Priest mains just wait for these threads to pop up I swear. But for real what’s the point of 30 minute games.. no fun
It's to show how much skill they have. Everyone knows if you play a "Control" deck you must be a 300 IQ apex human being who is perfect in all things. Everyone knows Control decks are slow. So therefore, the longer the game lasts the more of a genius they must be.
And before you point out that generating infinite value isn't the same as proper Control decks? Shut up you mentally deficient aggro-loving subhuman piece of trash.
Well, it's true that Priest is pretty opressive, but there is a reason why all Priest decks are considered tier 3 or 2 (at best). That is, It's very dependent on draw. Yes, it has a lot of value thanks to invoke and "thief" cards, but random cards usually tend to be mediocre, as most cards in modern Hearthstone are meant to be connected with other cards, if you know what I mean. In vanilla most cards were "good by themselves" but now almost every card is a part of a "combo" or any other "purpose of a deck". While it's true that they can create a few Murozonds and crash you in a very depressing way, but it's pretty rare. In short - auto conceding against Priest is just dumb and if you want to become a good player, don't ever do this.
Well, it's true that Priest is pretty opressive, but there is a reason why all Priest decks are considered tier 3 or 2 (at best). That is, It's very dependent on draw. Yes, it has a lot of value thanks to invoke and "thief" cards, but random cards usually tend to be mediocre, as most cards in modern Hearthstone are meant to be connected with other cards, if you know what I mean. In vanilla most cards were "good by themselves" but now almost every card is a part of a "combo" or any other "purpose of a deck". While it's true that they can create a few Murozonds and crash you in a very depressing way, but it's pretty rare. In short - auto conceding against Priest is just dumb and if you want to become a good player, don't ever do this.
auto conceding vs priest makes perfect sense when climbing to legend (and especially at a rank floor). I mean if you are one game away from a rank floor don't do it but if it takes 20 mins for one priest game you can play 4 games in that time. Also, some decks just will not win vs priest under any circumstances and therefore it's a clear waste of time. I am afraid though once quest warlock gets popular this is going to be true of them too. Sadly, quest warlock is the hard counter of a number of decks (not just one like priest hard counters enrage warrior) and the matchup is even worse. Quest warlock has basically a stone lock vs priest and rogue and is unbelievably favoured vs HL hunter. so much so that priest and rogue should probably consider auto conceding the matchup and never play (especially priest as their only chance to win is if both plot twists are at the bottom of the warlocks deck). The quest warlock vs priest matchup is the most lopsided matchup I have ever seen in this game. It is even a worse matchup than playing freeze mage vs control warrior which was about 90/10. Quest warlock is more like 99/1 vs priest. If you include times the quest warlock disconnects or makes a major blunder such as misclicking maybe 95/5.
Well, it's true that Priest is pretty opressive, but there is a reason why all Priest decks are considered tier 3 or 2 (at best). That is, It's very dependent on draw. Yes, it has a lot of value thanks to invoke and "thief" cards, but random cards usually tend to be mediocre, as most cards in modern Hearthstone are meant to be connected with other cards, if you know what I mean. In vanilla most cards were "good by themselves" but now almost every card is a part of a "combo" or any other "purpose of a deck". While it's true that they can create a few Murozonds and crash you in a very depressing way, but it's pretty rare. In short - auto conceding against Priest is just dumb and if you want to become a good player, don't ever do this.
auto conceding vs priest makes perfect sense when climbing to legend (and especially at a rank floor). I mean if you are one game away from a rank floor don't do it but if it takes 20 mins for one priest game you can play 4 games in that time. Also, some decks just will not win vs priest under any circumstances and therefore it's a clear waste of time. I am afraid though once quest warlock gets popular this is going to be true of them too. Sadly, quest warlock is the hard counter of a number of decks (not just one like priest hard counters enrage warrior) and the matchup is even worse. Quest warlock has basically a stone lock vs priest and rogue and is unbelievably favoured vs HL hunter. so much so that priest and rogue should probably consider auto conceding the matchup and never play (especially priest as their only chance to win is if both plot twists are at the bottom of the warlocks deck). The quest warlock vs priest matchup is the most lopsided matchup I have ever seen in this game. It is even a worse matchup than playing freeze mage vs control warrior which was about 90/10. Quest warlock is more like 99/1 vs priest. If you include times the quest warlock disconnects or makes a major blunder such as misclicking maybe 95/5.
Every deck has a counter, that's true. If the game is not an important one, you can concede for the sake of not wasting time. I remember the meta (Yeah Old Gods, I'm talkin' bout' you ;) when almost every single game was taking so long. It's all dependent on meta, and while it's true that now we have a Midrange domminance, where games usually last 8-9 turns. Sure if you've got tools like Patches the Pirate in the past or Dinotamer Brann nowadays, you can beat most control decks, with the exception of Priest. This is why the class is unliked by the community. It is the only control deck, which has enough healing, board clears and value generation to beat fast decks. Sure, you can say "What about Highlander Mage?". I genuinely don't understand how on earth HL Mage has higher winrate than Priest, but if you're looking for a deck to climb, HL Mage is not viable. As regards the Priest problem, like I said, it's usually "love it" or "hate it" depending on what kind of playstyle you prefer. I personally am a fan of control decks, but I don't have some important cards, so I can't play Galakrond Priest.
Well, it's true that Priest is pretty opressive, but there is a reason why all Priest decks are considered tier 3 or 2 (at best). That is, It's very dependent on draw. Yes, it has a lot of value thanks to invoke and "thief" cards, but random cards usually tend to be mediocre, as most cards in modern Hearthstone are meant to be connected with other cards, if you know what I mean. In vanilla most cards were "good by themselves" but now almost every card is a part of a "combo" or any other "purpose of a deck". While it's true that they can create a few Murozonds and crash you in a very depressing way, but it's pretty rare. In short - auto conceding against Priest is just dumb and if you want to become a good player, don't ever do this.
auto conceding vs priest makes perfect sense when climbing to legend (and especially at a rank floor). I mean if you are one game away from a rank floor don't do it but if it takes 20 mins for one priest game you can play 4 games in that time. Also, some decks just will not win vs priest under any circumstances and therefore it's a clear waste of time. I am afraid though once quest warlock gets popular this is going to be true of them too. Sadly, quest warlock is the hard counter of a number of decks (not just one like priest hard counters enrage warrior) and the matchup is even worse. Quest warlock has basically a stone lock vs priest and rogue and is unbelievably favoured vs HL hunter. so much so that priest and rogue should probably consider auto conceding the matchup and never play (especially priest as their only chance to win is if both plot twists are at the bottom of the warlocks deck). The quest warlock vs priest matchup is the most lopsided matchup I have ever seen in this game. It is even a worse matchup than playing freeze mage vs control warrior which was about 90/10. Quest warlock is more like 99/1 vs priest. If you include times the quest warlock disconnects or makes a major blunder such as misclicking maybe 95/5.
Every deck has a counter, that's true. If the game is not an important one, you can concede for the sake of not wasting time. I remember the meta (Yeah Old Gods, I'm talkin' bout' you ;) when almost every single game was taking so long. It's all dependent on meta, and while it's true that now we have a Midrange domminance, where games usually last 8-9 turns. Sure if you've got tools like Patches the Pirate in the past or Dinotamer Brann nowadays, you can beat most control decks, with the exception of Priest. This is why the class is unliked by the community. It is the only control deck, which has enough healing, board clears and value generation to beat fast decks. Sure, you can say "What about Highlander Mage?". I genuinely don't understand how on earth HL Mage has higher winrate than Priest, but if you're looking for a deck to climb, HL Mage is not viable. As regards the Priest problem, like I said, it's usually "love it" or "hate it" depending on what kind of playstyle you prefer. I personally am a fan of control decks, but I don't have some important cards, so I can't play Galakrond Priest.
The class isn't unliked by community, because it's a control deck, it's unliked, because it doesn't play the standard game. Neither Control Warlock, Big Druid or Control Warrior get the same amount of hate, even if they are control too and extend the duration of the games. The reason Priest is hated is because its main focus is to disrupt you. Board clears + removal is their playstyle, so basically your only option is to have them run out of them.
You can say it is true for other controls, but not really. Priest took it to the extreme, having 5-6 board clears mained and on top of that plenty of other removal.
If you played yugioh, it's like facing a deck of 90% traps. Summon a monster? Og it's gone. Summon a monster? Gone Summon a monster? Gone.
Yep, that's the point. Most control decks consist on: play minions, have them battle other minions, THEN use some AoE if you fall behind or that makes your minions win.
Priest is: You have 30 cards. 15 of them are removal, be it minions that kill minions no matter how smart you trade, be it pure AoEs. It's kinda like when Dr.Boom hero became popular, suddenly all warrior cards were removal.
Also, as far as I know, people just dont like ressurrection mechanics, as its already annoying enough to kill some minions to be forced to do it 20 times.
I dont have that much a problem with priest, mostly because it is fun to smash for me.
People talking as if Rez Priest is still dominating the meta....wtf?? The main Priest decks out there are focused on value generation. They run exactly 1 board clear (Soul Mirror) or 2 if you also consider Galakrond and 4 removal spells, 2 of which are also value-generating (Time Rip). The rest are minions, buffs, value-generating minions and spells and aboslutely no resurrect stuff
Threads like this one obviously are made by people who most of the times have no or too low experience on card games.
I used to play MTG tabletop (you know with real collectible cards which you could trade, sell or purchase- no crafting available) when there was that single Blue control deck full of counterspells (Force of Will ftw!) and board control decks. Your opponent could not even put a single card on the table with ease, yet, no one whinned or grubled about it. Games took even hours to finish and still everyone had fun.
Priest decks nowadays remind me of these days. The problem is not the time a game takes, nor the Priest playstyle, but the fact that almost ALL other decks around require 8-10 minutes to get if they win or not. The grinding of ranks, the grinding of gold, you name it.
Hating a deck just because it exists in a different mentality is not a way to solve a problem. I cannot make someone stop hating a deck (i myself used to hate discard Black decks on MTG days) but you should strive to find ways to make this game more fun for you. If you can't either stop playing or have some break.
Decks like control Priest should always be around. Afterall it is the right for those who love control decks to have a chance playing with them, as it is for those who prefer other types.
Threads like this one obviously are made by people who most of the times have no or too low experience on card games.
I used to play MTG tabletop (you know with real collectible cards which you could trade, sell or purchase- no crafting available) when there was that single Blue control deck full of counterspells (Force of Will ftw!) and board control decks. Your opponent could not even put a single card on the table with ease, yet, no one whinned or grubled about it. Games took even hours to finish and still everyone had fun.
Priest decks nowadays remind me of these days. The problem is not the time a game takes, nor the Priest playstyle, but the fact that almost ALL other decks around require 8-10 minutes to get if they win or not. The grinding of ranks, the grinding of gold, you name it.
Hating a deck just because it exists in a different mentality is not a way to solve a problem. I cannot make someone stop hating a deck (i myself used to hate discard Black decks on MTG days) but you should strive to find ways to make this game more fun for you. If you can't either stop playing or have some break.
Decks like control Priest should always be around. Afterall it is the right for those who love control decks to have a chance playing with them, as it is for those who prefer other types.
Funny, because in yugioh there actually were similar decks too - HAT or Counter Fairy. HAT wasn't even a real deck with real win condition - it was literally a mash-up of 3 separate engines (H)and (A)rtifact (T)raptrix made to disrupt your opponent + traps (made to disrupt by definition). Counter Fairies as the name suggests, were meant to counter your opponent plays - with Counter Traps. It was a deck made of like 6 monsters (out of 40 cards, when you can play 3 of each) + traps. You would just vomit your entire hand of traps on the board and flip them one by one not letting your opponent play the game.
Guess what? Both were universally hated. And there are more examples, just gave the first two that came to my mind.
Magic is one of the TCGs I didn't actually play, so don't know how good the deck you mentioned was. But if it was present on the top tables and worked as you describe it, I call bullshit on your words. Maybe it was simply bad or maybe you shouldn't speak for the entire community, because I am 99% sure that if the deck was good and its only focus was to disrupt, people complained about it.
There were people that complained, as there always will be, but the mentality of the community was such that made most of them to experiment on decks in order to find solutions on such problems. This blue deck i am refering to was one of the best (with some alternate builds) for a long period. It didn't own the tables (as it happens with Priest in HS) but had a huge impact and inspired the community to build a lot of different variations of this deck (or based on it) in the future.
I myself do not know about the decks you are talking about in Yugioh and i have no reason to doubt your words, but i say again, this is wrong mentality (unless we are talking about decks that own the meta no matter the playstyle).
Priest is not a Tier 1 deck for various reasons, it just uses a different approach for a win condition. The fact that this approach requires more time for a game to end should be a reason to hate it?
There were people that complained, as there always will be, but the mentality of the community was such that made most of them to experiment on decks in order to find solutions on such problems. This blue deck i am refering to was one of the best (with some alternate builds) for a long period. It didn't own the tables (as it happens with Priest in HS) but had a huge impact and inspired the community to build a lot of different variations of this deck (or based on it) in the future.
I myself do not know about the decks you are talking about in Yugioh and i have no reason to doubt your words, but i say again, this is wrong mentality (unless we are talking about decks that own the meta no matter the playstyle).
Priest is not a Tier 1 deck for various reasons, it just uses a different approach for a win condition. The fact that this approach requires more time for a game to end should be a reason to hate it?
I found a nice read - https://www.channelfireball.com/all-strategy/articles/was-blue-control-as-oppressive-as-we-remember/ - it is genuinely interesting. The main conculsion you can take from this excerpt is that the deck was never really oppressive and actually the other variant of it were better, but it remains in the memory of the players simply because they hated losing to it so badly. Does it sound familiar?
Yes, it's basically the current situation with Rez Priest. Good deck, but not the best. Worse (at least currently) to its other variant (Galakrond), yet people still complain about it, because they hate it so much.
You actually gave a nice example - based on the article, because as I said, I know nothing about Magic.
It's funny, I bet my average game against rogue is much longer than most priest games. Discover - Lackey - discover - draw 3 cards - shadowstep - discover every turn.
I've been saying this forever. Even if you're favored and even if you win, playing against priest nowadays is just a matter of 'welp let's play my cards and hope the priest doesn't generate something randomly that beats me'. It's so stupid, Galakrond priest is quite literally a deck that beats you by generating a bunch of extra random cards.
Galakrond, the Unspeakable is literally the worst Galakrond but people still need to complain about it because it's a Priest card. Resurrect Priest is almost dead and a different variant of Control Priest with a different win condition just appeared but people just can't stop complaining. I despise all face and hyper aggro decks but i don't complain about them outside of the salt thread because there's people that like them. Let the people who like to play Priest enjoy their decks. If you only like five minute games then go ahead and concede. This saves time for us as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It's to show how much skill they have. Everyone knows if you play a "Control" deck you must be a 300 IQ apex human being who is perfect in all things. Everyone knows Control decks are slow. So therefore, the longer the game lasts the more of a genius they must be.
And before you point out that generating infinite value isn't the same as proper Control decks? Shut up you mentally deficient aggro-loving subhuman piece of trash.
What an outstanding opinion!
I still beat them with my demon Hunter. Turns out they don't like that and bm me.
I mean, bm as priest. How pathetic can one be. It's already an insult to play vs. this class.
No. I play thief priest and try to steal as much as possible cards from their hand and deck and also their minions on the board.
PRICELESS!
EU 11/2015+ , f2p 03/2021+: DK 63 / DH 205 /Dr 277 / Hu 733 / Ma 6666 / Pa 1072 / Pr 1165 / Ro 1791 / Sh 1303 / Wl 707 / Wr 664
I also do leave if I get to play against priest, Same with rogue, I hate to play against them even more.
Well, it's true that Priest is pretty opressive, but there is a reason why all Priest decks are considered tier 3 or 2 (at best). That is, It's very dependent on draw. Yes, it has a lot of value thanks to invoke and "thief" cards, but random cards usually tend to be mediocre, as most cards in modern Hearthstone are meant to be connected with other cards, if you know what I mean. In vanilla most cards were "good by themselves" but now almost every card is a part of a "combo" or any other "purpose of a deck". While it's true that they can create a few Murozonds and crash you in a very depressing way, but it's pretty rare. In short - auto conceding against Priest is just dumb and if you want to become a good player, don't ever do this.
auto conceding vs priest makes perfect sense when climbing to legend (and especially at a rank floor). I mean if you are one game away from a rank floor don't do it but if it takes 20 mins for one priest game you can play 4 games in that time. Also, some decks just will not win vs priest under any circumstances and therefore it's a clear waste of time. I am afraid though once quest warlock gets popular this is going to be true of them too. Sadly, quest warlock is the hard counter of a number of decks (not just one like priest hard counters enrage warrior) and the matchup is even worse. Quest warlock has basically a stone lock vs priest and rogue and is unbelievably favoured vs HL hunter. so much so that priest and rogue should probably consider auto conceding the matchup and never play (especially priest as their only chance to win is if both plot twists are at the bottom of the warlocks deck). The quest warlock vs priest matchup is the most lopsided matchup I have ever seen in this game. It is even a worse matchup than playing freeze mage vs control warrior which was about 90/10. Quest warlock is more like 99/1 vs priest. If you include times the quest warlock disconnects or makes a major blunder such as misclicking maybe 95/5.
Every deck has a counter, that's true. If the game is not an important one, you can concede for the sake of not wasting time. I remember the meta (Yeah Old Gods, I'm talkin' bout' you ;) when almost every single game was taking so long. It's all dependent on meta, and while it's true that now we have a Midrange domminance, where games usually last 8-9 turns. Sure if you've got tools like Patches the Pirate in the past or Dinotamer Brann nowadays, you can beat most control decks, with the exception of Priest. This is why the class is unliked by the community. It is the only control deck, which has enough healing, board clears and value generation to beat fast decks. Sure, you can say "What about Highlander Mage?". I genuinely don't understand how on earth HL Mage has higher winrate than Priest, but if you're looking for a deck to climb, HL Mage is not viable. As regards the Priest problem, like I said, it's usually "love it" or "hate it" depending on what kind of playstyle you prefer. I personally am a fan of control decks, but I don't have some important cards, so I can't play Galakrond Priest.
The class isn't unliked by community, because it's a control deck, it's unliked, because it doesn't play the standard game. Neither Control Warlock, Big Druid or Control Warrior get the same amount of hate, even if they are control too and extend the duration of the games. The reason Priest is hated is because its main focus is to disrupt you. Board clears + removal is their playstyle, so basically your only option is to have them run out of them.
You can say it is true for other controls, but not really. Priest took it to the extreme, having 5-6 board clears mained and on top of that plenty of other removal.
If you played yugioh, it's like facing a deck of 90% traps. Summon a monster? Og it's gone. Summon a monster? Gone Summon a monster? Gone.
Yep, that's the point. Most control decks consist on: play minions, have them battle other minions, THEN use some AoE if you fall behind or that makes your minions win.
Priest is: You have 30 cards. 15 of them are removal, be it minions that kill minions no matter how smart you trade, be it pure AoEs. It's kinda like when Dr.Boom hero became popular, suddenly all warrior cards were removal.
Also, as far as I know, people just dont like ressurrection mechanics, as its already annoying enough to kill some minions to be forced to do it 20 times.
I dont have that much a problem with priest, mostly because it is fun to smash for me.
Click to see my Hearthstone projects:
Im very tempted to do this, its always slow players with turtle decks, super boring and slow chance to win against
People talking as if Rez Priest is still dominating the meta....wtf?? The main Priest decks out there are focused on value generation. They run exactly 1 board clear (Soul Mirror) or 2 if you also consider Galakrond and 4 removal spells, 2 of which are also value-generating (Time Rip). The rest are minions, buffs, value-generating minions and spells and aboslutely no resurrect stuff
What's the point of playing the game if all you want is for it to be over as fast as possible? Aggro is what destroys card games, not control.
Threads like this one obviously are made by people who most of the times have no or too low experience on card games.
I used to play MTG tabletop (you know with real collectible cards which you could trade, sell or purchase- no crafting available) when there was that single Blue control deck full of counterspells (Force of Will ftw!) and board control decks. Your opponent could not even put a single card on the table with ease, yet, no one whinned or grubled about it. Games took even hours to finish and still everyone had fun.
Priest decks nowadays remind me of these days. The problem is not the time a game takes, nor the Priest playstyle, but the fact that almost ALL other decks around require 8-10 minutes to get if they win or not. The grinding of ranks, the grinding of gold, you name it.
Hating a deck just because it exists in a different mentality is not a way to solve a problem. I cannot make someone stop hating a deck (i myself used to hate discard Black decks on MTG days) but you should strive to find ways to make this game more fun for you. If you can't either stop playing or have some break.
Decks like control Priest should always be around. Afterall it is the right for those who love control decks to have a chance playing with them, as it is for those who prefer other types.
Believe in potential; the multiverse blesses some beings with extraordinary traits, with the potential to do—to be—great things.
Funny, because in yugioh there actually were similar decks too - HAT or Counter Fairy. HAT wasn't even a real deck with real win condition - it was literally a mash-up of 3 separate engines (H)and (A)rtifact (T)raptrix made to disrupt your opponent + traps (made to disrupt by definition). Counter Fairies as the name suggests, were meant to counter your opponent plays - with Counter Traps. It was a deck made of like 6 monsters (out of 40 cards, when you can play 3 of each) + traps. You would just vomit your entire hand of traps on the board and flip them one by one not letting your opponent play the game.
Guess what? Both were universally hated. And there are more examples, just gave the first two that came to my mind.
Magic is one of the TCGs I didn't actually play, so don't know how good the deck you mentioned was. But if it was present on the top tables and worked as you describe it, I call bullshit on your words. Maybe it was simply bad or maybe you shouldn't speak for the entire community, because I am 99% sure that if the deck was good and its only focus was to disrupt, people complained about it.
There were people that complained, as there always will be, but the mentality of the community was such that made most of them to experiment on decks in order to find solutions on such problems. This blue deck i am refering to was one of the best (with some alternate builds) for a long period. It didn't own the tables (as it happens with Priest in HS) but had a huge impact and inspired the community to build a lot of different variations of this deck (or based on it) in the future.
I myself do not know about the decks you are talking about in Yugioh and i have no reason to doubt your words, but i say again, this is wrong mentality (unless we are talking about decks that own the meta no matter the playstyle).
Priest is not a Tier 1 deck for various reasons, it just uses a different approach for a win condition. The fact that this approach requires more time for a game to end should be a reason to hate it?
Believe in potential; the multiverse blesses some beings with extraordinary traits, with the potential to do—to be—great things.
I found a nice read - https://www.channelfireball.com/all-strategy/articles/was-blue-control-as-oppressive-as-we-remember/ - it is genuinely interesting. The main conculsion you can take from this excerpt is that the deck was never really oppressive and actually the other variant of it were better, but it remains in the memory of the players simply because they hated losing to it so badly. Does it sound familiar?
Yes, it's basically the current situation with Rez Priest. Good deck, but not the best. Worse (at least currently) to its other variant (Galakrond), yet people still complain about it, because they hate it so much.
You actually gave a nice example - based on the article, because as I said, I know nothing about Magic.
It's funny, I bet my average game against rogue is much longer than most priest games. Discover - Lackey - discover - draw 3 cards - shadowstep - discover every turn.
I've been saying this forever. Even if you're favored and even if you win, playing against priest nowadays is just a matter of 'welp let's play my cards and hope the priest doesn't generate something randomly that beats me'. It's so stupid, Galakrond priest is quite literally a deck that beats you by generating a bunch of extra random cards.
Galakrond, the Unspeakable is literally the worst Galakrond but people still need to complain about it because it's a Priest card. Resurrect Priest is almost dead and a different variant of Control Priest with a different win condition just appeared but people just can't stop complaining. I despise all face and hyper aggro decks but i don't complain about them outside of the salt thread because there's people that like them. Let the people who like to play Priest enjoy their decks. If you only like five minute games then go ahead and concede. This saves time for us as well.