So far from more than a year experience playng hearstone arena, i wanted to check if others feal like me : getting a leggendary in an arena run is a liability.
why i think so?
- normally most elgendaries are high costed so they disturb our curb.
-most of them are very situational, a black night or harrison jones could be uselless sometimesor win you games.
-theyre value si quite slime, in a lot of cases i would prefer an ogre over illidan, cairne and sometimes even sylvanas.
- you rely on them too much to take you back making underperforming plays sometimes.
So far my runs with legendaries had been quite mediocre (6-9) ( except a 12-0 hunter i had with rag... but i think the 4 animal companios made most of the work) for most of them compared to 0 legendaries decks, that normally where more consistent.(5-12)
When i even get 2 legendaries the arena goes very bad (4-7).
So it took people this long to figure out that legendaries =/= wins. I could have told you that nine months ago.
I can still remember all the damn complaining threads where people thought they were super unlucky because they kept loosing to decks in arena that had epics and legendaries, or that they would always loose in ranked because some people had four or five legendaries.
Think about how many essential cards in a good deck are rares and then think about how many essential cards are legendary. It's no comparison, the rares win out 10-1.
- you rely on them too much to take you back making underperforming plays sometimes.
Speaking of personal problems, or "subjective misconception patterns"... If you rely on legendaries too much, that's your fault as a player, not the fault of the legendaries.
Anyway, this whole discussion is moot, because we don't get to choose when we play with legendaries in the Arena. If you get offered a choice between 3 bad legendaries, that's no different than being offered 3 bad commons. You have to suck it up and make the most of it.
I don't think a legendary is a liability anymore than having 3 bad card choices of normal, rares, or epics. It's just a matter of choosing the best one for your draft and making use of it. (Just had a 8-3 shaman run with TBK, BGH, Hex, and Faceless Manipulator.)
I've had terrible luck with The Black Knight... sandbagged it for days against a high-record druid of all classes, never saw a target, might have even won if I had played it as a 6-mana yeti. Against high-win decks I think that's still the right play, but boy did that suck. Come on, what self-respecting druid doesn't have druid of the claw, ironbark protector, ancient of war or sludge belcher in their deck? I'd even settle for mark of nature or mark of the wild!
So far from more than a year experience playng hearstone arena, i wanted to check if others feal like me : getting a leggendary in an arena run is a liability.
why i think so?
- normally most elgendaries are high costed so they disturb our curb.
-most of them are very situational, a black night or harrison jones could be uselless sometimesor win you games.
-theyre value si quite slime, in a lot of cases i would prefer an ogre over illidan, cairne and sometimes even sylvanas.
- you rely on them too much to take you back making underperforming plays sometimes.
So far my runs with legendaries had been quite mediocre (6-9) ( except a 12-0 hunter i had with rag... but i think the 4 animal companios made most of the work) for most of them compared to 0 legendaries decks, that normally where more consistent.(5-12)
When i even get 2 legendaries the arena goes very bad (4-7).
It's true, legendaries can push up your mana curve and sometimes leave you short of the all important 2drops.
However arena decks tend to be slower, so the late game power of legendaries is often very advantageous.
I don't really play arena but the one time I got 12 wins I had Rag and he was awesome in every way
So it took people this long to figure out that legendaries =/= wins. I could have told you that nine months ago.
I can still remember all the damn complaining threads where people thought they were super unlucky because they kept loosing to decks in arena that had epics and legendaries, or that they would always loose in ranked because some people had four or five legendaries.
Think about how many essential cards in a good deck are rares and then think about how many essential cards are legendary. It's no comparison, the rares win out 10-1.
Speaking of personal problems, or "subjective misconception patterns"... If you rely on legendaries too much, that's your fault as a player, not the fault of the legendaries.
Anyway, this whole discussion is moot, because we don't get to choose when we play with legendaries in the Arena. If you get offered a choice between 3 bad legendaries, that's no different than being offered 3 bad commons. You have to suck it up and make the most of it.
I had a mage deck with Rag and went 6-3 and he was never to be seen. :(
I don't think a legendary is a liability anymore than having 3 bad card choices of normal, rares, or epics. It's just a matter of choosing the best one for your draft and making use of it. (Just had a 8-3 shaman run with TBK, BGH, Hex, and Faceless Manipulator.)
I've had terrible luck with The Black Knight... sandbagged it for days against a high-record druid of all classes, never saw a target, might have even won if I had played it as a 6-mana yeti. Against high-win decks I think that's still the right play, but boy did that suck. Come on, what self-respecting druid doesn't have druid of the claw, ironbark protector, ancient of war or sludge belcher in their deck? I'd even settle for mark of nature or mark of the wild!
No... Just no... Excluding the terrible ones, Legendaries have better value for card cost than most non-legendaries.
But if you've drafted a solid rush deck, a 10 cost legendary probably doesn't synergize very well.
I really want Pirates to be a playable theme.