⚙
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.
Hunter is actually going through what secret paladin did during TGT. It's NOT Tier 1 and there's a good few decks that slaughter the whole pack of them (or beat 3 out of 4 of them, which is more than enough). But it's cheap, easy, fast, and slaughters what a lot of the bad decks and bad players. So it's a VERY good ladder deck. But it's NOT the strongest. Secret paladin was the same way, especially since it was the same meta that had the insane patron warrior.
Jeesh, sometimes the best ladder decks have been among the weaker decks in power level . I mean decks that are less than a 50% win rate against the field. They tend to be so fast that they can win 2 games and lose 2 faster than a control deck can win twice, and in ladder fast games > most other things. Ease of use is also a factor and not just because of those 'bad players'. Good players will want to play easy decks to grind since it means you don't tire out as fast. Better to play a simple deck 40 times than a complex deck 10 times then have to call it a day.
This isn't to say that hunter is or isn't a problem. But popularity in the ladder does NOT mean strength. It's just a great, cheap, ladder deck.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
I'm "attacking" you because you're littering multiple threads with your whiny, misinformed garbage. These numbers you keep mentioning are made up and blatantly false. Go look at some actual statistics and analyses and be amazed at how wrong you are.
You're throwing a tantrum in your own created "hunter is overpowered" bubble. Absolutely ridiculous.
Alright, so show them to me then?
As we can see, it is rank 4th in the tier 1 bracket and has 2 other archetypes in tier 2. That being said, it has the same win rate as other classes so I don't see the issue here. What's wrong with having multiple good archetypes within a single class ?
Odd Paladin is listing at a higher win rate than all of them both on HRreplay and VS. Odd warrior is matching hunter's #1 deck and outdoing the other decks. #)$E)( right now Clone priest is beating the whole lot of them. If the problem is win rate then we have a LOT of classes to hate here.
So is the problem that Hunter has 4 decks that are good rather than 1 or 2? Is the problem that Hunter isn't a one-deck pony? Would it be better if it was just Spell hunter or Beast Hunter and the other two decks didn't exist?
If the problem is raw popularity, when, in the blooming hades, has the ladder EVER *EVER* not gravitated towards one or three decks, even when the decks were bad, or there were better options, or whatever? It's ALWAYS been that way. It's just what a large player base made to play randomly against each other DO. It's why random matches in competitive games were always annoying and dull.
If you want to make the argument that hunter needs a fix then go at it the way that other decks have been slammed: Overpoweredness or Polarity.
OPness isn't judged by raw win rate. It's judged by the matchups. You need to show that most decks can't compete against hunter using data. Polarity, meanwhile, is based on HOW badly it wins or loses. So you'll want to show that it, say, wins 60-70% against some decks and like 20-30% against the rest, resulting in a "win by what deck you choose" feeling.
If you want to argue about hunters, do it that way so we can have a real debate. But so long as you want to focus on raw win rates that are matched or bettered than other decks or that the netdecking trend-following masses are netdecking and trend-following AGAIN!!!!1111 you aren't going to get anywhere.
And a deck being annoying isn't enough for a nerf. Jade Druid was never nerfed. Secret Paladin was never nerfed. It takes something more.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
So whatever is king we'll just nerf on down. At this point it's best to look at your goal. What IS your goal. Nerf it all until every deck is below 60%? You must've loved the meta during Boomsday I'm guessing since that was what we had then, with every class having a high tier deck on top of it.
Or are we trying to eliminate anything that's Tier 1.
Or is there a deck type that you are hoping makes it to the top?
Or is the goal to try to make the main population actually start playing multiple decks and stop focusing on one or two top decks?
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Thank god you're not in charge of the game balance, that would be a disaster.
You have no clue what you're talking about.
I've already proved that although Hunter is good, it is no where near as OP as you make it seem, it's just that he has multiple different good archetypes.. which is in line with the other classes and which will be completely dead in 3 months. No nerfs are needed. The difference with druid is that wild growth and nourish are classic cards and will remain in standard forever. If the DK and spellstones were classic cards, then I agree it would need a nerf since those shape the hunter archetypes and are extremely good but the fact that it rotates in 3 months and that Hunter is nowhere near tier 1 in wild as far as I know means that no nerfs are needed.
Your decks should work way more after rank 5 where meta is different. Before that u encounter way more agrro
I'm still waiting on your statistics, sir. Bee posted one that directly counters what you said and further confirms what everyone BUT you has been saying.
Where is your rebuttal?
Haha your arguments are literally all over the place at this point. First you claim all your information is based on stats and now you suddenly don't need them anymore? Good stuff.
But I'm sure your story (which little to no one agrees with) is a lot more correct than ACTUAL STATISTICS. Stay buttmad over a non-issue in your little bubble, I'll go enjoy myself a few games of Hearthstone.
Winning is a thing most humans if not all have in common in their backmind. Winning will make you feel good, losing will make you feel bad. Now then I enjoy having fun but how can I have fun if my meme, homebrew deck or tier 4 deck cant do what I want for 50 games straight? Like having a weird combo but if you never get to do the combo cause you die is that fun? Or like 1 guy said in this thread that was good about getting frustrated when as control you don't get that AoE that could STABILIZE the game against aggro. I cant really express what I mean by words cause what I just said feels like a babyrage to most people. I want to have fun but I also want to win. If you read my post I didn't continue using Even Shaman, I just played it to get a feeling of winning.
Edit: I do not like can't fight them, join them policy
Me? Gongaga.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
PremiumDon't you have a pure gold set and multi-legend finishes? Please don't judge all by those standards. This post is beneath the reasoned and articulate posts of yours I've come to enjoy.
Golden Hero Collections thus far; -
Europe: Druid, Hunter, Paladin, Mage, Priest, Rogue, Shaman, Warlock, Warrior (9/9)
Americas: Druid, Mage, Paladin Shaman (4/9)
Everywhere else: Workin on it.. (0/9)
Fungalmacer is from K&C so don't worry, it's moving to wild soon.
Why is it a problem to have multiple good archetypes within a single class ? The win rates are good and on par with other tier 1 and 2 decks. Sure, there are a lot of people playing hunter right now, could you provide me stats on the hunter playrate compared to other classes ? And since you think hunter badly needs a nerf, could you tell me what would be your solution?
How is it OP ? The best Hunter deck is not even in the top 3 and all its archetypes have similar win rates to other classes.
You know what overpowered means right ? Clearly based on those stats, Hunter isn't overpowered. It's good, not overpowered.
Shudderwock was polarizing issue. If you were a slow deck you were doomed against it. Thus it's the #2 version.
Note that I never defended Hunter as NOT a polarizing issue. I'm not defending hunters at all. I'm just saying that your methods of argument are easy to tear apart and not helping you prove that hunter needs a nerf. Neither are the numbers you are using. Note that you are comparing hunter's spellstone with Mysterious Challenger a card that was never nerfed directly or indirectly.
You just stated that hunter's spellstone is slightly weaker than a card that didn't get nerfed and don't see any play in wild. THIS IS NOT HELPING YOUR ARGUMENT!
If the deck is highly polarizing, like Shudderwock then let's see some info. Then we'll have a real debate going. If you're arguing that the deck is as bad as Secret Paladin then..well.. it probably is, and thus just like Secret Paladin, it's an annoyance we can live with until spring.
When arguing about who has no clue, make sure to check what expansion the cards are in.
Funglemancer is a Kobolds card. It's gone in 3 months.
Yes, Rogue has cold blood still. But fire elementals and moles are gone. Fledgling is gone. Scalebane, Slayer. Most of their firepower and threats are gone. All they have is henchclan and their final burst, which are much easier to navigate when you aren't getting widdled down by flappy birds and cold blooded 1/3s.
Paladin has a better shot. But they still lose all of their 1 drops except for argent Squire. They lose all of their weapons, funglemancer, Creeper. There's only 12 cards that aren't rotated out, and Liam is worthless without a ton of 1 drops.
The decks will be gutted come next rotation. So will every hunter deck except for beast hunter and even that deck still loses razormaw and ALL of them lose the one erason why the decks don't fall flat to any control deck worth its' salt: Deathstalker
If your concern is what happens come spring, don't be. Just about everything we are seeing now will get slaughtered come rotation, and new things will come to bring out the same rage.
If you believe that there are decks so dangerous that they need to be taken down NOW. That IS an option. But you'll need to focus on the matchups and how few decks can stand up to the hunter decks or how polarizing it is to deal with.
And avoid theorycrafting about value or how 'OP' a certain move is and what not. I've seen that argument so many times and I've never seen it actually work. Even decks that were nerfed, like shudderwock and patron weren't stopped because of the 'broken' things they did. They were stopped by the matchups and how the data behind them and how the meta looked because of them.
You may be right about hunter. But your arguments are not proving it.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
That's Hsreplay, one of the main sites you listed. https://hsreplay.net/meta/
Spell hunter is at 4th at 54%.
Metastats has hunter at 60%, but honestly never heard of that group. I usually hear about HS or VS.
VS has an interesting take on the situation. For example, in legend Spell hunter is falling out in favor of midrange hunter. Funnything is, we wouldn't be fussing about this if it was in two separate classes (say, spell mage into midrange hunter). The two decks are vitally different. They are just within the same class. Same goes for that 30% which is spread out among 4 different prime decks.
Again is the problem that hunter has all four decks at a high tier? Should we knock 2 of them and keep 2? And if so which ones?
Or are we trying to gut the entire class? And if so, why?
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
What sites ? As far as I know hsreplay is the best source since most players use their deck tracker. You know what it means ? It means it's the most accurate of them all.
Those are sincest latest patch stats:
First of all, I'm sorry for the OP who wrote us all a nice note that certain folks have decided to shit on.
Second of all, a certain person made the implied claim that length of time playing the game correlates to understanding of game balance. I'm unhappy that person made that claim, because my eyes are still burning from the whiskey I sprayed out of my nose laughing when I read said claim.
Third of all, whether you sort data by "since expansion", "since nerf", "previous 3 days", "previous 7 days" or any of the previous restricted to rank 10 and up OR any restricted to rank 5 and up OR any restricted to legend only . . . HUNTER IS NOT THE DECK WITH THE HIGHEST WIN RATE.
The most relevant measure of the current meta for people who play the game at a reasonable level is "previous 3 days, rank 5 and up" or "previous 3 days, legend only"
In the former category, the top 14 win rate decks (all of which have at least 500 games played in the previous 3 days are as follows):
Control Warlock, Odd Paladin, Control Priest, Odd Paladin, Even Paladin x2, OTK Paladin, Even Lock, Odd Rogue, Odd Paladin, Cube Lock, Odd Mage, Tempo Rogue, MIDRANGE HUNTER
If one were to, for some unknown reason in this balance discussion, insist on a larger sample size, upgrading to 1k games played per deck would net you 3 hunter decks in the top ten, 2 of which are the Master's Call aggro and one of which is Deathrattle.
This averaging of win rates across the entire player base is meaningless when it comes to balance discussions.
Popular =/= Overpowered
There are very obvious choices that massacre hunters a high percentage of the time. If you don't like playing them, I am sorry for you as you will assuredly have a rough few months, but that does not reach the question of balance in any way.
Once again, apologies to the OP. I wish you happy laddering.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.