Yesterday was my Quest Rogue revelation. I used to hate this deck, and in part I still do. But yesterday happen two things.
1. I watched Dog struggle with his Quest Rogue against Control (the player) which obvious is a rare sight. Dog is one of the best in piloting hard decks.
2. I was lucky enough to open the quest yesterday and start playing it to understand it better.
I can say one thing, Quest Rogue has two big downsides: needs skill to play well and they are very vulnerable to draw order. On the other hand, other toxic mechanics, like recruit, mana cheating cards, Prince Keleseth, Cube+deathrattle eggs are without any downsides, quite dumb.
The morale of this is that we should not judge something before we try it . I was so critic against quest rogue.
* I should mentioned that I had the quest before the first nerf on NA account. Played it for a decent time to make an opinion but now I'm partly reconsider it.
Recruit stuff worsens the consistency of your deck since you can draw the minions you want to recruit before you can recruit them and end up with a dead hand. Also, if you plan to recruit Big minions the rest of your deck has to be spells (or in Hunter's case not-beasts or in Big druid case not-1-2-3 attack minions) which is a downside.
Prince doesn't allow you to play any other 2 drops and you need to draw him to use him, so again, consistency goes down. In standard it may not seem like a downside but in wild there's so many good 2 cost cards that prince isn't as good. So it depends on the amount of good 2 mana cards.
Cube/deathrattle is a weird one since on paper it should lose you a bit of tempo to gain you a bit of value but in practice it doesn't work that way. The only real downside is that you need something on the board already that you want to copy, otherwise it's just vanilla 4/6.
And with mana cheating it depends how do you cheat, if it's like Aviana-Kun then I guess it is pretty unfair (because you can search the parts, kill opponent in 1 turn fairly consistently and gain bodies on top of that) but if it's like Gather a party for lich king or something then it's fair for me.
But well, the only deck I truly hate to play against is burn mage/aluneth mage with ice blocks so maybe my views are biased.
Recruit stuff worsens the consistency of your deck since you can draw the minions you want to recruit before you can recruit them and end up with a dead hand. Also, if you plan to recruit Big minions the rest of your deck has to be spells (or in Hunter's case not-beasts or in Big druid case not-1-2-3 attack minions) which is a downside.
(...)
Sorry, but this is so wrong... Recruit is in no way a downside for cnsistency. More likely it is the other way around. If I can pull my Tar Creeper and my Ironwood Golem with Oaken Summons , it drastically increases the cnsistency of my taunt Druid. I can pull Hadronox and my Primordial Drake so much more often because of Master Oakheart.Without recruit, taunt Druid would likely not work, because then it would be too inconsistent.
And in no means the hand is dead if I actually draw everything before I can play him, but then I have to play the stuff from hand which takes more time and is less tempo but is not a dead hand. Merely oaken summons and Master Oakheart are overpriced cards which you do not want to play any more, but the deck still was consistent. So you could say that the drawback of recruit is the (small) chance that the recruit card itself becomes inefficient or maybe even a dead card, but the conistency of the deck benefits greatly from recruit.
2. I was lucky enough to open the quest yesterday and start playing it to understand it better.
So untill now you didn't even bother to look into the deck enough to form an unbiased opinion but joined the mass who bash it. And now one thing changed, so your bias changed.
2. I was lucky enough to open the quest yesterday and start playing it to understand it better.
So untill now you didn't even bother to look into the deck enough to form an unbiased opinion but joined the mass who bash it. And now one thing changed, so your bias changed.
No, I had it on NA account before first nerf. I've played there for a decent amount of time to make an opinion but now I'm partly reconsidering it. My mistake, I should mentioned in the first post that I've played it before nerf. I've thought it is not relevant for the Quest after the nerf.
People who bash other people for playing certain decks are idiots and should be ignored
Bashing players is one thing hating a deck is another. I was against the deck not players. Now I have more respect/consideration towards those who played it well because it requires skill.
"skill" LOL, just play sonya + 1 charger and you win. Struggle with aggro? You have giggling inventor, the card that single handly brought back quest rogue in the meta.
Quest rogue does take some skill. Most likely if you think a deck doesn't take skill you don't actually know how to play it and or are a bad player.... Just making that assumption pretty much labels you as a bad player because it indicates a prejudice and low level of introspection when making moves.
I don't know why i should have respect for a deck that's only goal is to destroy control and still has a decent matchup against aggro thanks to gigglings. I played it a lot and retired, because it's way to boring to play (at warrior quest level boredom).
Quest rogue does take some skill. Most likely if you think a deck doesn't take skill you don't actually know how to play it and or are a bad player.... Just making that assumption pretty much labels you as a bad player because it indicates a prejudice and low level of introspection when making moves.
I've never considered low skill deck, I've just said I hate the deck, big difference. Read carefully before making any wrong assumption by the way. Now I've discovered on my own, better than before, how many different decisions make this deck hard to pilot.
Quest rogue does take some skill. Most likely if you think a deck doesn't take skill you don't actually know how to play it and or are a bad player.... Just making that assumption pretty much labels you as a bad player because it indicates a prejudice and low level of introspection when making moves.
Pretty sure that the deck's win rate being as obnoxiously high as it is versus control decks means that your point falls flat on it's face. It's objectively a low skill deck when it's match ups are so polarized. I mean if you want to argue this point, how about you convince me that Jade Idol takes skill to play against a fatigue deck. It's basically the same thing. Both decks generate infinite threats and control decks lack infinite removal. One will eventually beat the other, it's only a matter of time; not outwitting or out playing your opponent.
Yesterday was my Quest Rogue revelation. I used to hate this deck, and in part I still do. But yesterday happen two things.
1. I watched Dog struggle with his Quest Rogue against Control (the player) which obvious is a rare sight. Dog is one of the best in piloting hard decks.
2. I was lucky enough to open the quest yesterday and start playing it to understand it better.
I can say one thing, Quest Rogue has two big downsides: needs skill to play well and they are very vulnerable to draw order. On the other hand, other toxic mechanics, like recruit, mana cheating cards, Prince Keleseth, Cube+deathrattle eggs are without any downsides, quite dumb.
The morale of this is that we should not judge something before we try it . I was so critic against quest rogue.
* I should mentioned that I had the quest before the first nerf on NA account. Played it for a decent time to make an opinion but now I'm partly reconsider it.
Respect?? Say any other thing pls
Recruit stuff worsens the consistency of your deck since you can draw the minions you want to recruit before you can recruit them and end up with a dead hand. Also, if you plan to recruit Big minions the rest of your deck has to be spells (or in Hunter's case not-beasts or in Big druid case not-1-2-3 attack minions) which is a downside.
Prince doesn't allow you to play any other 2 drops and you need to draw him to use him, so again, consistency goes down. In standard it may not seem like a downside but in wild there's so many good 2 cost cards that prince isn't as good. So it depends on the amount of good 2 mana cards.
Cube/deathrattle is a weird one since on paper it should lose you a bit of tempo to gain you a bit of value but in practice it doesn't work that way. The only real downside is that you need something on the board already that you want to copy, otherwise it's just vanilla 4/6.
And with mana cheating it depends how do you cheat, if it's like Aviana-Kun then I guess it is pretty unfair (because you can search the parts, kill opponent in 1 turn fairly consistently and gain bodies on top of that) but if it's like Gather a party for lich king or something then it's fair for me.
But well, the only deck I truly hate to play against is burn mage/aluneth mage with ice blocks so maybe my views are biased.
Sorry, but this is so wrong... Recruit is in no way a downside for cnsistency. More likely it is the other way around. If I can pull my Tar Creeper and my Ironwood Golem with Oaken Summons , it drastically increases the cnsistency of my taunt Druid. I can pull Hadronox and my Primordial Drake so much more often because of Master Oakheart.Without recruit, taunt Druid would likely not work, because then it would be too inconsistent.
And in no means the hand is dead if I actually draw everything before I can play him, but then I have to play the stuff from hand which takes more time and is less tempo but is not a dead hand. Merely oaken summons and Master Oakheart are overpriced cards which you do not want to play any more, but the deck still was consistent. So you could say that the drawback of recruit is the (small) chance that the recruit card itself becomes inefficient or maybe even a dead card, but the conistency of the deck benefits greatly from recruit.
So untill now you didn't even bother to look into the deck enough to form an unbiased opinion but joined the mass who bash it.
And now one thing changed, so your bias changed.
nope. still one the most cancerous and bullshit deck this game has ever seen. Nerfed twice and still good enough to have over 50% WR
No, I had it on NA account before first nerf. I've played there for a decent amount of time to make an opinion but now I'm partly reconsidering it. My mistake, I should mentioned in the first post that I've played it before nerf. I've thought it is not relevant for the Quest after the nerf.
People who bash other people for playing certain decks are idiots and should be ignored
Bashing players is one thing hating a deck is another. I was against the deck not players. Now I have more respect/consideration towards those who played it well because it requires skill.
Quest rogue is not hard to play.
Consideration ? :)
Way to go OP.
Knowledge is Power
"skill" LOL, just play sonya + 1 charger and you win. Struggle with aggro? You have giggling inventor, the card that single handly brought back quest rogue in the meta.
Maybe you are just bad that you can't even pilot the deck properly?
If you want hard,you should play pre nerf Patron warrior.
Or topsy curvy priest. Those are hard decks.
Just Another Legend Player#Kappa
Quest rogue does take some skill. Most likely if you think a deck doesn't take skill you don't actually know how to play it and or are a bad player.... Just making that assumption pretty much labels you as a bad player because it indicates a prejudice and low level of introspection when making moves.
I don't know why i should have respect for a deck that's only goal is to destroy control and still has a decent matchup against aggro thanks to gigglings. I played it a lot and retired, because it's way to boring to play (at warrior quest level boredom).
Always expect the unexpectable!
I've played prenerfed Patron warrior, quite a lot. Topsy curvy is really difficult to manage successfully every time, true.
I've never considered low skill deck, I've just said I hate the deck, big difference. Read carefully before making any wrong assumption by the way. Now I've discovered on my own, better than before, how many different decisions make this deck hard to pilot.
Pretty sure that the deck's win rate being as obnoxiously high as it is versus control decks means that your point falls flat on it's face. It's objectively a low skill deck when it's match ups are so polarized. I mean if you want to argue this point, how about you convince me that Jade Idol takes skill to play against a fatigue deck. It's basically the same thing. Both decks generate infinite threats and control decks lack infinite removal. One will eventually beat the other, it's only a matter of time; not outwitting or out playing your opponent.
Quest rogue and skill
OMEGAGIGALUL
Why u hav to be mad? is only card gaem.