⚙
Learn More
Cosmetics
Related Cards
Card Pools
✕
×
PopCard Settings
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Elements settings
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
One of the big issue with tickatus is the fact is a demon and interract with lot of combo cards .Making him to be a minion will be the corect nerf otherwise is ok .
Yeah, control decks have no win condition appart from attrition, so let's make a win condition that is just playing a 7+ card, and then playing a well stated 6 mana card. Sure the game will be way more enjoyable than if you played against a deck where you won/lost into fatigue.
People are not complaining that they are getting milled. They are complaining they are getting milled so easily and from so little cost. There have been a warlock legendary designed to mill your opponent before, and to offer a win condition other than attrition in control mirrors. But this one couldn't be just slapped turn 8 to win the game. You actually had to use mana and lose tempo in order to win with it. A lot of it. It was free win only against the slowest control decks, who had only reactive cards. Here Tickatus is so ridiculously easy to activate that the only way to win is to just not play a control deck altogether.
Also, i get that you want control decks to have a win condition other than attrition, blizzard said they were going to turn to that in the future, but I don't see how those control decks that have a win condition can exist when Tickatus can mill said win condition so quickly and easily.
While Priest doesnt gets removed from this game a card like tickatus is needed
Tickatus is the type of card that keep the meta diversified. So, I love it. Without cards like Tickatus we would have a meta based only about control or aggro or combo. With Tickatus we can have a type of decks in middle. Something between control/combo. It is also a card that screw all types of priests, therefore I love it more.
Serious deckbuilding? seriously? it's just one card that obliterates ALL control decks because it burns so much cards and it's easy to activate. All those heavy decks you mentioned have low winrates. Gnomeferatu was a balanced card in comparison and rin is too slow (talking about wild). Considering wild, tickatus is played in a very heavy deck, renolock, which can corrupt is veeery easily. I think it needs a little nerf to the cards it burns to maintain it playable, from 5 to 4 or 3
Edit: wow this has got to be the longest post I made...sry I guess
This is just good ol' plain wrong but let's get into it in more detail:
Angry or not, it's awful and reprehensible to say things like that to people because you're mad about a card game. Please get some perspective and take a break if Hearthstone is making you that angry.
This is the only good point you made
Shitheadtus threads are becoming really grating to me, honestly. Control decks having a win condition against other control decks is GOOD and NECESSARY for the game.
While I do agree that most control decks should have a wincondition other than "grind the opponent out in fatigue" removing that option entirely is less healthy than making it extremely prevalent (with the exeption of the "ignore fatigue" cards, those are almost as toxic as retardtus).
Fatigue is easily the best "end of deck" feature ever created and DEFINETLY the best part of Hearthstone in terms of "interesting decisions it forces" and ignoring it is the biggest waste this game can do. The fact that you have (well...you no longer have it anymore but it WAS a relevant consideration ) every turn to think about "I could draw cards....but if I'm not careful I may lose in fatigue...or maybe I think I have better healing/threats than him so maybe I can afford to do it...and so on" has always been to me the most interesting and fun part of control mirrors.
The fact that we've gone for like 3 years with control decks only winning through attrition is not a good thing, and has lead to a weird sense of entitlement in control players, who expect that every game the play lasts for 40 minutes and drags to 10 fatigue AT LEAST (I'm projecting here, this obviously isn't true).
You say that but you'd be surprised at how many control decks have run actual winconditions relatively recently, control priest in ....it was Rashtakan I believe... going for the 3/4 mind blasts dealing around 18/20 dmg burst in a turn with Shadowreaper Anduin is one such "winconditioned" control deck, cubelock and hadronox druid are other ones .... while they are WAY more like (super)heavy midrange decks they still have a controlly feel to them and...well..they very obviously ran winconditions, then you got Luna's Pocket Galaxy, I don't think you can say making a fkton of 7/10 drops cost 1 isn't a good wincondition. We could go on and we could even get into the fact that the "no wincon" decks were only popular in rise of shadows because of Archivist Elysiana allowing it but let's not go TOO much in depth.
The only superlong and toxic games are the ones with stuff like Archivist Elysiana to enable them and I DO agree these ones (in any form...be it Dead Man's Hand warrior, Archbishop Benedictus priest, Academic Espionage rogue and similar BS) are toxic as they either give a free fatigue win if the game gets there or they make games unbearably long. (I play ODD warrior and deathrattle quest priest btw, if I think a game is going too long it must mean something)
Decks having bad/polarizing matchups is also a normal and healthy thing for card games.
Normal...maybe, I do not have enough info on that one...healthy...FK NO. Now: good and bad matchups? yes 100% , if you go down my thread history you'll see that deathrattle hunter (eggs/cubes/recruit you name it...the more recent tonk one in wild is a bit more toxic with its near OTK levels of burst but still...) is one of my favourite decks to play AGAINST of all time AND I HAD A NEGATIVE WR AGAINST IT...it was a really bad matchup for any of my "no wincondition" decks, same with cubelock and hadronox druid...THESE are the good/bad matchups that are healthy for the game...the "realistically winnable" ones, not the "if I get lucky enough maybe I can bullshit myself out of this one" games...aka the ones like inbredtus (mainly talking about wild where Brann Bronzebeard is a card renolock seems to always have on turn 9)
cancertus Warlock is good against Control decks. Control decks are bad against Tickatus Warlock. The Earth spins on its axis and plants photosynthesize to make oxygen.
Ok man, I thought I was on the internet, not in a poetry class...anyway refer to my previous point.
There's apparently now a deck, which is a control deck, and has a favorable matchup against Tickatus Warlock. You can choose to play that if you're desperately attached to playing Control Decks,
I honestly do not know which deck you are talikng about but since it beats tumortus it is likely a "control" burn deck maybe kind of like the y'shharj (spelled wrong...DO NOT care) higlander druid that can deal 16 burst...TWICE or maybe a "virtually" infinite one (aka...the game is goint to end...one way or another b4 it runs out of cards) like "prime gaming" (as Kibler calls it) which I also dislike since it also ignores any possibilty of fatigue making it almost as toxic as the deck it beats.
or you can change pace entirely and play aggro (God forbid) to just bully greedy control/combo decks (which is something Tickatus was designed to do).
So basically "don't play what's fun to you" VERY nice design I must say.
I would almost agree with you if """"""""normal"""""""" midrange was an existing archetype in wild I'd play elemental shaman which is one of my favourite decks of all time to have a decent wr vs them...but that STILL would mean I was forced away from something I enjoy making this card (amd similar) STILL 100% toxic
I understand the frustration of getting milled. It's a bad feeling, and it's the reason that Pot of Desires is such a polarizing subject in YuGiOh to this day. Magic players also hate being milled.
And that is exacly why mill should disappear as a concept from human memory..moving on.
Legends of Runeterra recently has had very grindy control decks pop up recently (with a win condition other than attrition, please take notes Hearthstone)
That is precisely why I haven't swhitched to LoR (and believe me...with all the ultra toxic OTK/mill/infinite BS they keep printing AND EVEN SUPPORTING here...I came quite close) :
there is NO SUCH THING as a grindy reactive deck there AND all of the "winconditions" they run are unstoppable once they go off making them unfun, just to name a few you have aurelion who has "Level up: your opponent surrenders" as his effect, or Nasus being Nasus the way he is in LoL (although LoL can afford an infinite scaling champ because there are 4 other idiots with him), or even just Fiora.
Stuff like that may be more handlable there given the "fk you, I win" nature of all the winconditions AND given that your health is low but being allowed to play in the way I find fun (REACTABLE threats on both parts) is more important to me.
and hey, it has a hard matchup against the one champion that can mill their deck from X to 4. Maybe Tick should have his stats toned down, but ultimately I think his effect is important for the game.
Maokai uh? I can't really say much here since the only LoR I play is VERY casual and I never meet actually good decks but given what I know about the game it is probably fine given the already discussed "fk you, I win" nature of the cards making toxic cards like him not stand out TOO much because the design philosphy is "whoever draws his BS first wins" (now obviously there is a lot more to that and the more correct way to phrase it would be "whoever gets his BS to work first wins" and even then I still don't like it)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since I already have had this happen here are a few clarifications to avoid idiots inventing stupid points out of thin air like the illitterate guy that, just because I complained about cancertus he thought I was ok with clown druid summoning a board full of 12/12s on turn 10:
Carfusso, the childishness and pointless digs ("This is the only good point you made") really take away from the obvious effort you put into that post, and I agree with it for the most part. It was equal parts "I agree with this" and cringe.
It's interesting you mention LoR (I haven't played it) and "whoever gets his BS to work first wins" because that's exactly how I feel about HS at the moment, Standard at least (I've never payed Wild). As it's not just Tickatus alone which stifles control decks. There are numerous incredibly powerful cards which, unless you have the correct answer, require numerous resources (and often life points) to deal with.
Soulciologist Malicia is one of the main offenders due to her just straight up ending the game more often than not if you're not playing a class with great board clears*. Carnival Clown is another obvious example as is Blastmaster Boom and to an extent Jandice Barov.
This is usually fine for 'Meta Decks', but it lowers the value of anything outside of these, overall decreasing the amount of decks which are possible viable. There's really no need for the power level of these cards to be as they are, other than to compete with other overstated and undercosted cards and to push certain archetypes that Blizzard want to push.
*And before people say "just play a class with good board clears" that isn't the point. A deck making an overwhelming board state that something like Rogue cannot deal with is absolutely fine, just not when it's achieved by 1 extremely overstated card or easily achievable combo.
Bad destroys every control deck,and in wild is really wild face him
Making people like you more angry and prone to write such huge complaints on a forum for some pixels they paid, is what drives me to play Mill decks and Tickatus decks.
Carfusso, the childishness and pointless digs ("This is the only good point you made") really take away from the obvious effort you put into that post, and I agree with it for the most part. It was equal parts "I agree with this" and cringe.
childishness for? arguing for my points? showing the parts I agree with him?
It's interesting you mention LoR (I haven't played it) and "whoever gets his BS to work first wins" because that's exactly how I feel about HS at the moment, Standard at least (I've never payed Wild). As it's not just dogshitus alone which stifles control decks. There are numerous incredibly powerful cards which, unless you have the correct answer, require numerous resources (and often life points) to deal with.
Soulciologist Malicia is one of the main offenders due to her just straight up ending the game more often than not if you're not playing a class with great board clears*. Carnival Clown is another obvious example as is Blastmaster Boom and to an extent Jandice Barov.
This is usually fine for 'Meta Decks', but it lowers the value of anything outside of these, overall decreasing the amount of decks which are possible viable. There's really no need for the power level of these cards to be as they are, other than to compete with other overstated and undercosted cards and to push certain archetypes that Blizzard want to push.
this is simply incorrect, cards that can create medium to huge boards are only a problem relative to how early they can do that, any huge board that drops in the lategame (there ARE exeptions obviously and obviously it also depends on HOW late we're talking...turn 10 or deep into the deck) is, in general, perfectly fine since if you are playing an aggressive deck you aim to finish the game before they are played and if you are playing a deck that goes for the long game you need to either have big boards of your own or good removal and healing...otherwise your deck is not good enough to play for the lategame (the key part is that these boards are handlable in ways that are not limited to "kill the opponent" unlike fuckfacetus or any of the LoR winconditions I mentioned)
*And before people say "just play a class with good board clears" that isn't the point. A deck making an overwhelming board state that something like Rogue cannot deal with is absolutely fine, just not when it's achieved by 1 extremely overstated card or easily achievable combo.
your point here is more relative to the powerlevel while mine was never about that...I know it sounds wierd but I do not even think shitpiletus is overpowered, it is just stupidly polarizing as it HARD loses to aggression/pressure while winning vs reactive decks
anyway, of course obviously broken cards should be nerfed, my point was not game balance but rather letting someone play the game they like
nice arguments, you sure are someone whose opinion needs to be taken seriously
I'm LOLing at the comments that are saying Tickatus is only good against Priest. That's the funniest thing I've heard all day.
Also, the people who make the argument that Control Players are entitled and should have counters don't realize that even with some control decks (Highlander decks specifically) have more pressure than most other slow decks, yet no matter what you do to try to pressure the Warlock your board just gets removed over and over again quite easily. Cascading Disaster and plenty of other removal pretty much invalidate any way for a control deck to pressure. You just cannot pressure Warlock unless you play threat after threats until they don't have anymore removal.
I remember a game playing as Highlander Druid (which is supposed to be a good matchup for me) and doing my very best to pressure the Warlock, but everything I did was just easily thwarted. I even Zephrys for a Tirion and that still wasn't enough.
Do I really need to explain how calling Tick a variety of childish names makes your post look cringey? Or making a statement like "this is the only good point you made", "this is just good ol' plain wrong" or calling people idiots and illiterate does nothing for your argument. It looks completely ridiculous to anyone who might actually be willing to take your arguments seriously and only, ironically, appeals to "idiotic and illiterate" fools who get a kick out of acting like edgy children on the internet. I'm telling you this because you actually spent a lot of time formatting and formulating a decent post, you can ignore the advice by all means but I can guarantee that it will only make your efforts to create such a post wasted, with comments like Chewmass' (and I really cannot blame him for replying to you the way he did). I only read beyond the fourth or fifth line due to the formatting, indicating that you weren't, as you say, an idiot, and I'm glad I did because the post was good.
In anycase:
this is simply incorrect, cards that can create medium to huge boards are only a problem relative to how early they can do that, any huge board that drops in the lategame (there ARE exeptions obviously and obviously it also depends on HOW late we're talking...turn 10 or deep into the deck) is, in general, perfectly fine since if you are playing an aggressive deck you aim to finish the game before they are played and if you are playing a deck that goes for the long game you need to either have big boards of your own or good removal and healing...otherwise your deck is not good enough to play for the lategame (the key part is that these boards are handlable in ways that are not limited to "kill the opponent" unlike fuckfacetus or any of the LoR winconditions mentioned).
What is incorrect? I haven't claimed that cards should not be able to create medium to huge boards. I'm saying that there is no reason for Blizzard to go so over the top with the power level of these cards that the only way to counter them is with mass board wipes or with generating huge boards yourself and rushing them with broom.
So we'll start with an extreme case, a 1-mana card that reads "Summon 7 8/8 Clowns. Can only be played if you have 10 mana." can only be played in the late game but obviously would not be fine, it would be broken beyond belief, and that's where the power of the card is relative, and where trying to find the sweet spot between what is OP and what amount of stats a card like that could generate while still being relatively comparable to the rest of the card set.
Malicia, for 7-mana and 1 card, can easily generate 23/23 worth of stats, 18/18 of which have rush. The condition is that she must be played in a Soul Fragment deck. There is absolutely no way you will ever convince me that the card is 'balanced', the only way I can see that argument working out is the consideration that there are countless other cards in the game which are equally as broken.
This, I'm saying, creates a game where the average power level of cards that aren't completely broken is significantly lowered, meaning fewer decks are viable, especially control decks.
your point here is more relative to the powerlevel while mine was never about that...I know it sounds wierd but I do not even think shitpiletus is overpowered, it is just stupidly polarizing as it HARD loses to aggression/pressure while winning vs reactive decks
anyway, of course obviously broken cards should be nerfed, my point was not game balance but rather letting someone play the game they like
I don't think he's OP either, at least not in the context of the meta he is in at the moment. My issue with him is exactly the same as yours. But even without Tickatus many potential control decks will suffer because Blizzards' card design generally funnels us down specific paths for deck creation.
Priest's only board clear spell in classic HS was a 5-mana Holy Nova and they were one of the main control classes alongside Mage and Warrior, nowadays if a class doesn't have absurdly powerful board wipes they will get run over by shit like Ysera, Clowns, or Malicia, unless they cannot create large boards themselves and utilise broken shit like Animated Broomstick.
Nerfing Ticktatus is something unecessary. While i can guess that in standard it is somewhat of an issue especially in control vs control matchup, it's at the same time the card players on this forum were crying to have for years. It is the best card that can challenge otk decks successfully both in standard and wild. Especially in wild where with every new expansion there is somewhat of a risk that new cards bring back old broken combos\otk decks that in a week are everywere in the ladder. Also it keeps infinite value and slow autochess control decks in check. And it's really useless in any aggro matchup and against most midrange decks
Alright alright so:
Do I really need to explain how calling Tick a variety of childish names makes your post look cringey? Or making a statement like "this is the only good point you made", "this is just good ol' plain wrong" or calling people idiots and illiterate does nothing for your argument. It looks completely ridiculous to anyone who might actually be willing to take your arguments seriously and only, ironically, appeals to "idiotic and illiterate" fools who get a kick out of acting like edgy children on the internet.
Ok so I do see your point and honestly I kind of understand it, I seem to be the only person on the planet who believes the only "proper form" when writing/speaking and even acting (to an extent) is to be as clear to understand as possible, and DO NOT get me started on my opinion on the so called "dress code" as this is neither the place nor the time.
(now I'm afraid I sometimes miss the mark on the "clarity" part since,even with all the exams I passed I've never been that good at writing an essay,it actually costed me an A by 1 point on the most important one but that's besides the point)
the "different names" part is meant to be nothing but a throwaway thing to be completely ignored by anyone that's not me, sorry it bothered you but (as I expressed before) my opinion on form is VERY peculiar, the rest was just a way to express my distaste towards people that (e.g.) use words I never wrote/said to discredit my points
I'm telling you this because you actually spent a lot of time formatting and formulating a decent post, you can ignore the advice by all means but I can guarantee that it will only make your efforts to create such a post wasted, with comments like Chewmass' (and I really cannot blame him for replying to you the way he did).
He would have had the right to do so IF he had brought actual arguments like I did, the fact that he didn't means that he lost every right to respond that way
I only read beyond the fourth or fifth line due to the formatting, indicating that you weren't, as you say, an idiot, and I'm glad I did because the post was good.
I'm afraid I don't quite understand what you mean but...thanks...I guess
What is incorrect? I haven't claimed that cards should not be able to create medium to huge boards. I'm saying that there is no reason for Blizzard to go so over the top with the power level of these cards that the only way to counter them is with mass board wipes or with generating huge boards yourself.
So we'll start with an extreme case, a 1-mana card that reads "Summon 7 8/8 Clowns. Can only be played if you have 10 mana." can only be played in the late game but obviously would not be fine, it would be broken beyond belief, and that's where the power of the card is relative, and where trying to find the sweet spot between what is OP and what amount of stats a card like that could generate while still being relatively comparable to the rest of the card set.
Malicia, for 7-mana and 1 card, can easily generate 23/23 worth of stats, 18/18 of which have rush. The condition is that she must be played in a Soul Fragment deck. There is absolutely no way you will ever convince me that the card is 'balanced', the only way I can see that argument working out is the consideration that there are countless other cards in the game which are equally as broken.
This, I'm saying, creates a game where the average power level of cards that aren't completely broken is significantly lowered, meaning fewer decks are viable, especially control decks.
ok I think I now understand what you mean, the powerlevel of the game (some cards exopecially) has gone up dramatically and we could argue for long on wether that is a good or a bad thing.
one small thing you said though:
So we'll start with an extreme case, a 1-mana card that reads "Summon 7 8/8 Clowns. Can only be played if you have 10 mana." can only be played in the late game but obviously would not be fine, it would be broken beyond belief.
I may have expressed this poorly but I did say that you'd ALSO have to think about WHEN the card is playable in order to detemine if it's a bad idea or not. To try to explain my point: Bloodreaver Gul'dan (one of my favourite cards): his battlecry is obviously insane and he can "technically" only be played way late into the game when you have ammassed an insane pool of demons and your opponent has the mana AND (supposedly) the resources in the form of removal/healing/armor or a "counterboard" that he needs to deal with it.
Your card would be ultrabroken anyway I know but I still hope you see what I meant now.
My point however was about the fact that these cards are all things that (unlike my LoR examples) can be dealt with in ways that are different from "kill the opponent". Yes it IS true that it can be quite to incredibly hard to do so but still cards like these need to exist as good ways to close out games for control decks (as long as they don't become unreactable)
I don't think he's OP either, at least not in the context of the meta he is in at the moment. My issue with him is exactly the same as yours. But even without Tickatus many potential control decks will suffer because Blizzards' card design generally funnels us down specific paths for deck creation.
I'm fine with blizzard printing better aggro cards, I'm not fine with them printing "fk you, I win" cards
Priest's only board clear spell in classic HS was a 5-mana Holy Nova and they were one of the main control classes alongside Mage and Warrior, nowadays if a class doesn't have absurdly powerful board wipes they will get run over by shit like Ysera, Clowns, or Malicia, unless they cannot create large boards themselves and utilise broken shit like Animated Broomstick.
And here we go back to the powerlevel and that is not a discussion I want to start rn as I don't have a fully formed opinion on that one
I think it's good to have disruptivecards that target both greedy control and combo decks but it definitely feels a bit too powerful, specially cause you can get extra copies with both Y'Shaarj and Felosophy, Tickatus existing is a constant threat for any and every Control deck until it rotates.
It's a necessary evil. It's a class card that can be played in basically only big\control warlock decks that may or may not be there depending on how aggro the meta gets and destroys slow control decks (mostly priest) that have the wincon of clearing the board until the opponent ends his deck. This card alone is what can keep the meta from becoming the control vs control "loses whoever gets to fatigue first"meta that we had when Archivist Elysiana was added
If you're playing a control deck, that's what you kinda sign up for. Resource and fatigue management should be the whole point of control v control, not "well they have this card so I lose10 cards and the matchup before the game even starts".
Yeah, the meta would be so sad if control decks were allowed to exist, instead let's have any control vs control warlock be ruined by tickatus
Sounds like you are just a horrible player. Any competent player can easily beat Tickatus lock with highlander druid, warlock only has 2 legit board clears with twisting nether. Cascading disaster is often useless against a wide board. Compare that with the plethora of ways highlander druid can build board after board, it really is a one sided matchup. Not to mention stuff like solar eclipse, cenarion ward and moontouched amulet/ Yshraaj which gains you enough armour to survive long into fatigue.
Note that it's not about pressure from turn 1, you want to draw through your deck and ramp initially, highlander druid can actually benefit from Tickatus getting rid of useless stuff (in some games I regard even Zephrys as unnecessary) as it means quicker dream portal draws to apply REAL PRESSURE where they are FORCED to use their removal. Not tempo-ing out an uncorrupted dreaming drake on 3 and then complaining about Tickatus on here.
I have played highlander druid enough to know the intricacies of the deck and I'm happy when I see a Tickatus lock because i know it's an easy win.