I'm sure this isn't a new idea or discussion, but I haven't thought this myself until this season in HS.
My plight is that I really want to play control warrior, no gimmicks, I just want to counter rogue and stand a chance against mech oriented aggro decks. The problem is that I have played 2 mirror matches now that went on for 50 minutes and ended up in a draw anyway due to the 50 turn limit. Going to fatigue and double Archivist Elysiana for both sides ends up in a game that neither play can (likely) win. The second time around I knew what I was up against and realized that I was 7 minutes into an hour long match. If I had the option to offer the draw, we could have moved on with our lives and played against the decks we were trying to counter.
Look at it this way: „Bad matchup“ normally means „you are likely going to loose“. In current control warrior lists, mirror is almost the only bad matchup which is not „loose“ but „waste some time and likely draw“. Its totally fair that way :)
drawing= both players losing ... so just concede..
or play mechathun to beat the matchup in another way..
I think archivist elesyana ishould be changed to shuffle less cards it's not a nerf if everyone is running her 10 cards prolong the game by way too much..
drawing= both players losing ... so just concede..
or play mechathun to beat the matchup in another way..
I think archivist elesyana ishould be changed to shuffle less cards it's not a nerf if everyone is running her 10 cards prolong the game by way too much..
As i have not seen any warriors play silence so far you can probably get away with just emptying your deck and slamming down mechathun without any combo instead of running archivist
drawing= both players losing ... so just concede..
or play mechathun to beat the matchup in another way..
I think archivist elesyana ishould be changed to shuffle less cards it's not a nerf if everyone is running her 10 cards prolong the game by way too much..
Actually a draw is a draw and doesnt make you lose stars or gain them either
drawing= both players losing ... so just concede..
or play mechathun to beat the matchup in another way..
I think archivist elesyana ishould be changed to shuffle less cards it's not a nerf if everyone is running her 10 cards prolong the game by way too much..
Actually a draw is a draw and doesnt make you lose stars or gain them either
Well, seeing as how you're playing Elysiana for the control mirror and not the aggro/midrange matchups you mentioned that doesn't seem very fair to the rest of us, does it? Avoiding inconvenient matchups and only play the ones you're favored in?
drawing= both players losing ... so just concede..
or play mechathun to beat the matchup in another way..
I think archivist elesyana ishould be changed to shuffle less cards it's not a nerf if everyone is running her 10 cards prolong the game by way too much..
As i have not seen any warriors play silence so far you can probably get away with just emptying your deck and slamming down mechathun without any combo instead of running archivist
I tried that in Bomb Warrior to help the matchup vs Control Warrior since that was the only matchup I ever had to use Elysiana in.
Won me this game at least, although it was a little close because I let them get too big of a board near the end and they pulled Mosh’Ohh Enforcer from Elysiana.
It seems this thread has run its course, but just for the sake of debate, I'd like to reply to a few more points in order to make my case. It's kind of whatever, but, hey, I started this, might as well finish it.
Well, seeing as how you're playing Elysiana for the control mirror and not the aggro/midrange matchups you mentioned that doesn't seem very fair to the rest of us, does it? Avoiding inconvenient matchups and only play the ones you're favored in?
This point has come up a few times and I don't really understand it. I'm not complaining about hitting bad matchups, I'm complaining that I'm hitting a matchup that is unwinnable by either player. It turns into a waste of time. If the turn limit didn't exist, I wouldn't be complaining. I might still choose to play something else because 50 minute games are a chore, but it's especially annoying when the outcome is decided by HS saying "nah game too long bruh".
Each of the Control players *chose* to have no game plan, other than countering the opponent, which in HS means playing the Value game, slowly.
So you actually wanted long games, why should you deserve an option for short ones?
I'm not saying I want long games, I just want to beat aggro. I'm ok with dealing with long games, as long as I *can* win. If I lose, whatever, but had the possibility of winning. If I don't have the option to win, give me the option to bail early for the same result. If both players are into it, I don't see what the problem is.
On this note, I will say that other games like chess will let you offer a draw because there are some cases where the outcome has been decided and there's no reason to continue playing. HS games don't typically go that way, but I think allowing all types of play-styles without punishing them with some arbitrary built-in-game limitation would be ideal. Supporting diversity of decks seems better to me.
Anyway, thanks everybody for your thoughts, it was a fun discussion.
I'm sure this isn't a new idea or discussion, but I haven't thought this myself until this season in HS.
My plight is that I really want to play control warrior, no gimmicks, I just want to counter rogue and stand a chance against mech oriented aggro decks. The problem is that I have played 2 mirror matches now that went on for 50 minutes and ended up in a draw anyway due to the 50 turn limit. Going to fatigue and double Archivist Elysiana for both sides ends up in a game that neither play can (likely) win. The second time around I knew what I was up against and realized that I was 7 minutes into an hour long match. If I had the option to offer the draw, we could have moved on with our lives and played against the decks we were trying to counter.
Well you can always concede.
Yeah, no. That's like banning all control on control matchups to just get the favorable ones. That's not unfair at all...
Actually, friend, you are not alone.
There are, in fact, two solutions to your plight:
1. Concede; or
2. Uninstall Hearthstone
Huh? It ends up being a draw anyway...
people who play Archivist Elysiana with bounce effect minions deserve each other
Look at it this way: „Bad matchup“ normally means „you are likely going to loose“. In current control warrior lists, mirror is almost the only bad matchup which is not „loose“ but „waste some time and likely draw“. Its totally fair that way :)
Lol, alright, I can't argue with this
ok i got a card idea
10 mana 6/9
battlecry: destroy a random hero
drawing= both players losing ... so just concede..
or play mechathun to beat the matchup in another way..
I think archivist elesyana ishould be changed to shuffle less cards it's not a nerf if everyone is running her 10 cards prolong the game by way too much..
As i have not seen any warriors play silence so far you can probably get away with just emptying your deck and slamming down mechathun without any combo instead of running archivist
Actually a draw is a draw and doesnt make you lose stars or gain them either
Can confirm
Well, seeing as how you're playing Elysiana for the control mirror and not the aggro/midrange matchups you mentioned that doesn't seem very fair to the rest of us, does it? Avoiding inconvenient matchups and only play the ones you're favored in?
Mmh, on paper, it sounds interesting.
But in practice? It's just an option for a niche number of matches.
In particular, these niche matches are the Control mirrors.
Aggro or Midrange games would hardly accept a draw.
Each of the Control players *chose* to have no game plan, other than countering the opponent, which in HS means playing the Value game, slowly.
So you actually wanted long games, why should you deserve an option for short ones?
I tried that in Bomb Warrior to help the matchup vs Control Warrior since that was the only matchup I ever had to use Elysiana in.
https://hsreplay.net/replay/H7cNvPHJfDen2udJ73nmzM
Won me this game at least, although it was a little close because I let them get too big of a board near the end and they pulled Mosh’Ohh Enforcer from Elysiana.
It would be silly. Those long games are a consequence of neither decks having a win condition. If you don't like play decks that has a win condition.
I love seeing Control Warriors playing Elysiana +Brewmaster/Banker crying about other Control Warriors playing Elysiana + Brewmaster/Banker.
If it's not fun for YOU playing the deck and facing it, imagine for all the others.
Even better than when the crying is "He got more value from Dr.Boom than me".
It seems this thread has run its course, but just for the sake of debate, I'd like to reply to a few more points in order to make my case. It's kind of whatever, but, hey, I started this, might as well finish it.
This point has come up a few times and I don't really understand it. I'm not complaining about hitting bad matchups, I'm complaining that I'm hitting a matchup that is unwinnable by either player. It turns into a waste of time. If the turn limit didn't exist, I wouldn't be complaining. I might still choose to play something else because 50 minute games are a chore, but it's especially annoying when the outcome is decided by HS saying "nah game too long bruh".
I'm not saying I want long games, I just want to beat aggro. I'm ok with dealing with long games, as long as I *can* win. If I lose, whatever, but had the possibility of winning. If I don't have the option to win, give me the option to bail early for the same result. If both players are into it, I don't see what the problem is.
On this note, I will say that other games like chess will let you offer a draw because there are some cases where the outcome has been decided and there's no reason to continue playing. HS games don't typically go that way, but I think allowing all types of play-styles without punishing them with some arbitrary built-in-game limitation would be ideal. Supporting diversity of decks seems better to me.
Anyway, thanks everybody for your thoughts, it was a fun discussion.
You're also assuming that both players are competent enough to survive till the end, which isn't necessarily true.
Unpopular opinion: Rogue is OP