face hunter and pirate warrior were the fastest decks in hearthstone, maybe with aggro shaman. And if you play midrange or control, you will mostly perceive that they “always go face“ which is often right, but not always the winning play. And the reason is that they have the beatdown role in all matchups, except against themselves.
There is no contradiction:
Aggro tries to build early board to translate that into damage; Burn tries to directly damage the face; Face-decks run shittons of charge minions to do both (and some aggro package too, just to deal free extra game-opener damage).
That's why face isn't aggro. It doesn't trade because it doesn't care about minions, it cares only about burning opponent down. Back in facehunter times, there were no true aggro decks, and facehunter arsenal was plain out broken. Now, aggro druid or aggro warlock just kills facedeck faster then it burns opponent down (which is actually very-very consistent and good design).
So facedeck basically have good matchup of midrange (no heal) and greedy control with no heal.
The contradiction is that you state that facedecks are not the fastest decks, but simultaneously claim that they want to kill you asap. They do want to do that. And to do that, they are quick.
and both decks, pw and face hunter (when he was viable) build an early board. And they also try to keep it, if possible. Even facehunter traded with glaivezooka to protect the 3/1 leper gnome. They close the game with burn by weapon, charge or spells. And both decks are pure aggro decks. Face is the quintessence of aggro. There is nothing more aggressive than face damage.
Edit: and no, zoo and aggro Druid do not kill pirate warrior faster because they’re slower decks (when savage roar in hand, Druid might be able to win the race). They win because they are better at board control and can protect themselves with taunts. You’re right that aggro Druid wins against pw (at least in my experience even pre nerf) but they do not outrage them. The kill their stuff, try to slow them down and build a board. If I would’ve let the pirate warrior just punch my face with everything he had on board, I would’ve lost every game. And if the pirate warrior wouldn’t have traded his weapon with my minions, I would’ve won more games against them due to more favorable trades.
Face is closest to MTGs burn with 1-mana 3-damage spells. Is it fast? Yes. Why does it win? Because it's fast. Is it aggro? No, it's burn. It doesn't care about board, that's why, burn.
Facedecks in Hearthstone is very close to that, except they care about taunts at many stages of the game, thus more interactive. Yet they are more dangerous in a way they do put minions on the board, tho.
Aggro opener, yes, thus *possible* trading at the very-very beginning (not to stabilize on board - but to do more damage). Saving leper gnome with glaivezooka t2 is maximum trade it did (except when you are forced to trade in order not to die).
Face decks isn't fastest decks, face decks are essentially burn decks. They win if they aren't killed faster than they burn opponents face (in case face doesn't taunt or heal).
So they aren’t the fastest but you tell me it’s essentially a Race to the face? That sounds contradictory to me. And it is since the race is not „kill the face deck quicker“ as you admit yourself. Control or midrange win against face decks by healing and protecting themselves until the face deck runs out of gas.
The only Face deck I remember that wasn’t fast is burn Mage because they slowed the opponent down by using freeze and mirror images (but had a different gameplay than freeze Mage which is also a burn deck but way slower). Face hunter and pirate warrior were the fastest decks in hearthstone, maybe with aggro shaman. And if you play midrange or control, you will mostly perceive that they “always go face“ which is often right, but not always the winning play. And the reason is that they have the beatdown role in all matchups, except against themselves.
There is no contradiction:
Aggro tries to build early board to translate that into damage; Burn tries to directly damage the face; Face-decks run shittons of charge minions to do both (and some aggro package too, just to deal free extra game-opener damage).
That's why face isn't aggro. It doesn't trade because it doesn't care about minions, it cares only about burning opponent down. Back in facehunter times, there were no true aggro decks, and facehunter arsenal was plain out broken. Now, aggro druid or aggro warlock just kills facedeck faster then it burns opponent down (which is actually very-very consistent and good design).
So facedeck basically have good matchup of midrange (no heal) and greedy control with no heal.
The contradiction is that you state that facedecks are not the fastest decks, but simultaneously claim that they want to kill you asap. They do want to do that. And to do that, they are quick.
and both decks, pw and face hunter (when he was viable) build an early board. And they also try to keep it, if possible. Even facehunter traded with glaivezooka to protect the 3/1 leper gnome. They close the game with burn by weapon, charge or spells. And both decks are pure aggro decks. Face is the quintessence of aggro. There is nothing more aggressive than face damage.
Edit: and no, zoo and aggro Druid do not kill pirate warrior faster because they’re slower decks (when savage roar in hand, Druid might be able to win the race). They win because they are better at board control and can protect themselves with taunts. You’re right that aggro Druid wins against pw (at least in my experience even pre nerf) but they do not outrage them. The kill their stuff, try to slow them down and build a board. If I would’ve let the pirate warrior just punch my face with everything he had on board, I would’ve lost every game. And if the pirate warrior wouldn’t have traded his weapon with my minions, I would’ve won more games against them due to more favorable trades.
Face is closest to MTGs burn with 1-mana 3-damage spells. Is it fast? Yes. Why does it win? Because it's fast. Is it aggro? No, it's burn. It doesn't care about board, that's why, burn.
Facedecks in Hearthstone is very close to that, except they care about taunts at many stages of the game, thus more interactive. Yet they are more dangerous in a way they do put minions on the board, tho.
Aggro opener, yes, thus *possible* trading at the very-very beginning (not to stabilize on board - but to do more damage). Saving leper gnome with glaivezooka t2 is maximum trade it did (except when you are forced to trade in order not to die).
There are Aggro, midrange and control decks. Face in Hearthstone is aggro. The epitome of it. Always was and probably always will be. Some put Combo into the mix as well, but they mostly belong in the control section because they try to stall and control the board to get time.
But if you insist, you can call Face decks burn decks. I don't care about the specific definition you want to use (although I don't agree with it). Our discussion began because you told me face decks are not the fastest decks. That disagreement has at least ended, since you also said they are.
That disagreement has at least ended, since you also said they are.
They need to be fast to win, doesn't mean they are fast now. You *may* do them faster, they will be aggro instead or face. That mean, they will be screwed with early (t3/t4) AoE and control. Pure face deck doesn't care much.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Face decks isn't fastest decks, face decks are essentially burn decks. They win if they aren't killed faster than they burn opponents face (in case face doesn't taunt or heal).
Rouge is the fastest now. Turn 2 14/14 vancleef. Turn 3 Devine shield wind fury taunt card. Turn 2 double/triple keleseth. I’ve lost by turn 3-4 many times to this seasons “tempo rouge”
Keeper of the Grove Gone, but not forgotten.
I doubt any midrange or even aggro deck can survive a CW deck with cheap poweful board clears like 1 fish, 2 brawl and 2 reckless flurry. This that too much. Again other control deck with weaker boardclear like Controk Mage, Control Warlock and Control Paladin midrange still have a slight edge, but it getting harder now.
You should play at rank 5. CW is garbage. Even if you draw those clears, rouge and warlock fill the board and buff with scalebane and bomemare and gg. 1/5 chance for CW to win
Keeper of the Grove Gone, but not forgotten.
Midrange is the only viable strat right now.
For example: try playing quest warrior right now.
Keeper of the Grove Gone, but not forgotten.
I don’t think you play CW. I think you play midrange. Because if you played CW you would know how bad brawl and fishes is right now. Doesn’t look likes it getting any better.
And brawl and fishes are horrible right now.
Fishes is kill some minions discard you hand.
Braw is leave 1 minion alive to get buffed and watch them fill the board with at least 2 other big guys.
Keeper of the Grove Gone, but not forgotten.
Burn tries to directly damage the face;
Face-decks run shittons of charge minions to do both (and some aggro package too, just to deal free extra game-opener damage).
They need to be fast to win, doesn't mean they are fast now. You *may* do them faster, they will be aggro instead or face. That mean, they will be screwed with early (t3/t4) AoE and control. Pure face deck doesn't care much.