What could possibly be wrong with this solution? I just drew a Control Warrior - Control Shaman match with me at 72 total health (as warrior) and him at f-ing 9. I did everything I needed to do (played Elysiana early, had Azalina in my deck and played her at the right time to copy his shudderwock, played a shudderwock to duplicate both my Elysiana and Azalina battlecries, managed my removal, etc. Etc. Et-fn-c. So I should be satisfied with wasting literally 40 minutes of my life because he Hagatha'd into like 6 witch's brews to barely avoid fatigue damage? And before someone points me to the salt thread, yes of course I'm salty. The turn Limit draw rule is ridiculous and needs to be looked at. You can still outplay someone at the turn Limit. Yes this is a fringe case and is probably like .0001% of games or whatever, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done right.
You didn’t win. It doesn’t matter if you accumulate 100 armor or your opponent mage is sitting on 1 health after procing 4 ice blocks. As long as the health wasn’t brought down to 0 within the turn limir or if you didn’t use any “win the game” card, you drew. Accumulating health isn’t a win condition, bringing your opponent down is.
No it should not. You play a deck that does not have a win condition other than fatiquing your opponent and removing things from the board. You have 89 turns to win the game - do it before that or draw.
Neither of us had a win condition. That isn't the issue. The issue is that had the game gone on naturally, I would have won every time. The artificial turn Limit draw thing is silly.
Neither of us had a win condition. That isn't the issue. The issue is that had the game gone on naturally, I would have won every time. The artificial turn Limit draw thing is silly.
Neither of us had a win condition. That isn't the issue. The issue is that had the game gone on naturally, I would have won every time. The artificial turn Limit draw thing is silly.
Going off of health totals is not a good solution, because decks such as Control Warrior work by keeping huge life and armour values, whereas Control Shaman focuses on board control and keeping threats away. There is nothing wrong with a tie in this instance. If you failed to kill the opponent, then you failed to win. And likewise for your opponent, the same should be the case.
They had a health-based tiebreaker when I played in the WoW TCG tournaments, and I won mine literally thanks to this rule, because I had health potions and the opponent didn't. While it's great to win, it felt very cheap and I had to commiserate my opponent afterwards. In a game like Hearthstone, that would only serve to create a HUGE salt-feeling about losing when you didn't actually lose.
I'd like to point out one important thing here. Fatigue shaman should have upper hand against fatigue warrior.
What you're doing, is teching a deck, which is fine as it is, to the point of greediness which prolly makes your deck worse against most of the meta decks. There is no other reason to do so than because you're too focused on mirror matchups. I mean okay, you like being greedy AF? Sure go ahead. But now try to think how frustrating it actually was for an opponent with a deck which beats yours most of the time (fatigue shaman).
Elsyiana fits perfectly to fatigue shaman because of shudderwock. It's just a natural addition to this deck which actually makes you have overall higher WR on the ladder as it is the only fatigue tool in control shammy. Same can't be said about control warrior because of both Azalina and Elysiana fighting for fatigue matchups. Shudderwock can be both tempo and huge value swing and isn't just a greedy card to win in fatigue.
I had a very similar situation today. I played against quest shaman with my fatigue shaman. The game lasted to fatigue after both mine and his shudder had been played after elysiana (yes, a very very long game). I won because my deck is meant to go into fatigue and win it almost every time naturally. What he did is basically making a quest shaman weaker for a greedy purpose forgetting that going into fatigue matchups require much more health gain cards in the deck.
What could possibly be wrong with this solution? I just drew a Control Warrior - Control Shaman match with me at 72 total health (as warrior) and him at f-ing 9. I did everything I needed to do (played Elysiana early, had Azalina in my deck and played her at the right time to copy his shudderwock, played a shudderwock to duplicate both my Elysiana and Azalina battlecries, managed my removal, etc. Etc. Et-fn-c. So I should be satisfied with wasting literally 40 minutes of my life because he Hagatha'd into like 6 witch's brews to barely avoid fatigue damage? And before someone points me to the salt thread, yes of course I'm salty. The turn Limit draw rule is ridiculous and needs to be looked at. You can still outplay someone at the turn Limit. Yes this is a fringe case and is probably like .0001% of games or whatever, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done right.
You didn’t win. It doesn’t matter if you accumulate 100 armor or your opponent mage is sitting on 1 health after procing 4 ice blocks. As long as the health wasn’t brought down to 0 within the turn limir or if you didn’t use any “win the game” card, you drew. Accumulating health isn’t a win condition, bringing your opponent down is.
No it should not. You play a deck that does not have a win condition other than fatiquing your opponent and removing things from the board. You have 89 turns to win the game - do it before that or draw.
Neither of us had a win condition. That isn't the issue. The issue is that had the game gone on naturally, I would have won every time. The artificial turn Limit draw thing is silly.
Neither of us had a win condition. That isn't the issue. The issue is that had the game gone on naturally, I would have won every time. The artificial turn Limit draw thing is silly.
Neither of us had a win condition. That isn't the issue. The issue is that had the game gone on naturally, I would have won every time. The artificial turn Limit draw thing is silly.
No, the limit is perfectly fine. Win before the turn limit or draw.
The silly artificial turn limit draw thing is there exactly for the purpose to end the game for 2 decks without a win condition
Salty control warrior
they should make the turn limit 1000, and if you hit it it means you play crappy decks and it auto uninstalls HS and your PC catches on fire.
There is a 45 turn limit before the game starts so don't cry if you choose to play a deck that has a chance not to be able to win in that time.
Also you clearly didn't play perfectly or you would have won.
Except actually kill him?
Going off of health totals is not a good solution, because decks such as Control Warrior work by keeping huge life and armour values, whereas Control Shaman focuses on board control and keeping threats away.
There is nothing wrong with a tie in this instance. If you failed to kill the opponent, then you failed to win. And likewise for your opponent, the same should be the case.
They had a health-based tiebreaker when I played in the WoW TCG tournaments, and I won mine literally thanks to this rule, because I had health potions and the opponent didn't. While it's great to win, it felt very cheap and I had to commiserate my opponent afterwards.
In a game like Hearthstone, that would only serve to create a HUGE salt-feeling about losing when you didn't actually lose.
I think both players should lose.
Wow... 45 turns and you couldn’t win? Gotta agree with everyone else. Can’t imagine a more boring way to play tbh
Advocating for not getting shit on as a control warrior on this site? Have you read any of the forums? Everyone plays aggro on here, they hate you.
Those who are given more in life, must not cling to it, but risk it all at every moment!
I'd like to point out one important thing here. Fatigue shaman should have upper hand against fatigue warrior.
What you're doing, is teching a deck, which is fine as it is, to the point of greediness which prolly makes your deck worse against most of the meta decks. There is no other reason to do so than because you're too focused on mirror matchups. I mean okay, you like being greedy AF? Sure go ahead. But now try to think how frustrating it actually was for an opponent with a deck which beats yours most of the time (fatigue shaman).
Elsyiana fits perfectly to fatigue shaman because of shudderwock. It's just a natural addition to this deck which actually makes you have overall higher WR on the ladder as it is the only fatigue tool in control shammy. Same can't be said about control warrior because of both Azalina and Elysiana fighting for fatigue matchups. Shudderwock can be both tempo and huge value swing and isn't just a greedy card to win in fatigue.
I had a very similar situation today. I played against quest shaman with my fatigue shaman. The game lasted to fatigue after both mine and his shudder had been played after elysiana (yes, a very very long game). I won because my deck is meant to go into fatigue and win it almost every time naturally. What he did is basically making a quest shaman weaker for a greedy purpose forgetting that going into fatigue matchups require much more health gain cards in the deck.