Imo you lack instant removal spells. In your deck I only see Hex, Forked and Venture Co. as ones (since Venture at turn 5 or 6 is so big that it likely draws out instant removal).
You built a very aggressive deck, which is not the best when playing shaman. Additionally you made some choices that do not fit the spirit of the deck (passing cult master, another twilight drake and a bloodlust). I believe this deck's aggression falls off pretty quickly, and having only 1 solid removal and 3 big threats means you had a pretty hard time in the late game.
All that said, this deck is still worth abot 4 wins, so either rng or misplays were probably involved as well.
It means two things: a. The average casting cost of the creatures in the deck is low. In this particular deck there are 8 guys that cost 2 or less and only 2 that cost 6 or more b. The deck as a whole is more geared towards having board presence and attacking, than stabilizing and eliminating the opponent's advantages. This is very relevant to the class played. For example a mage has many tools to catch up when his opponent gets ahead, so mage control decks are strong in the arena. On the other hand, the Hunter's ability to finish off an opponent that is low on Health makes him great for aggressive strategies.
There are generally two parts in a successful aggro deck: -Cards that generate board advantage, such as early drops and cheap removals. -Cards that capitalize on the existing board advantage. This includes cards like Bloodlust that finish the game before the opponent has a chance to react, and cards like Frostwolf Warlord, that push the board advantage to a point where the opponent has no solutions.
Pretty sure the draft was not the problem here. The deck looks totally fine. This should do way better than 2-3. Either you had very bad luck with your draws/opponents or your play needs some refining.
Not really. Shaman are geared towards strong control and the late-game. This deck had neither. Four spells total, and a dearth of 6+ mana minions.
Take pick #20, for instance. You were already really light on spells that deep into the draft, so taking Gadgetzan Auctioneer was a poor choice. You didn't have the cards that would allow him to give you value. Ravenholdt Assassin would have been the better pick at that point in the draft and would have helped to shore up your late game as well.
The quality of the deck is indeed above average, but not amazing. 2-3 is unacceptable but it happens, bad RNG or misplay. Either way no reason to worry about that, just play more and have fun!
Hi all,
I built what I thought was a pretty solid shaman deck and got pretty crushed, 2-3. Any thoughts on problems w/ the deck? Thanks!
http://www.arenavalue.com/s/iB9S5N
Looks good enough, sometimes you just play bad/get bad rng/meet better decks.
I had the same bad luck last night...I had a good shaman deck I thought i could get at least 5-6 wins with it since i'm not an expert at arenas.
But I Stoped pretty fast at 3-3
Imo you lack instant removal spells. In your deck I only see Hex, Forked and Venture Co. as ones (since Venture at turn 5 or 6 is so big that it likely draws out instant removal).
You built a very aggressive deck, which is not the best when playing shaman. Additionally you made some choices that do not fit the spirit of the deck (passing cult master, another twilight drake and a bloodlust). I believe this deck's aggression falls off pretty quickly, and having only 1 solid removal and 3 big threats means you had a pretty hard time in the late game.
All that said, this deck is still worth abot 4 wins, so either rng or misplays were probably involved as well.
ok, thanks everyone. When you guys say the deck is aggressive, what dose that mean? more creatures than taunts/removal? Or something else?
It means two things:
a. The average casting cost of the creatures in the deck is low. In this particular deck there are 8 guys that cost 2 or less and only 2 that cost 6 or more
b. The deck as a whole is more geared towards having board presence and attacking, than stabilizing and eliminating the opponent's advantages. This is very relevant to the class played. For example a mage has many tools to catch up when his opponent gets ahead, so mage control decks are strong in the arena. On the other hand, the Hunter's ability to finish off an opponent that is low on Health makes him great for aggressive strategies.
There are generally two parts in a successful aggro deck:
-Cards that generate board advantage, such as early drops and cheap removals.
-Cards that capitalize on the existing board advantage. This includes cards like Bloodlust that finish the game before the opponent has a chance to react, and cards like Frostwolf Warlord, that push the board advantage to a point where the opponent has no solutions.
Not really. Shaman are geared towards strong control and the late-game. This deck had neither. Four spells total, and a dearth of 6+ mana minions.
Take pick #20, for instance. You were already really light on spells that deep into the draft, so taking Gadgetzan Auctioneer was a poor choice. You didn't have the cards that would allow him to give you value. Ravenholdt Assassin would have been the better pick at that point in the draft and would have helped to shore up your late game as well.
Poetic.
No way. 90% of arena is about control, and this deck has very poor control. Three wins is about all you can expect, four or five if lucky.
Poetic.
The quality of the deck is indeed above average, but not amazing. 2-3 is unacceptable but it happens, bad RNG or misplay. Either way no reason to worry about that, just play more and have fun!
Looks like a 7+ deck to me.
It's nowhere near a perfect deck, but it's definitely above average. And average decks are all you need to pass 7 wins.