This thread is for a discussion on the methods people use for deck building. I'd love to compare and contrast different theories and processes to see how you make one.
Personally, I begin with the deck's main idea. For example, one I am developing right now is a divine shield paladin with buffs to get really efficient trades and eventually gain enough tempo to overwhelm him.
First I go for the 2 main mechanics I want, divine shield and buffs. Since there is no online deck builder that lets you get too many cards and then preen down, so I use pen and paper and write down all my options. First I take a list of everything with divine shield, and everything that buffs, things you would consider standard needs for every deck (ie I like to keep an acidic swamp ooze, an ironbeak owl, and a black knight in every deck), a list of paladin removal that I like using, and then finally a list of things that will synergize with divine shield (Blessing of wisdom, redemption)
I then start to build a deck, this involves shaving away cards based on what is most useful and what helps the mana curve etc. I keep the list though as to me the deck will go through endless iterations as i tweak it and play with it to increase efficiency. Like right now I realize that there is a lack of card draw I'd like to confront.
I very much like to focus on controlling the damage flow as well as the card usage ratio. By card ratio, I am referring to the amount of cards used to counter other cards. If I can use one card to eliminate 2 or 3 that you played, I consider myself to (generally speaking) have the advantage. Increase the amount of cards that I pull, and it's generally a solid win.
I tend to focus first on what type of deck I want: control, aggro, or combo. The latter isn't really possible in the game right now and I vastly favor control (I was an MTG tourney player for 12 years, playing mostly blue/black control.) Then I look at the mechanics of the class. Shaman is ideal for control because of the totems and the cheap removal that Overload lets you spread over two turns. Furthermore, Overload benefits a prime card for Shaman (Unbound Elemental) which is usually better as a removal tool than a serious offensive threat because it starts with far more health than attack. So, there's the core of the mechanics I want to use: Overload and removal.
Then I think about how I want to address the deck's main weakness; in this case, offense. I'll have issues trying to win with just 2/3 Ferals and 2/4 Unbounds that I'll hopefully be able to boost before they get killed. However, dropping huge monsters in there will often leave me with dead cards in hand when I really need another Lightning Storm. Thankfully, Overload helps here, as well, as I can use 7/8 Earth Elementals for 5 and I can use non-Overload 6/5 Fire Elementals that also double as removal or more aggro for 6. But I think the key with Shaman is that you're going to have a relatively constant stream of minions via the hero power, so you want cards that will take advantage of that. Therefore, Bloodlust and Stormwind Champion become good late-game cards that let you turn a situation around and/or keep your minions alive to keep the pressure on.
After that, I just fill holes typically based on mana curve or RNG that needs to be reduced. It's why I'm running a single Kobold Geomancer in case I don't have a Wrath of Air totem and want to Lightning Storm with more certainty and why I'm running Ironfur Grizzlies in case I need more time. Both are fairly subpar cards but they fit needs and the fill gaps in the curve. Then it's about testing.
At the moment, my tactic for deckbuilding is mostly throw shit at the wall and then play a few games to see what sticks. In this way I've created a few decks that let me get wins for dailies in unranked. That's about it. My decks tend to be more succesful as I get further away from extremes, and make a more vanilla deck that is allround decent, without any particular good or bad thing about them.
I'm hoping to eventually get better at deckbuilding, and really seeing when synergy is viable, and when you need to sub in various cards to make it work. For now I tend to scour the deckbuilding forum in search for good decks to copy or try out or get ideas from.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you see a bad post on the forum use the report function under it, so I or someone else of the moderation team can take care of it!
I let others do the work and just copy the decks *cough*
In all seriousness: I usually play theme decks for fun. For example a deck similar to the Randuin Deck by Noxious, but with even more randomness involved. I also like my zero beast/all traps and other funstuff hunter. Tend to lack on a lot of fields, but they are fun to play. So telling anyone about my deckbuilding won't help in any way ;)
If I build a deck for a tournament, I usually build a deck around 10 or so specific cards, then add in some common tools based on tournament rules (sideboard or not etc.). One of the reasons I really like Blizzards Idea for tournaments, though it is a lot of "theorycrafting".
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please report toxic behaviour and unwanted threads, so the moderators can deal with them.
i build decks around the current meta in high rankeds. try to build it that way that it can counter nearly all decks and has a good early,mid,late and finishing. with enough card draw and card advantage.
i like when cards work with each other and u have 2-3 options with every card.
I play OTK decks for the most part, Bloodlust and Unleash the Hounds are my staples, i also play lots of cards with charge like argent commander and Leeroy. I simply think the best way to win is to kill the opponent without letting them respond.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This thread is for a discussion on the methods people use for deck building. I'd love to compare and contrast different theories and processes to see how you make one.
Personally, I begin with the deck's main idea. For example, one I am developing right now is a divine shield paladin with buffs to get really efficient trades and eventually gain enough tempo to overwhelm him.
First I go for the 2 main mechanics I want, divine shield and buffs. Since there is no online deck builder that lets you get too many cards and then preen down, so I use pen and paper and write down all my options. First I take a list of everything with divine shield, and everything that buffs, things you would consider standard needs for every deck (ie I like to keep an acidic swamp ooze, an ironbeak owl, and a black knight in every deck), a list of paladin removal that I like using, and then finally a list of things that will synergize with divine shield (Blessing of wisdom, redemption)
I then start to build a deck, this involves shaving away cards based on what is most useful and what helps the mana curve etc. I keep the list though as to me the deck will go through endless iterations as i tweak it and play with it to increase efficiency. Like right now I realize that there is a lack of card draw I'd like to confront.
So, what is your "method"?
Pick all the OP cards, totally no synergy, win everygame.
Actually... High value cards, and combinations of those, always keeping some strategy agaisnt early-agro and BigLegendary decks. (aoe and removal)
I very much like to focus on controlling the damage flow as well as the card usage ratio. By card ratio, I am referring to the amount of cards used to counter other cards. If I can use one card to eliminate 2 or 3 that you played, I consider myself to (generally speaking) have the advantage. Increase the amount of cards that I pull, and it's generally a solid win.
There's no method to my madness, it's mostly "ohhh this card is amazing with this card, I must have it"
Sometimes it works, others not so much : )
I tend to focus first on what type of deck I want: control, aggro, or combo. The latter isn't really possible in the game right now and I vastly favor control (I was an MTG tourney player for 12 years, playing mostly blue/black control.) Then I look at the mechanics of the class. Shaman is ideal for control because of the totems and the cheap removal that Overload lets you spread over two turns. Furthermore, Overload benefits a prime card for Shaman (Unbound Elemental) which is usually better as a removal tool than a serious offensive threat because it starts with far more health than attack. So, there's the core of the mechanics I want to use: Overload and removal.
Then I think about how I want to address the deck's main weakness; in this case, offense. I'll have issues trying to win with just 2/3 Ferals and 2/4 Unbounds that I'll hopefully be able to boost before they get killed. However, dropping huge monsters in there will often leave me with dead cards in hand when I really need another Lightning Storm. Thankfully, Overload helps here, as well, as I can use 7/8 Earth Elementals for 5 and I can use non-Overload 6/5 Fire Elementals that also double as removal or more aggro for 6. But I think the key with Shaman is that you're going to have a relatively constant stream of minions via the hero power, so you want cards that will take advantage of that. Therefore, Bloodlust and Stormwind Champion become good late-game cards that let you turn a situation around and/or keep your minions alive to keep the pressure on.
After that, I just fill holes typically based on mana curve or RNG that needs to be reduced. It's why I'm running a single Kobold Geomancer in case I don't have a Wrath of Air totem and want to Lightning Storm with more certainty and why I'm running Ironfur Grizzlies in case I need more time. Both are fairly subpar cards but they fit needs and the fill gaps in the curve. Then it's about testing.
At the moment, my tactic for deckbuilding is mostly throw shit at the wall and then play a few games to see what sticks. In this way I've created a few decks that let me get wins for dailies in unranked. That's about it. My decks tend to be more succesful as I get further away from extremes, and make a more vanilla deck that is allround decent, without any particular good or bad thing about them.
I'm hoping to eventually get better at deckbuilding, and really seeing when synergy is viable, and when you need to sub in various cards to make it work. For now I tend to scour the deckbuilding forum in search for good decks to copy or try out or get ideas from.
If you see a bad post on the forum use the report function under it, so I or someone else of the moderation team can take care of it!
I let others do the work and just copy the decks *cough*
In all seriousness:
I usually play theme decks for fun. For example a deck similar to the Randuin Deck by Noxious, but with even more randomness involved.
I also like my zero beast/all traps and other funstuff hunter.
Tend to lack on a lot of fields, but they are fun to play.
So telling anyone about my deckbuilding won't help in any way ;)
If I build a deck for a tournament, I usually build a deck around 10 or so specific cards, then add in some common tools based on tournament rules (sideboard or not etc.). One of the reasons I really like Blizzards Idea for tournaments, though it is a lot of "theorycrafting".
Please report toxic behaviour and unwanted threads, so the moderators can deal with them.
i build decks around the current meta in high rankeds. try to build it that way that it can counter nearly all decks and has a good early,mid,late and finishing. with enough card draw and card advantage.
i like when cards work with each other and u have 2-3 options with every card.
2x pyro
1x rag
2x frostbolt
Win game cause mage is easy mode.
Right now, there are so many staples that only 5 or 6 cards are actually your flavor, the rest is just metagame.
Hearthstone 101 Guide: Everything you need to know to become an expert!
Achieve Legendary rank with F2P Mage Deck by Trump
Achieve Legendary rank with F2P Shaman Deck by Trump
I play OTK decks for the most part, Bloodlust and Unleash the Hounds are my staples, i also play lots of cards with charge like argent commander and Leeroy. I simply think the best way to win is to kill the opponent without letting them respond.