If I may ask, how did he play two Malygos? Did he play Malygos, allowed you to kill them without Transforming them, and proceeded to resurrect them?
He could easily have played one or a couple of Shadow Essences. And then resurrected them. In this instance, I'm not sure how the OP could have prevented it?
I am playing a dmh warrior with hakkar and zihi at the Moment, have a positive win-rate against gallery priest and mechathun-locks and -druids. Obviously both hakkar and zihi destroy the thun, against gallery priest I try to gather a shit tun of armor and pollute their resurrect-pool with 1/1 raptors.
Obviously if they draw the nuts and blast you for 80 in turn 9 it's gg, but if they game keeps going a while you can outlast them. So in conclusion, if you wanna be able to beat otk-decks as control, hakkar and zihi are your friends ;)
Yes in Wild: Deathlord and Dirty Rat are available there and can totally destroy combo. And Loatheb can stall many combos for a round. And since aggro is also stronger there, many combo-decks are simply not viable.
If I may ask, how did he play two Malygos? Did he play Malygos, allowed you to kill them without Transforming them, and proceeded to resurrect them?
He could easily have played one or a couple of Shadow Essences. And then resurrected them. In this instance, I'm not sure how the OP could have prevented it?
The answer is present in the quote. You transform the Shadow Essence minion. OP stated he has Brewmasters, if he felt he needed to bounce back Tinkmaster. The opponent needs the minion to die before it gets transformed, for resurrect cards to work as intended.
Ah. There was no mention of Tinkmaster Overspark in the OP comment, so I wasn't aware that this was present in the deck. (I could only go off the cards he said he had - partly because Tink is not a card that I have ever seen in competitive play - meta or Counter - so was an unlikely addition) I suppose there is also the big likelihood that Tink is in the bottom half of the deck making this play hard to pull off. :-)
Big spell mage, odd mage (some versions), control paladin (cubes), control warlock, odd warrior, fatigue warrior, quest warrior, shudderwock shaman.
Edit: it's worth mentioning that pros bringing control to tournaments is quite different from bringing control to ladder because in tournaments you can ban the OTK decks.
The very fact thet you can ban OTK decks in tournaments says something how repulsive they are. That this is not possible on ladder signify 'more rights' for the tournament player. The fact that you can't ban them on ladder has its reasons. You can fill it in yourself.
What he means is every player brings a predetermined number of decks (for example at the HCT tournaments they bring four) and each match both players get to ban one of the opponent's decks. Typically if you're packing an OTK deck in your lineup its because you expect to see a lot of Control at the tournament, in which case your other 3 decks are probably also some combination of OTKs, Combos, Deathrattle Hunters and/or Quest Rogues.
True, but what I signal is the fact that on ladder this is now not possible. Either you don't allow bans in tournaments, or you organize it in a certain way on ladder too. That is a matter of fairness. So I guess you ban OTK- style or something else you don't want to meet upfront.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
Big spell mage, odd mage (some versions), control paladin (cubes), control warlock, odd warrior, fatigue warrior, quest warrior, shudderwock shaman.
Edit: it's worth mentioning that pros bringing control to tournaments is quite different from bringing control to ladder because in tournaments you can ban the OTK decks.
The very fact thet you can ban OTK decks in tournaments says something how repulsive they are. That this is not possible on ladder signify 'more rights' for the tournament player. The fact that you can't ban them on ladder has its reasons. You can fill it in yourself.
What he means is every player brings a predetermined number of decks (for example at the HCT tournaments they bring four) and each match both players get to ban one of the opponent's decks. Typically if you're packing an OTK deck in your lineup its because you expect to see a lot of Control at the tournament, in which case your other 3 decks are probably also some combination of OTKs, Combos, Deathrattle Hunters and/or Quest Rogues.
True, but what I signal is the fact that on ladder this is now not possible. Either you don't allow bans in tournaments, or you organize it in a certain way on ladder too. That is a matter of fairness. So I guess you ban OTK- style or something else you don't want to meet upfront.
How exactly would you determine what style a deck is without seeing the opponent's deck beforehand? (Which obviously would not be allowed due to unfairness. What about decks with multiple win conditions? You cant exactly do it by card (by claiming "This is an OTK card, this is a Control card", etc).
the thing is that you still didnt add anyting to your deck to win the game, you only added stuff that delayed losing, the thing with Demonic project and gnomeferatus is that es, it's nice if you burn their cards but they aren't a proactive win condition, what rookieish control players dont understand is that "not losing to X card" does not equal winning, as an example why do you think cubelock is the best performing control deck rn? despite the nerfs back in knc?, the answer is simple cubelock seeks to win the game, charging doomguards from cubes and revived with gul'dan are an actual proactive action towards winning and closing out the game instead of delaying a loss, it's something that will kill the combo player if he/she hasnt had enoug time to assemble their combos and doesn't maneuver around it, opposdly a whiffed gnomeferatu or demonic project isnt going to do anything to advance your position in the game and adding brewmasters and baleful bankers to the mix just reduces your slots for cards that can actually lead to a win more proactively and consistently.
tldr: COntrol is about controling the game until you play a larger than life threat that's really hard to deal with and has a high chance to close out the game before your opponent gets to fully respond to it, control players seem to willingly ignore that last part and replace the threats int heir decks in favor of cards that simply delay losing.
sure delaying losing has its uses as it gives you more time to try and win the game, but that's only useful as long as you actually try to close the game.
If you had burned his maly and velen, you would have probably won. You didn't, and that's that. You had a chance to win, but it didn't happen for you in one game. Didn't you say you wanted the theoretical chance at victory?
Big spell mage, odd mage (some versions), control paladin (cubes), control warlock, odd warrior, fatigue warrior, quest warrior, shudderwock shaman.
Edit: it's worth mentioning that pros bringing control to tournaments is quite different from bringing control to ladder because in tournaments you can ban the OTK decks.
The very fact thet you can ban OTK decks in tournaments says something how repulsive they are. That this is not possible on ladder signify 'more rights' for the tournament player. The fact that you can't ban them on ladder has its reasons. You can fill it in yourself.
What he means is every player brings a predetermined number of decks (for example at the HCT tournaments they bring four) and each match both players get to ban one of the opponent's decks. Typically if you're packing an OTK deck in your lineup its because you expect to see a lot of Control at the tournament, in which case your other 3 decks are probably also some combination of OTKs, Combos, Deathrattle Hunters and/or Quest Rogues.
True, but what I signal is the fact that on ladder this is now not possible. Either you don't allow bans in tournaments, or you organize it in a certain way on ladder too. That is a matter of fairness. So I guess you ban OTK- style or something else you don't want to meet upfront.
How exactly would you determine what style a deck is without seeing the opponent's deck beforehand? (Which obviously would not be allowed due to unfairness. What about decks with multiple win conditions? You cant exactly do it by card (by claiming "This is an OTK card, this is a Control card", etc).
Well before start playing you get multiple options to choose from. For instance if you don't want a matchup against an OTK deck you can choose that option. Or you can do it per class. If you don't want to meet Hunters, you ban that class before the matchup.
What would that do to the meta...….
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
In my opinion the win condition is burn the combo. If you could discard or burn the correct cards you win. But this winning condition is only applicable vs otk decks
Well before start playing you get multiple options to choose from. For instance if you don't want a matchup against an OTK deck you can choose that option. Or you can do it per class. If you don't want to meet Hunters, you ban that class before the matchup.
What would that do to the meta...….
Don't think this would do anything for the meta but it would let you create an environment that was favourable to your deck thereby allowing you an easier climb and reducing the amount of skill needed to advance.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Arguing on the internet is like playing chess with a pigeon. You may be good at chess, but the pigeon is just going to knock all the pieces down, take a shit on the table, and strut around like its victorious.
How exactly would you determine what style a deck is without seeing the opponent's deck beforehand? (Which obviously would not be allowed due to unfairness. What about decks with multiple win conditions? You cant exactly do it by card (by claiming "This is an OTK card, this is a Control card", etc).
Well before start playing you get multiple options to choose from. For instance if you don't want a matchup against an OTK deck you can choose that option. Or you can do it per class. If you don't want to meet Hunters, you ban that class before the matchup.
What would that do to the meta...….
So... how does the game determine if you're playing an OTK deck? By asking the player who creates it? What's to stop them simply lying and saying it's an Aggro deck (to get around the ban)? You're essentially relying on the honesty of a player to say his deck falls into that category. And what if it falls across multiple categories>
Big spell mage, odd mage (some versions), control paladin (cubes), control warlock, odd warrior, fatigue warrior, quest warrior, shudderwock shaman.
Edit: it's worth mentioning that pros bringing control to tournaments is quite different from bringing control to ladder because in tournaments you can ban the OTK decks.
The very fact thet you can ban OTK decks in tournaments says something how repulsive they are. That this is not possible on ladder signify 'more rights' for the tournament player. The fact that you can't ban them on ladder has its reasons. You can fill it in yourself.
How exactly would you determine what style a deck is without seeing the opponent's deck beforehand? (Which obviously would not be allowed due to unfairness. What about decks with multiple win conditions? You cant exactly do it by card (by claiming "This is an OTK card, this is a Control card", etc).
Well before start playing you get multiple options to choose from. For instance if you don't want a matchup against an OTK deck you can choose that option. Or you can do it per class. If you don't want to meet Hunters, you ban that class before the matchup.
What would that do to the meta...….
So... how does the game determine if you're playing an OTK deck? By asking the player who creates it? What's to stop them simply lying and saying it's an Aggro deck (to get around the ban)? You're essentially relying on the honesty of a player to say his deck falls into that category. And what if it falls across multiple categories>
All decklists BEFORE a tournament are made public. That is why they can ban combo (or Odd Rogue).
I was trying to build a Warlock deck that could beat combo while still having some control elements. I put in Rin, 1x the spell that turns one minion in each hand into a demon, 2x the 2/3 that burns a card in opponent's library. Then I threw in 4 brewmasters to bounce the Gnomes.
I faced a res priest.
I turned Velen in their hand into a demon. I burned 4 cards in their library (Zillax, the 4 mana res spell, the spell that puts 1 mana copies of all minions in your deck into play, and ?)
I still lost. He got 2x Malygos into play and bursted me down.
It feels like an impossible mission to build a control deck that can beat combo. I think we definitely need some more tools to work with as I'd like to think if I teched in 7 cards to beat a certain deck I could beat that certain deck. Seems fair to me, right?
I think if Combo gives up 7 slots to deal with aggro they should be able to beat aggro as well. Or if aggro gives up 7 slots to beat control then they should be able to do so as well. No archetype should be gimped into an auto loss if built to combat that matchup IMHO. I'm not saying that it should result in an auto-win for the teched deck, but at least even footing if not slightly favored.
its because u still doesnt have any wincon yourself, the deck can beat u with minion damage aswell.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
try removin some aoes instead of 409648604646 aoe then maybe u can attack with minions etc
He could easily have played one or a couple of Shadow Essences.
And then resurrected them.
In this instance, I'm not sure how the OP could have prevented it?
I am playing a dmh warrior with hakkar and zihi at the Moment, have a positive win-rate against gallery priest and mechathun-locks and -druids. Obviously both hakkar and zihi destroy the thun, against gallery priest I try to gather a shit tun of armor and pollute their resurrect-pool with 1/1 raptors.
Obviously if they draw the nuts and blast you for 80 in turn 9 it's gg, but if they game keeps going a while you can outlast them. So in conclusion, if you wanna be able to beat otk-decks as control, hakkar and zihi are your friends ;)
Hi,
Yes.
My first created Hearthstone cards:
Yes in Wild: Deathlord and Dirty Rat are available there and can totally destroy combo. And Loatheb can stall many combos for a round. And since aggro is also stronger there, many combo-decks are simply not viable.
Ah. There was no mention of Tinkmaster Overspark in the OP comment, so I wasn't aware that this was present in the deck.
(I could only go off the cards he said he had - partly because Tink is not a card that I have ever seen in competitive play - meta or Counter - so was an unlikely addition)
I suppose there is also the big likelihood that Tink is in the bottom half of the deck making this play hard to pull off. :-)
True, but what I signal is the fact that on ladder this is now not possible. Either you don't allow bans in tournaments, or you organize it in a certain way on ladder too. That is a matter of fairness. So I guess you ban OTK- style or something else you don't want to meet upfront.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
How exactly would you determine what style a deck is without seeing the opponent's deck beforehand? (Which obviously would not be allowed due to unfairness.
What about decks with multiple win conditions?
You cant exactly do it by card (by claiming "This is an OTK card, this is a Control card", etc).
the thing is that you still didnt add anyting to your deck to win the game, you only added stuff that delayed losing, the thing with Demonic project and gnomeferatus is that es, it's nice if you burn their cards but they aren't a proactive win condition, what rookieish control players dont understand is that "not losing to X card" does not equal winning, as an example why do you think cubelock is the best performing control deck rn? despite the nerfs back in knc?, the answer is simple cubelock seeks to win the game, charging doomguards from cubes and revived with gul'dan are an actual proactive action towards winning and closing out the game instead of delaying a loss, it's something that will kill the combo player if he/she hasnt had enoug time to assemble their combos and doesn't maneuver around it, opposdly a whiffed gnomeferatu or demonic project isnt going to do anything to advance your position in the game and adding brewmasters and baleful bankers to the mix just reduces your slots for cards that can actually lead to a win more proactively and consistently.
tldr: COntrol is about controling the game until you play a larger than life threat that's really hard to deal with and has a high chance to close out the game before your opponent gets to fully respond to it, control players seem to willingly ignore that last part and replace the threats int heir decks in favor of cards that simply delay losing.
sure delaying losing has its uses as it gives you more time to try and win the game, but that's only useful as long as you actually try to close the game.
if it's faster than the combo deck, yes.
for instance cutlass decks fit this role pretty damn well. punishes anything slower, struggles against fast decks.
If you had burned his maly and velen, you would have probably won. You didn't, and that's that. You had a chance to win, but it didn't happen for you in one game. Didn't you say you wanted the theoretical chance at victory?
Well before start playing you get multiple options to choose from. For instance if you don't want a matchup against an OTK deck you can choose that option. Or you can do it per class. If you don't want to meet Hunters, you ban that class before the matchup.
What would that do to the meta...….
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
In my opinion the win condition is burn the combo. If you could discard or burn the correct cards you win. But this winning condition is only applicable vs otk decks
Don't think this would do anything for the meta but it would let you create an environment that was favourable to your deck thereby allowing you an easier climb and reducing the amount of skill needed to advance.
Arguing on the internet is like playing chess with a pigeon. You may be good at chess, but the pigeon is just going to knock all the pieces down, take a shit on the table, and strut around like its victorious.
So... how does the game determine if you're playing an OTK deck?
By asking the player who creates it? What's to stop them simply lying and saying it's an Aggro deck (to get around the ban)?
You're essentially relying on the honesty of a player to say his deck falls into that category.
And what if it falls across multiple categories>
That is completely terrible and flawed logic.
Banning decks isn't OTK specific.
I didn't have tinkmaster. Sorry if there was confustion.
Galavant Animation
Control can beat Combo, specially Warlock. You have most of the tools to disrupt it.
Yet, Gallery Priest is very hard (and annoying) to beat unless you have ways to gain lots of armor and thinking ahead of the priest.
All decklists BEFORE a tournament are made public. That is why they can ban combo (or Odd Rogue).
its because u still doesnt have any wincon yourself, the deck can beat u with minion damage aswell.