It's a "Cycle 1 card for 1 mana, and burn 2 random cards out of your deck for no apparent reason". So no... I won't be trying to change your mind. It's a terrible card and I laugh whenever my opponent plays it - even more so when they take more than a few seconds to choose what card they want because you know at that moment they just got given the choice from helll! Hah!
My perspective of the card changed a lot over the years. I also used to think it was bad, but now I can't imagine Hunter without it.
The one question I still often debate with however is WHEN to play it. Is it worth keeping as a turn 1 play (when you might not yet know what your opponent is playing), or playing it when the game has advanced to a point where playing Tracking becomes a more clutch play.
"Get a certain card NOW" Can't counter that point - a very good one, and I think the ONLY valid reason to run Tracking. Is the direct and implied cost worth it though? Perhaps it is, perhaps it's not.
"Lucky top deck lost me the game" Just wanted to respond to this specific scenario - KC is usually drawn and hoarded for the final kill. Sometimes you draw it (or 2nd one) at the point of lethal, but often it's set up over a few turns. Tracking picks up the next three cards to be drawn from the deck, so at worst you're getting that KC in two turns time. Now of course a lot can happen in two turns, but there are also scenarios where two KCs come up in one Tracking and conversely cost you the game.
"Things you really want" Definitely agree with the value of Tracking for Spellstone/spell synergies - but rest of the time I feel it's value is more in a defensive Hail Mary. A lot of the time I see it as "well, got 1 mana left this turn, let's see what I can get" as well.
Just an addendum to these three points while it comes to mind - they are essentially requiring each other to happen. You have to have a lucky top deck to get the Tracking. You then need Tracking to give you what you are looking for. You also need Tracking NOT to screw you over at the same time.
It's all very well finding that much needed removal to save you on the board, but in the process burning Rexxar DK and/or Zul'jian? Yeah, you would have had a MUCH better chance if you had just topdecked the removal by itself....
If you can’t see the merits of the card then you don’t understand why cycling and thinning your deck is so powerful.
I was gonna just ignore it, but I have to second scorpyon on this. Don't attack someone simply for having a differing opinion. It only results in negativity and ignorance.
A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. Unless you're playing fatigue hunter, this card is amazing. It's like discover but all of the options should be good because you put them there.
My perspective of the card changed a lot over the years. I also used to think it was bad, but now I can't imagine Hunter without it.
The one question I still often debate with however is WHEN to play it. Is it worth keeping as a turn 1 play (when you might not yet know what your opponent is playing), or playing it when the game has advanced to a point where playing Tracking becomes a more clutch play.
I feel that in Spell/Secret Hunter it's a good mulligan keep IF you have a Spellstone and need secrets. If I don't have a Spellstone I'll cycle Tracking and whatever secrets I have (except Wandering) to try and get it. Will be interesting to see how that pans out post-nerf.
A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. Unless you're playing fatigue hunter, this card is amazing. It's like discover but all of the options should be good because you put them there.
But you just blew the heads off the two in the bush! :D
If you can’t see the merits of the card then you don’t understand why cycling and thinning your deck is so powerful.
I was gonna just ignore it, but I have to second scorpyon on this. Don't attack someone simply for having a differing opinion. It only results in negativity and ignorance.
Ok since I got some bites, I didn’t intend it as an attack.
You need to have 30 cards in a deck. When making a deck you want to put in the most powerful cards you can. The smaller the deck the more powerful it can be because you don’t have to put in filler cards. This is where tracking come in. You can fill will a card that only helps you get to the most powerful cards in your deck. Don’t see it as dropping 2 good cards think of it as picking the one card that’s most likely to help you win the game while clearing out less useful cards to give you an even better chance of drawing the best stuff. Think of it in terms of odds.
Ok since I got some bites, I didn’t intend it as an attack.
You need to have 30 cards in a deck. When making a deck you want to put in the most powerful cards you can. The smaller the deck the more powerful it can be because you don’t have to put in filler cards. This is where tracking come in. You can fill will a card that only helps you get to the most powerful cards in your deck. Don’t see it as dropping 2 good cards think of it as picking the one card that’s most likely to help you win the game while clearing out less useful cards to give you an even better chance of drawing the best stuff. Think of it in terms of odds.
You are right. But the response will always be "what if I burn a card I don't want to burn?" Because that's always the response. People who can't understand that burning the cards doesn't matter will never understand why Tracking is good.
Many have already probably said this, but unless you're playing to fatigue, burning cards does not matter in the slightest. It is simply the same end result as if the cards you burned was at the bottom of your deck, but you never drew them. Another point, is that it thins your deck allowing you to more quickly draw into cards you do want.
If however you do play to fatigue, its a different matter altogether.
Ok since I got some bites, I didn’t intend it as an attack.
You need to have 30 cards in a deck. When making a deck you want to put in the most powerful cards you can. The smaller the deck the more powerful it can be because you don’t have to put in filler cards. This is where tracking come in. You can fill will a card that only helps you get to the most powerful cards in your deck. Don’t see it as dropping 2 good cards think of it as picking the one card that’s most likely to help you win the game while clearing out less useful cards to give you an even better chance of drawing the best stuff. Think of it in terms of odds.
You are right. But the response will always be "what if I burn a card I don't want to burn?" Because that's always the response. People who can't understand that burning the cards doesn't matter will never understand why Tracking is good.
Except that is always the tired and overused excuse. People who can't understand why burning your win condition cards out of your deck is a bad thing, will never understand why Tracking is bad. They can't see the wood for the trees. They only consider the short term effects of it. It's quite simple short-sighted gameplay. These people would make terrible chess players for example. Finding a card that solves your immediate problem at the expense of losing you the game in the long run is never a sign of good strategy. But there's only so many times you can tell people this until they have to learn it for themselves.
Anecdotally, I removed Tracking from my own hunter decks and with it, my WR increased dramatically (which is how I maintained the R5 shelf last month by sitting at R1 thanks to Hunter). I always tend to prefer decks that I have full control over and limit any (if not all) RnG from screwing me over. Tracking is a prime example of this sort of thing. You are desperately hoping to High Roll with it every time and when it screws you over, some people kid themselves into thinking it was "just bad luck" when in reality it was a bad card choice.
A thing to consider is that Tracking isn't pulling from the top of the deck. Meaning that DK you 'gave up' isn't necessarily going to end up in your hand soon. And a Zul'jin at the back 10 of your deck still means you are without Zul'jin this game.
In fact, if you need help with the 'irrational element' here's a way to imagine it: tracking is pulling from the bottom three cards in your deck and giving you one up front. Meaning, if you didn't play the card you wouldn't have seen any of the three anyway.
Thus you aren't sacrificing 2 cards to get one. You are finding out which three cards were NOT going to be a part of the game and adding one in.
As many have said, this is a matter of emotional impact rather than mechanical issues. It FEELS bad seeing that Epic card in front of you go away. It's like how your computer feels perfectly fine until you visit someone with a PC that runs everything 5 times faster. Suddenly you can't go back even though nothing has really changed.
So my proposal is fighting emotion with emotion. If you know that you didn't have a shot at getting those 3 cards anyway, then tracking is 1 mana to rescue a card rather than 1 mana burn 2 cards.
(also a hidden benefit to knowing the 'bottom two cards'. If you KNOW you aren't going to have DK this game you can at least plan around that and push for a faster game. You can't do that if the card is at the bottom and you think it'll be coming any minute now)
I don't think the use of Tracking is a matter of opinion. The card statistics clearly suggest that the card is a good card.
The thing is that you shouldn't use tracking just when you can (e.g. turn 1), but when you know what you are looking for. And then you get three chances of finding it. If you need removal for the opponent's minions, then it is better to find it, discard Rexxar and live than to draw Rexxar and die because you can't play him on turn 5. Basically, the matchups in which you want to have tracking are the matchups you will not go through your whole deck. And as long as you are not going through your whole deck, the discarded cards could also have been on the bottom of your deck (i.e. discarding them doesn't matter, you wouldn't have drawn them anyway). Using it means that you get at least something good, even if another good card will go in the bin. If you didn't draw anything good, then you are happy to discard the other two cards anyway.
Every time you are in a situation thinking "if I draw card X I will not lose" (or something similar) and you do not draw it, that is a time you would've liked to have an additional draw by using Tracking .
Ok since I got some bites, I didn’t intend it as an attack.
You need to have 30 cards in a deck. When making a deck you want to put in the most powerful cards you can. The smaller the deck the more powerful it can be because you don’t have to put in filler cards. This is where tracking come in. You can fill will a card that only helps you get to the most powerful cards in your deck. Don’t see it as dropping 2 good cards think of it as picking the one card that’s most likely to help you win the game while clearing out less useful cards to give you an even better chance of drawing the best stuff. Think of it in terms of odds.
You are right. But the response will always be "what if I burn a card I don't want to burn?" Because that's always the response. People who can't understand that burning the cards doesn't matter will never understand why Tracking is good.
Is there a queue to make inappropriate remarks in this thread or something?
Except that is always the tired and overused excuse.
Nah, it's the truth.
People who can't understand why burning your win condition cards out of your deck is a bad thing, will never understand why Tracking is bad.
If you're burning your win condition, you're playing tracking wrong. If a card off tracking will win you the game, then that is the card you should pick.
They can't see the wood for the trees. They only consider the short term effects of it. It's quite simple short-sighted gameplay. These people would make terrible chess players for example.
Chess is a completely different game, and your comparison makes no sense. Regardless, if you are not considering the long term when you are making your selection off Tracking, again, you are playing it wrong.
Finding a card that solves your immediate problem at the expense of losing you the game in the long run is never a sign of good strategy.
It's actually a great strategy in a game that is primarily dictated by tempo. You shouldn't lose the game because you played tracking. Again, if you are finding yourself in that position, it is because you are playing Tracking wrong.
But there's only so many times you can tell people this until they have to learn it for themselves.
Anecdotally, I removed Tracking from my own hunter decks and with it, my WR increased dramatically (which is how I maintained the R5 shelf last month by sitting at R1 thanks to Hunter). I always tend to prefer decks that I have full control over and limit any (if not all) RnG from screwing me over.
Which is probably because you were playing Tracking incorrectly.
Tracking is a prime example of this sort of thing. You are desperately hoping to High Roll with it every time and when it screws you over, some people kid themselves into thinking it was "just bad luck" when in reality it was a bad card choice.
Tracking is actually one of the least high-roll type cards. It is always doing the same thing - letting you see 3 your next three cards.
Ok since I got some bites, I didn’t intend it as an attack.
You need to have 30 cards in a deck. When making a deck you want to put in the most powerful cards you can. The smaller the deck the more powerful it can be because you don’t have to put in filler cards. This is where tracking come in. You can fill will a card that only helps you get to the most powerful cards in your deck. Don’t see it as dropping 2 good cards think of it as picking the one card that’s most likely to help you win the game while clearing out less useful cards to give you an even better chance of drawing the best stuff. Think of it in terms of odds.
Great input, thanks!
I find with my decks I don't generally have "filler" cards - but every card is situational. It's not like I'm running a Dire Mole cuz it's shit - it's one of the strongest opening plays. But a Dire Mole IS shit as a T9 topdeck when you're looking for King Krush!
Because decks are refined so precisely with the sheer volume of play and statistical analysis available, I don't think there's a scenario where there's one specific card that's a great burn in every situation. So fleshing that out, statistically over a large sample size you should get an even % of good burns, as you do bad burns - thus cancelling out the burn mechanic altogether.
Of course situationally it can be a great mechanic, but it's a double-edged sword. I would contend that pro-Tracking people have confirmation bias themselves as well :)
Many have already probably said this, but unless you're playing to fatigue, burning cards does not matter in the slightest. It is simply the same end result as if the cards you burned was at the bottom of your deck, but you never drew them.
I actually said that in the very first post :D
Thanks for contributing though!!!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
My perspective of the card changed a lot over the years. I also used to think it was bad, but now I can't imagine Hunter without it.
The one question I still often debate with however is WHEN to play it. Is it worth keeping as a turn 1 play (when you might not yet know what your opponent is playing), or playing it when the game has advanced to a point where playing Tracking becomes a more clutch play.
"Everyone! Get in here!"
Just an addendum to these three points while it comes to mind - they are essentially requiring each other to happen.
You have to have a lucky top deck to get the Tracking.
You then need Tracking to give you what you are looking for.
You also need Tracking NOT to screw you over at the same time.
It's all very well finding that much needed removal to save you on the board, but in the process burning Rexxar DK and/or Zul'jian? Yeah, you would have had a MUCH better chance if you had just topdecked the removal by itself....
I was gonna just ignore it, but I have to second scorpyon on this. Don't attack someone simply for having a differing opinion. It only results in negativity and ignorance.
A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. Unless you're playing fatigue hunter, this card is amazing. It's like discover but all of the options should be good because you put them there.
I feel that in Spell/Secret Hunter it's a good mulligan keep IF you have a Spellstone and need secrets. If I don't have a Spellstone I'll cycle Tracking and whatever secrets I have (except Wandering) to try and get it. Will be interesting to see how that pans out post-nerf.
But you just blew the heads off the two in the bush! :D
Had to be done. ;-)
I think that's the core of this site TBH ^^^^^^
Ok since I got some bites, I didn’t intend it as an attack.
You need to have 30 cards in a deck. When making a deck you want to put in the most powerful cards you can. The smaller the deck the more powerful it can be because you don’t have to put in filler cards. This is where tracking come in. You can fill will a card that only helps you get to the most powerful cards in your deck. Don’t see it as dropping 2 good cards think of it as picking the one card that’s most likely to help you win the game while clearing out less useful cards to give you an even better chance of drawing the best stuff. Think of it in terms of odds.
You are right. But the response will always be "what if I burn a card I don't want to burn?" Because that's always the response. People who can't understand that burning the cards doesn't matter will never understand why Tracking is good.
Many have already probably said this, but unless you're playing to fatigue, burning cards does not matter in the slightest. It is simply the same end result as if the cards you burned was at the bottom of your deck, but you never drew them. Another point, is that it thins your deck allowing you to more quickly draw into cards you do want.
If however you do play to fatigue, its a different matter altogether.
Except that is always the tired and overused excuse. People who can't understand why burning your win condition cards out of your deck is a bad thing, will never understand why Tracking is bad. They can't see the wood for the trees. They only consider the short term effects of it. It's quite simple short-sighted gameplay. These people would make terrible chess players for example.
Finding a card that solves your immediate problem at the expense of losing you the game in the long run is never a sign of good strategy.
But there's only so many times you can tell people this until they have to learn it for themselves.
Anecdotally, I removed Tracking from my own hunter decks and with it, my WR increased dramatically (which is how I maintained the R5 shelf last month by sitting at R1 thanks to Hunter). I always tend to prefer decks that I have full control over and limit any (if not all) RnG from screwing me over.
Tracking is a prime example of this sort of thing. You are desperately hoping to High Roll with it every time and when it screws you over, some people kid themselves into thinking it was "just bad luck" when in reality it was a bad card choice.
I THINK I can help here?
A thing to consider is that Tracking isn't pulling from the top of the deck. Meaning that DK you 'gave up' isn't necessarily going to end up in your hand soon. And a Zul'jin at the back 10 of your deck still means you are without Zul'jin this game.
In fact, if you need help with the 'irrational element' here's a way to imagine it: tracking is pulling from the bottom three cards in your deck and giving you one up front. Meaning, if you didn't play the card you wouldn't have seen any of the three anyway.
Thus you aren't sacrificing 2 cards to get one. You are finding out which three cards were NOT going to be a part of the game and adding one in.
As many have said, this is a matter of emotional impact rather than mechanical issues. It FEELS bad seeing that Epic card in front of you go away. It's like how your computer feels perfectly fine until you visit someone with a PC that runs everything 5 times faster. Suddenly you can't go back even though nothing has really changed.
So my proposal is fighting emotion with emotion. If you know that you didn't have a shot at getting those 3 cards anyway, then tracking is 1 mana to rescue a card rather than 1 mana burn 2 cards.
(also a hidden benefit to knowing the 'bottom two cards'. If you KNOW you aren't going to have DK this game you can at least plan around that and push for a faster game. You can't do that if the card is at the bottom and you think it'll be coming any minute now)
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
I don't think the use of Tracking is a matter of opinion. The card statistics clearly suggest that the card is a good card.
The thing is that you shouldn't use tracking just when you can (e.g. turn 1), but when you know what you are looking for. And then you get three chances of finding it. If you need removal for the opponent's minions, then it is better to find it, discard Rexxar and live than to draw Rexxar and die because you can't play him on turn 5. Basically, the matchups in which you want to have tracking are the matchups you will not go through your whole deck. And as long as you are not going through your whole deck, the discarded cards could also have been on the bottom of your deck (i.e. discarding them doesn't matter, you wouldn't have drawn them anyway). Using it means that you get at least something good, even if another good card will go in the bin. If you didn't draw anything good, then you are happy to discard the other two cards anyway.
Every time you are in a situation thinking "if I draw card X I will not lose" (or something similar) and you do not draw it, that is a time you would've liked to have an additional draw by using Tracking .
Is there a queue to make inappropriate remarks in this thread or something?
ME 1XBENX1
ME GOOD
YOU DUMB
Come dude...... O_o
Responses in bold.
And yet this was your comment...ironic?
Great input, thanks!
I find with my decks I don't generally have "filler" cards - but every card is situational. It's not like I'm running a Dire Mole cuz it's shit - it's one of the strongest opening plays. But a Dire Mole IS shit as a T9 topdeck when you're looking for King Krush!
Because decks are refined so precisely with the sheer volume of play and statistical analysis available, I don't think there's a scenario where there's one specific card that's a great burn in every situation. So fleshing that out, statistically over a large sample size you should get an even % of good burns, as you do bad burns - thus cancelling out the burn mechanic altogether.
Of course situationally it can be a great mechanic, but it's a double-edged sword. I would contend that pro-Tracking people have confirmation bias themselves as well :)
I actually said that in the very first post :D
Thanks for contributing though!!!