Hearthpwn

Quote from scout1515 >>

Quote from EquinoxHS >>

Sure, it is annoying that there's always something to complain about, but the thing is, NOTHING is more annoying than aggro.  It's people being able to get to Legend by spamming face while fighting people with decks that are well thought-out and creative.  It makes the game boring and stale - Games against Aggro are "Okay, how do I maximize value, be the least greedy possible, and heal so I'm not dead at turn effing four?"

Against control it's "How do I outsmart and deal with their plays?"

Midrange is "How do I screw up their tempo and gain lots of board control?"

Reno Decks are "How do I make it so I can kill them before they get Reno or make it so they have to use it at times they don't want to?"

Mill/Fatigue Decks are "How do I get the most value?"

 

See, all Aggro is is them pounding you to a pulp as you try to heal yourself then realize you're playing Renolock and you had to coin out T5 Reno and on T7 you're at 13 HP....  And your rank goes down the drain.

Aggro decks are not fun to play against as you A). can't do anything but wait it out (You're going to die) and B). Aren't even playing someone who uses strategy, just goes FACE so now you have to deal with all his minions that he didn't trade.

The problem with Aggro is that it'll always be there, and it's just someone with cheeto-crusted fingers sitting at their $80 PC chugging month-old Mountain Dew.  It isn't fun to play.  It isn't fun to play against.

 

 Sorry you didn't a chance to play all those legendaries you stacked your deck with.

Maybe if you play a deck that's less greedy and has more tools to deal with aggro you won't lose every time.

You can say the same thing about super greedy decks, those don't require any skill, they just hope the game lasts long enough to drop threat after threat that you can't possibly deal with.

Ever think of running your own counter-pirate pirate package of 2 bloodsail corsairs + patches? You can trash their weapon putting their small time back to a 1/2, trade your patches into theirs and now you both have a 1/2 on board.

Quote from Relashio24 >>

Quote from nocontrol1111 >>

Quote from Relashio24 >>

^the only snide comments I'm reading on this thread are posted by scout1515

 Are you a troll or just an idiot?

"Of course making stupid greedy plays against aggro is going to backfire on you"

"which is a HORRIBLE strategy against aggro."

"I don't think shaman really needs a nerf"

"The odds of someone having an emperor on turn 6 are pretty low, considering that almost nobody would keep that on the mulligan."

" If that's the case then you should be beating aggro. If not then you're misplaying it."

Is this not snide? does not only aggro but midrange/jade/control shaman also play totem golem?

 

lot of pros said that its very good meta for tournaments

Quote from nocontrol1111 >>

Quote from Relashio24 >>

Quote from nocontrol1111 >>

Quote from Relashio24 >>

^the only snide comments I'm reading on this thread are posted by scout1515

 Are you a troll or just an idiot?

"Of course making stupid greedy plays against aggro is going to backfire on you"

"which is a HORRIBLE strategy against aggro."

"I don't think shaman really needs a nerf"

"The odds of someone having an emperor on turn 6 are pretty low, considering that almost nobody would keep that on the mulligan."

" If that's the case then you should be beating aggro. If not then you're misplaying it."

Is this not snide? does not only aggro but midrange/jade/control shaman also play totem golem?

 

 Did you read what everyone else wrote? Seriously this is a sad troll and you are cherry picking based on your sad little biases. Such ignorance is disturbing.

Quote from vajenice >>

S­t­a­r­t­­­­­­­­­­ y­o­u­r­­­­­­­­­ h­o­m­e­­­­­­­­ b­u­s­i­n­e­s­s­­­­­­­­­ r­i­g­h­t­­­­­­­­­ n­o­w. Spend­­­­­­ more­­­­­­ time­­­­­­ with­­­­­­ your­­­­­­ family­­­­­­ and­­­­­­ earn. Start­­­­­­ bringing­­­­­­ $60/hr­­­­­­ just­­­­­­ on­­­­­­ a­­­­­­ computer. Very­­­­­­ easy­­­­­­ way­­­­­­to­­­­­­ make­­­­­­ your­­­­­­ life­­­­­­ happy­­­­­­ and­­­­­­ earning­­­­­­ continuously. Start­­­­­­ here””­­­­­­....SD!46
#######> ＷＷＷ.moneytime10.ＣＯＭ

Quote from scout1515 >>

I just played a game where I got a 4 turn kill against a warlock. Now, aggro haters will probably have some snide comment about that, but if you look at the game: https://hsreplay.net/replay/nCq5FHbEdQSBV2jdBofbCJ

It becomes clear the reason why the 4 turn kill happened is because the warlock decided to be greedy and tap 2 times to play his mountain giant on turn 4, which is a HORRIBLE strategy against aggro. Can't complain about that kind of thing when it's the result of your own misplay.

Of course making stupid greedy plays against aggro is going to backfire on you

Pretty much all of my turn 4/5 kills are partially helped out by a warlock killing himself for me.

Well, tapping to play Mountain Giant or a fat drake definitely isn't the right way to deal with aggro, but sadly this game basically lacks something effective enough to prevent early face damage burst.

Say in Elder Scrolls you can make some face deck capable of doing 30 damage in the first 5 turns too, but this will give your opponent 5 extra cards, some of that can be played instantly on your turn, including hard removals/taunts/heals, which could potentially result in you suddenly having no board/cards for the final burst next turn and no means to regain the tempo.

Quote from scout1515 >>

At one point, people were saying "we hate huntard players," now people are complaining that the class isn't playable.

If pirates were gone, there would be complaints about whatever the top deck was and how cheap it is. If it's reno, people would bitch about getting cheaped out by a nut kazakus potion, if it's miracle rogue the complaints would be about the 12/12 stealthed cleef, and if it's jade druid the complaints would be about getting cheaped out by the endless 1 mana 10/10 golems.

I don't think this was a bad meta. A few months of pirates dominating, then it gets overnerfed, goes away for good, and something else takes over. Ofc, then people will complain about how STB and patches are totally unplayable even though that's what's being asked for now. Yeah, I agree it's a bit stale when 50% of decks above rank 5 are running the pirate package, but it's going away pretty soon.

It doesn't make sense for things like nerfs to happen right away. It takes time for the meta to evolve. Like right after gadgetzan, the meta was 30% pirate warrior. Then people realized aggro shaman was better and people started switching over to that.

Also for that game against Renolock, he didn't have the coin, so he would have had to double tap to get out the giant and maybe taunt it up next turn. Its very hard to kill a 3/4 for on turn 2.

Quote from dW2005 >>

Well, tapping to play Mountain Giant or a fat drake definitely isn't the right way to deal with aggro, but sadly this game basically lacks something effective enough to prevent early face damage burst.

Say in Elder Scrolls you can make some face deck capable of doing 30 damage in the first 5 turns too, but this will give your opponent 5 extra cards, some of that can be played instantly on your turn, including hard removals/taunts/heals, which could potentially result in you suddenly having no board/cards for the final burst next turn and no means to regain the tempo.

Quote from dieseledge >>

Sometimes it's just not in the cards when you get lethaled in 4 turns.  He was likely dead the next turn anyway.  As someone that plays a ton of Reno Mage, I have beaten my share of aggro shaman and pirate warriors.  I know how to deal with them effectively.

Quote from ArgentumEmperio >>

Quote from dieseledge >>

Quote from scout1515 >>

 

...

 Have you ever played Renolock or any Reno deck for that matter?  It's entirely possible he just had a bad hand.  He mulliganed his initial starting hand and was tapping for any possible answer.  Oh that's right.  He should have "skilled" into acidic ooze and shadowbolt.  How can you possibly know the player made a mistake if you didn't know what cards were in his hand?

 A lot of people complain that "You are dead on turn 4" and yah'... if you intentionally make yourself take an additional 6 damage you can be dead at that point - not by turn 4 but it can be turn 4 and you can longer to turn it around.

But those situations are a) rare, b) followed up by a good aggressive hand versus a bad starting hand of the defender and c) we remember those bad times more than we remember the other games before that may have been hairy but was never the less still won because you had the right cards.

So... from top to bottom:

1. This is a lazy excuse to call one deck more skillful than another. They play out differently and function vastly differently. The only matchup that is based a majority on skill is mirror matchups since deck building, consistency and choice of cards matter more in those circumstances than top decks which is the primary 'skill' in ALL other matchups. It is a cardgame after all, one of the selling points is in-built RNG.

2. If you are up against an aggressive deck, to know 'when' to tap and when to 'not' tap is a huge deal for the renolock player including the notion of redundancy. The idea that you need to include more cards to fulfill similar roles since you play Reno Jackson and can't run as an example 2 copies of Mistress of Mixtures means you have to take this into account when building the deck in the first place as well. This is a problem Highlander-decks will have to continue to face for as long as they exist and yes, that means you'll have on average more 'bad hands' than other decks.

3. I would love to see the rest of the games that this player played so we could see how many good hands, average hands, bad hands, what cards were included in their deck etc.

This is a single sample game and its only purpose is to destinguish that tapping equals to you taking lethal damage very soon after. It is not an honest representation if it was right or wrong to do so but without additional information... it is only a sample game to showcase that yes you can kill yourself when tapping and not dealing with the board. That's the full extent of it.

 

I am not saying this is good or bad, I personally think this is for the most part good but I do agree that the pirate package is too damn common to put into decks. But I don't think its bad that there's decks that can punish a decktype that is frankly exceedingly greedy. The notion of having a deck completely of '1-of's in any other cardgame is insane. The difference here may be that a playset is 2 cards and 1 card respectively for commons-to-epics and then 1 for legendaries. Its still a reduction of roughly 50% in regards to what the game allows you to put into your deck for redundancy.

So... all in all, kinda' what's supposed to happen since it just makes logical sense if you kill yourself by tapping.

Quote from dieseledge >>

 I'm not debating whether one deck is more skillful than the other.  It's a question of experience with a deck and it's weaknesses/downsides.  Scout is a relatively new player. I actually made one of the few positive posts in Scout's thread when he hit rank 5 legend with aggro shaman.  My point, which you actually made for me, is there is not enough information to fairly judge his opponent.

Quote from ArgentumEmperio >>

Quote from dieseledge >>

Quote from ArgentumEmperio >>

Quote from dieseledge >>

Quote from scout1515 >>

 

...

...

 ...

 I'm not debating whether one deck is more skillful than the other.  It's a question of experience with a deck and it's weaknesses/downsides.  Scout is a relatively new player. I actually made one of the few positive posts in Scout's thread when he hit rank 5 legend with aggro shaman.  My point, which you actually made for me, is there is not enough information to fairly judge his opponent.

 Okey fair enough.

I was mostly replying in regards to the comment where you stated 'He should have "skilled"' as it seemed like it was you flaming him but... yes, if your point was that its not enough information to be had to make an informed decision or statement. Yes, I do full-heartedly agree with you.

You guys wanna see someone who actually has a good idea of what's wrong with this game? Check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wh7XCtjnnDI. But besides that, fixing the Pirate Meta isn't going to be as easy as everyone makes it out to be. Before I talk though, I would like to share a quote from the amazing U.S. president Teddy Roosevelt:

"Complaining about a problem without proposing a solution is called whining."-Good old T.R.

Anyways, into the real shit. Now, there are plenty of cards in the game that could use nerfing, but those cards won't be as easy to nerf as some people think despite looks. I mean, take Small-Time Buccaneer for example. You lower its health and it becomes way too easy to kill, you increase its health and it becomes way too much of a pain to remove. You lower the attack buff by any amount and it barely holds up its base value even with the attack buff, and increasing the cost would make it only be able to hold up its own value in certain situations. Long story short, Small-Time Buccaneer is the most gimped thing to enter this game since Grim Patron, and theres no other card we really can nerf to decrease its power like Grim Patron had with Warsong Commander. The other problem with nerfing Pirate Warrior is that if we knock down the Pirates, we're instantly back to Curvestone like we had before. Right now, the game is being held up by a power trinity-the power trinity that Hearthstone has always had. Aggro counters Midrange, Midrange counters Control and Control counters Aggro. During the reign of Midrange Shaman, that triangle was broken when the primary Aggro deck that was keeping Control in check, Face Hunter, had pretty much all of its core cards nerfed, which allowed Midrange to beat out all other decks without being countered. Once MSG swung around though, Aggro came back and now the trinity has been restored, with Pirates holding up the position of Aggro, Jade holding up the position of Midrange and the Reno decks holding up the position of Control. The Reno decks might not do the best job of holding up their end of the counterplay triangle, but they're the best thing we have right now to deal with the Pirates. The only problem is, once Reno gets taken out of rotation we're gonna need something powerful enough to keep the Pirates in check on the end of Control, or else people are gonna be DREAMING about what the game was like in its current state. And the third and final thing is, people need to be careful what they wish for when it comes to balance. My proof? Shaman's rise to power after Standard was released. This may be hard to remember for some people, but I remember the days during GvG when Shaman was by far the least played class in the game. I couldn't go one day without seeing someone complaining about how the Overload mechanic was the worst mechanic in the game or, when I searched up fun decks in Hearthstone, seeing Shaman as the bearer of that title every single time. So what did people do? They asked for Shaman to get buffed, and that's what Ben Brode did once WoG was released. I mean, you have NO idea how many times I had to remind people of the irony of complaining about Shaman's dominance in the meta on these forums-usually with no reply whatsoever or just some lame salty reply-when we were the ones that ASKED for all of that in the later days before Standard. I personally hope more people are willing to share their opinions with me on this, I've grown far too tired of people trusting more in their salt than the spirit of friendly debate on these forums.

Quote from Hooghout >>

Quote from CO1933 >>

You guys wanna see someone who actually has a good idea of what's wrong with this game? Check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wh7XCtjnnDI. But besides that, fixing the Pirate Meta isn't going to be as easy as everyone makes it out to be. Before I talk though, I would like to share a quote from the amazing U.S. president Teddy Roosevelt:

"Complaining about a problem without proposing a solution is called whining."-Good old T.R.

Anyways, into the real shit. Now, there are plenty of cards in the game that could use nerfing, but those cards won't be as easy to nerf as some people think despite looks. I mean, take Small-Time Buccaneer for example. You lower its health and it becomes way too easy to kill, you increase its health and it becomes way too much of a pain to remove. You lower the attack buff by any amount and it barely holds up its base value even with the attack buff, and increasing the cost would make it only be able to hold up its own value in certain situations. Long story short, Small-Time Buccaneer is the most gimped thing to enter this game since Grim Patron, and theres no other card we really can nerf to decrease its power like Grim Patron had with Warsong Commander. The other problem with nerfing Pirate Warrior is that if we knock down the Pirates, we're instantly back to Curvestone like we had before. Right now, the game is being held up by a power trinity-the power trinity that Hearthstone has always had. Aggro counters Midrange, Midrange counters Control and Control counters Aggro. During the reign of Midrange Shaman, that triangle was broken when the primary Aggro deck that was keeping Control in check, Face Hunter, had pretty much all of its core cards nerfed, which allowed Midrange to beat out all other decks without being countered. Once MSG swung around though, Aggro came back and now the trinity has been restored, with Pirates holding up the position of Aggro, Jade holding up the position of Midrange and the Reno decks holding up the position of Control. The Reno decks might not do the best job of holding up their end of the counterplay triangle, but they're the best thing we have right now to deal with the Pirates. The only problem is, once Reno gets taken out of rotation we're gonna need something powerful enough to keep the Pirates in check on the end of Control, or else people are gonna be DREAMING about what the game was like in its current state. And the third and final thing is, people need to be careful what they wish for when it comes to balance. My proof? Shaman's rise to power after Standard was released. This may be hard to remember for some people, but I remember the days during GvG when Shaman was by far the least played class in the game. I couldn't go one day without seeing someone complaining about how the Overload mechanic was the worst mechanic in the game or, when I searched up fun decks in Hearthstone, seeing Shaman as the bearer of that title every single time. So what did people do? They asked for Shaman to get buffed, and that's what Ben Brode did once WoG was released. I mean, you have NO idea how many times I had to remind people of the irony of complaining about Shaman's dominance in the meta on these forums-usually with no reply whatsoever or just some lame salty reply-when we were the ones that ASKED for all of that in the later days before Standard. I personally hope more people are willing to share their opinions with me on this, I've grown far too tired of people trusting more in their salt than the spirit of friendly debate on these forums.

 Your wall of text calls for better card designers as to minimize to need to nerf. Better balance as all classes are being viable in ranked. Everybody can play his favorite deck and only then not salty but friendly debates are possible.

The thing I'm bitching about is when someone is a "copycat" by "copying" your deck completely... 

I feel like pirates are sort of the scape goat in a sense because if someone loses to a PW or an aggro shaman or any deck running the pirate package, then they just say it's because of the pirates. Now don't get me wrong the pirate package is a problem but once everybody started complaining about pirates, the became the thing to bitch about if someone was heated about losing

Quote from scout1515 >>

Quote from Haussenfuss >>

Quote from Fierytear >>

Quote from Haussenfuss >>

People are mostly bitching about Pirates, and losing the game on the first turn - the game might last until turn six or seven, but it was lost before the Pirate opponent had a chance to play a card. 

 If your deck can't play a card before turn 6 maybe there is something wrong with your deck

Re-read the post before offering snarky comments. The point was perfectly clear.

Players routinely lose games against Pirate decks before they play a card, because nothing they can do allows them to recover from the degenerate opening of 1/3 weapon, 1/1 charger, 3/2 and 1/1 pirate, or some combination thereof. The opponent will play plenty of cards before turn six, and lose the game regardless, owing to the Pirate opening on turn one. Hence, "losing the game before playing a single card."

 You only lose before playing a card if your deck is so damn greedy you can't fend off any early game stuff. Or if you try to play greedy like try to wait for turn 7 to do your brann kazakus combo when you should be throwing brann out on turn 3 to put something on the board.

Reno mage is slightly favored/even vs aggro shaman. If you're constantly losing before playing a single card then you're not doing it right.

I've actually never had a game where my opponent never played a single card. There's a few games where they played exactly 1 card before i killed them on turn 4, but even those are pretty rare.

Quote from Popeye11627 >>

He even explained his point, which was a valid one, again and you still didn't understand it. You are truly an aggro player.