I can't remember seeing this before. If you look at HSReplay decks, it looks like theres tons of Tempo DH decks performing well they're all basically the same deck with minor variations and the best ones have 60%-63% winrate.
Mixed in are the following decks:
Highlander Hunter, Face Hunter, and Dragon Hunter.
Murloc Paladin and Pure Paladin
Galakrond Rogue and Highlander Rogue
Highlander Mage
Totem Shaman
Token Druid
Galakrond Warlock
Ressurect Priest
Most of these decks have a couple versions at least with a 60-63% winrate.
Spell Mage, Spell Druid, Galakrond Priest, Highlander Priest, Big Druid, Galakrond Shaman, Stealth Rogue, Egg Warrior and Bomb Warrior are showing 55-59%
All 10 classes have at least 2 decks performing at 55%+ winrate.
So, I suppose my question is... What exactly do people want??
You can pick ANY class, and have a choice of 2 top performing decks and if you're anywhere close to a decent player are STATISTICALLY SHOWN to have an average of 55%+ winrate!! What will it take to not have 18 threads created EVERY SINGLE DAY that are about nerfing a class?
I don't like being negative, but I honestly can't believe the constant salt, in a meta that has likely never been so balanced (literally inarguable. The stats show it)
Some of the decks are pure Tempo
Some are budget/FTP
Some are PACKED with interactive legendaries.
I'm really sorry to say, but this is a competitive game. Any game with "rewards" will be. People want to win, so people will play the top tier decks. That will NEVER change. The meta will ALWAYS be a majority of the most powerful deck, and then circle through counters. If that deck is nerfed to nothing, the next deck will take its place, and be just as "cancerous"... Your meme deck will NEVER be competitive.
These percentages are statistic. If you play these decks, cycle them to fit the meta, change out tech cards to suit the meta, and still can't maintain 55% winrate overall, then unfortunately, your skill level is statistically below average, and your play is actually lowering the win% of these decks.
If a deck has a 55% winrate, then there are likely 2 people running it with a 65% winrate, 2 people running it with a 55% winrate, and 2 people running it with a 45% winrate. That is how statistics work. The reason for these variances are the skill involved. A good player runs 65, a medium player runs 55, a 'not so good' player runs 45
I'm bad at golf, but I still have fun playing with my friends... I don't blame my friends ball when he beats me... I don't blame the grass, I don't blame the wind. We are all playing on the same course, and they are doing fine. I take responsibility for my crappy playing.
But... But... My deck should be the only one with high win rates! The others obviously are all broken deck in a toxic Meta! Nerf them! Nerf them 'till they die I say!
Also, I don't like all the other decks because <insert reason>.
This post is what I've wanted to see for the last two weeks. It's so annoying that people don't understand, that Hearthstone, as a competetive game, requires some skill. It's not different than Fifa, LoL, DoTa or any other online game. The only difference is that instead of refelxes you have to train your brain and logical thinking.
Is powercreep over the years the reason for this? Crazy swing turns and insane power turns lead to games/losses which feel unfair and unjust even if that players deck is capable of similar plays too.
Don't underestimate the impact Demon Hunter ruining the new expansion and new rotation experience has had. Players are aggrieved and are in a blowback of negativity. We have to wait a whole year for that chance again.
I am pleased they are releasing new heroes but they dropped the ball with this release, it was like an overexcited kid made the demon hunter cards. Apart from the odd arena run I don't ever plan on playing demon hunter, if they ever make monk I pray they be more considered.
I will say that I am playing ranked more after this last round of nerfs and it is good to see so many classes with decks capable of competing.
There is more choice for decks than at any time I can remember playing this game. Pretty much all have something fun to play with and can almost hear any other class. There are obviously heavy favourites in some match ups but generally you can mess around with anything and climb the ladder.
There's a new mode coming, battlegrounds seems to have a strong following, although it isn't something I play in too much, more fun cards than I can think there ever really being, a new class and swift nerds if needed. Throw in some kid expansion content they've been putting out and I've only seen this game go from strength to strength to be honest.
I've had a great time playing since the expansion and have comfortably played more than at this point in any other expansion since I started and there are still so many decks and even classes I haven't got round to really messing about with yet.
I have to disagree with some parts of this primary with the use of hsreplay as a primary point of statistical analysis.
Of course HSreplay is a large source of hearthstone information however it uses an aggregate system based on user input and usage of apps that help with deck building and tracking (mainly tracking apps). Overall statistics can be divided among ranked/casual/all. The top decks in any meta (for the most part) are heavy dust based decks (or in the past adventure based (irl money based ftmp)) these decks usually see a higher % of winrate overall because they are not used by the majority of the playerbase. These decks are used by players from (before rank 20ish) now around bronze to silver for quick ranked gain. The usage of these decks in the lower ranks wherein the majority of the community is present in sees a all around higher winnrate. The higher rank you get the more diverse the decks get (which is then not tracked by hsreplay or other sites because technically its a different deck). Even a single card change registers that decks as a different deck. In the higher ranks (me being around diamond 5-legend) most seasons i can definitely say that the diversity of decks decreases when going up BUT the uniqueness of said decks rapidly increases. This is because most "meta" decks are built for mass usage while the 'skill' aspect of the game is how you can manipulate the deck to your advantage. Lets be real here, most players who have a 45% or less win rate doesn't necessarily have a bad deck.
Budget decks/FTP decks in higher ranks are very rare (unless its cheap but has a VERy high skill gap (of which there have been very very few in the history of hearthstone). Most players to hearthstone don't/can't/won't spend money on the game, not because they don't support it but because of their own financial reasons. Budget/FTP decks can certainly get you out of bronze, probably silver, unlikely gold (but good luck), and then it gets considerably worse.
Forgot to say this before but remember that the majority of hearthstone players don't use deck trackers or a service that adds to HSreplay. Look at statistics of mobile players for example.
Also remember this entire post forgets hearthstone rng system. You could have the best deck in the world, but even that loses to a basic deck if u get a horrific draw. What people don't like is that unlike back in the day the meta feels more and more like you are either being forced into playing extremely high cost ptw decks or into simply 40-55% win rate cheap decks. Despite how OP the cards from naxx were seen i can clearly remember that there were so many extremely cheap versions of decks making high ranks that didn't need these op adventure cards. The amount of smorc hunters between rank 20-10 that were 80% common cards, the basic card tempo rogue, meme priest and so so so much more. What im seeing in a lot of these discussions is the dislike of being forced into a certain meta. A meta that is dominated by epics and legendaries; keep in mind if hearthstone's dust system were a little better designed then you would see a greater variance in ranked. Now all you have is people trying to get to legend and majoritvely a 16-23k+ dust decks will help you get there over a cheap deck. Hearthstone has been notorious for poor balancing judgement. Why is demon hunter seen as so op? because the value that they have in their BASIC CARDS is insane vs other classes.
I think what people want is to play games where in game choices determine whether you win or don't win, moreso than simply picking a deck that wins against A B C and D, but gets countered by Y and Z, and having that be, essentially, the sole determinant in who wins and loses. The winrates have less to do with good player/bad player, but simply how often you're likely to queue into a mirror or counter match.
I think what people might want is not necessarily to have their meme deck become an unstoppable god tier force, but simply to able to create a deck using even slightly off-meta picks that could actually win games now and then when they play well, rather than knowing they played well, and still getting downed by some forced-synergy OP deck that they've played 400 times this week because the designers made that the only real way to play this game, to the point where even the casual games are exactly the same.
I think we'd all love to see less pompous thread-making where people copy some statistics off a site and act as though they were The Father of Mathematics, condescendingly explaining to people that they are wrong to feel irritated about the direction a game they used to enjoy is going in, because "that's how math works".
I freaking love such threads where OP just claims an absolute nonsense providing an “argument” based on HSReply gathered data which a priori can’t be used as the reliable source. Totem shaman, Murloc Paladin, Post nerf Galakrond warlock. Really?
If you are playing in high legend(top 2000-3000k) you may notice that there are not so many competitive decks right now. More than 70% of your matchups will be against rogues and demon hunters and the reason beyond that is that both of these classes have an access to strong tempo tools which is crucial in this meta due to lack of self-healing and defensive options. There is no such thing as class or archetype diversity right now. You join the face race or you die. Don’t believe me? Well, just go check streamers who play in high legend and you will see. You may enjoy ladder that consist of literally 4 decks(Gala priest, Tempo dh, Gala rogue, tempo warrior), but I find it boring.
I came back to HS after 2+ years only to find out it's extremely boring and even more rng that it was before. How it is even possible? 10 classes? Lol. Variety? Lol. I can create every deck I want, so what? Every single game in diamond 10 or diamond 5+ is/was against same dh or rogue deck. Exactly. Same. Decks. With... Yes. Almost exactly same card draws and boards (because they can draw, keep large hand all the time).
I'm bored after playing 2 weeks after 2+ years break. This is sad and ridiculous.
This post is what I've wanted to see for the last two weeks. It's so annoying that people don't understand, that Hearthstone, as a competetive game, requires some skill. It's not different than Fifa, LoL, DoTa or any other online game. The only difference is that instead of refelxes you have to train your brain and logical thinking.
Hearthstone is nothing like actual competitive games, good grief. Tell me which part of your brain and logical thinking you need in order to have a babbling book giving you a polymorph, I'll be waiting for a while here. Hearthstone is a card game and as such, luck is already one of the most important things and with hearthstone itself, it's even more fundamental than other online ccgs because of the way it works.
Hearthstone is a children's card game, and I find it just fine for what it is. Let's not try to throw "train your brain and logical thinking" in the mix please, it really sounds absurd, to put it mildly.
This post is what I've wanted to see for the last two weeks. It's so annoying that people don't understand, that Hearthstone, as a competetive game, requires some skill. It's not different than Fifa, LoL, DoTa or any other online game. The only difference is that instead of refelxes you have to train your brain and logical thinking.
Hearthstone is nothing like actual competitive games, good grief. Tell me which part of your brain and logical thinking you need in order to have a babbling book giving you a polymorph, I'll be waiting for a while here. Hearthstone is a card game and as such, luck is already one of the most important things and with hearthstone itself, it's even more fundamental than other online ccgs because of the way it works.
Hearthstone is a children's card game, and I find it just fine for what it is. Let's not try to throw "train your brain and logical thinking" in the mix please, it really sounds absurd, to put it mildly.
Hearthstone is actually a game that requires some skill if you're playing at the higher ranks. You will have a 50%+ winrate if you play better than your opponents.
Yes, you can queue into your bad matchups a couple of times. And yes, you can win or lose games because of stupid RNG. But this counts for every single player in the game. So why do some people have 60%+ winrate with a deck, while other people barely manage a 40% with exactly the same deck? Pure luck? I don't think so. Winstreaks and losing streaks because if RNG exist for sure. And maybe the RNG in hearthstone determines more wins or losses than actual skill does. But in the end, the better player will always be the better player.
To react to OP: Just because a deck has 60% winrate in 200 games at bronze rank doesn't make it a good deck. The data you're looking at is very flawed. HSreplay is a fun place to look at certain decks and their winrates, but you can't just go and look for the highest winrate decks and expect them to be viable.
I can't remember seeing this before. If you look at HSReplay decks, it looks like theres tons of Tempo DH decks performing well they're all basically the same deck with minor variations and the best ones have 60%-63% winrate.
Mixed in are the following decks:
Highlander Hunter, Face Hunter, and Dragon Hunter.
Murloc Paladin and Pure Paladin
Galakrond Rogue and Highlander Rogue
Highlander Mage
Totem Shaman
Token Druid
Galakrond Warlock
Ressurect Priest
Most of these decks have a couple versions at least with a 60-63% winrate.
Spell Mage, Spell Druid, Galakrond Priest, Highlander Priest, Big Druid, Galakrond Shaman, Stealth Rogue, Egg Warrior and Bomb Warrior are showing 55-59%
All 10 classes have at least 2 decks performing at 55%+ winrate.
So, I suppose my question is... What exactly do people want??
You can pick ANY class, and have a choice of 2 top performing decks and if you're anywhere close to a decent player are STATISTICALLY SHOWN to have an average of 55%+ winrate!! What will it take to not have 18 threads created EVERY SINGLE DAY that are about nerfing a class?
I don't like being negative, but I honestly can't believe the constant salt, in a meta that has likely never been so balanced (literally inarguable. The stats show it)
Some of the decks are pure Tempo
Some are budget/FTP
Some are PACKED with interactive legendaries.
I'm really sorry to say, but this is a competitive game. Any game with "rewards" will be. People want to win, so people will play the top tier decks. That will NEVER change. The meta will ALWAYS be a majority of the most powerful deck, and then circle through counters. If that deck is nerfed to nothing, the next deck will take its place, and be just as "cancerous"... Your meme deck will NEVER be competitive.
These percentages are statistic. If you play these decks, cycle them to fit the meta, change out tech cards to suit the meta, and still can't maintain 55% winrate overall, then unfortunately, your skill level is statistically below average, and your play is actually lowering the win% of these decks.
If a deck has a 55% winrate, then there are likely 2 people running it with a 65% winrate, 2 people running it with a 55% winrate, and 2 people running it with a 45% winrate. That is how statistics work. The reason for these variances are the skill involved. A good player runs 65, a medium player runs 55, a 'not so good' player runs 45
I'm bad at golf, but I still have fun playing with my friends... I don't blame my friends ball when he beats me... I don't blame the grass, I don't blame the wind. We are all playing on the same course, and they are doing fine. I take responsibility for my crappy playing.
this guy plays golf.
Is this supposed to be an insult?
Also, well said OP
The smartest post i read all week
Silver Hand Recruit
But... But... My deck should be the only one with high win rates! The others obviously are all broken deck in a toxic Meta! Nerf them! Nerf them 'till they die I say!
Also, I don't like all the other decks because <insert reason>.
This post is what I've wanted to see for the last two weeks. It's so annoying that people don't understand, that Hearthstone, as a competetive game, requires some skill. It's not different than Fifa, LoL, DoTa or any other online game. The only difference is that instead of refelxes you have to train your brain and logical thinking.
Quick post to thank all the other guys out there making this possible with their 40% win rate. Your effort will not be forgotten. Thank you
Why do you even bother making this long-ass thread?
It's hearthstone, and it's a game. People will be salty and demand nerfs and buffs and stuff like that.
Is powercreep over the years the reason for this? Crazy swing turns and insane power turns lead to games/losses which feel unfair and unjust even if that players deck is capable of similar plays too.
Don't underestimate the impact Demon Hunter ruining the new expansion and new rotation experience has had. Players are aggrieved and are in a blowback of negativity. We have to wait a whole year for that chance again.
I am pleased they are releasing new heroes but they dropped the ball with this release, it was like an overexcited kid made the demon hunter cards. Apart from the odd arena run I don't ever plan on playing demon hunter, if they ever make monk I pray they be more considered.
I will say that I am playing ranked more after this last round of nerfs and it is good to see so many classes with decks capable of competing.
and this
But nerf dh.
There is more choice for decks than at any time I can remember playing this game. Pretty much all have something fun to play with and can almost hear any other class. There are obviously heavy favourites in some match ups but generally you can mess around with anything and climb the ladder.
There's a new mode coming, battlegrounds seems to have a strong following, although it isn't something I play in too much, more fun cards than I can think there ever really being, a new class and swift nerds if needed. Throw in some kid expansion content they've been putting out and I've only seen this game go from strength to strength to be honest.
I've had a great time playing since the expansion and have comfortably played more than at this point in any other expansion since I started and there are still so many decks and even classes I haven't got round to really messing about with yet.
I have to disagree with some parts of this primary with the use of hsreplay as a primary point of statistical analysis.
Of course HSreplay is a large source of hearthstone information however it uses an aggregate system based on user input and usage of apps that help with deck building and tracking (mainly tracking apps). Overall statistics can be divided among ranked/casual/all. The top decks in any meta (for the most part) are heavy dust based decks (or in the past adventure based (irl money based ftmp)) these decks usually see a higher % of winrate overall because they are not used by the majority of the playerbase. These decks are used by players from (before rank 20ish) now around bronze to silver for quick ranked gain. The usage of these decks in the lower ranks wherein the majority of the community is present in sees a all around higher winnrate. The higher rank you get the more diverse the decks get (which is then not tracked by hsreplay or other sites because technically its a different deck). Even a single card change registers that decks as a different deck. In the higher ranks (me being around diamond 5-legend) most seasons i can definitely say that the diversity of decks decreases when going up BUT the uniqueness of said decks rapidly increases. This is because most "meta" decks are built for mass usage while the 'skill' aspect of the game is how you can manipulate the deck to your advantage. Lets be real here, most players who have a 45% or less win rate doesn't necessarily have a bad deck.
Budget decks/FTP decks in higher ranks are very rare (unless its cheap but has a VERy high skill gap (of which there have been very very few in the history of hearthstone). Most players to hearthstone don't/can't/won't spend money on the game, not because they don't support it but because of their own financial reasons. Budget/FTP decks can certainly get you out of bronze, probably silver, unlikely gold (but good luck), and then it gets considerably worse.
Forgot to say this before but remember that the majority of hearthstone players don't use deck trackers or a service that adds to HSreplay. Look at statistics of mobile players for example.
Also remember this entire post forgets hearthstone rng system. You could have the best deck in the world, but even that loses to a basic deck if u get a horrific draw. What people don't like is that unlike back in the day the meta feels more and more like you are either being forced into playing extremely high cost ptw decks or into simply 40-55% win rate cheap decks. Despite how OP the cards from naxx were seen i can clearly remember that there were so many extremely cheap versions of decks making high ranks that didn't need these op adventure cards. The amount of smorc hunters between rank 20-10 that were 80% common cards, the basic card tempo rogue, meme priest and so so so much more. What im seeing in a lot of these discussions is the dislike of being forced into a certain meta. A meta that is dominated by epics and legendaries; keep in mind if hearthstone's dust system were a little better designed then you would see a greater variance in ranked. Now all you have is people trying to get to legend and majoritvely a 16-23k+ dust decks will help you get there over a cheap deck. Hearthstone has been notorious for poor balancing judgement. Why is demon hunter seen as so op? because the value that they have in their BASIC CARDS is insane vs other classes.
I think what people want is to play games where in game choices determine whether you win or don't win, moreso than simply picking a deck that wins against A B C and D, but gets countered by Y and Z, and having that be, essentially, the sole determinant in who wins and loses. The winrates have less to do with good player/bad player, but simply how often you're likely to queue into a mirror or counter match.
I think what people might want is not necessarily to have their meme deck become an unstoppable god tier force, but simply to able to create a deck using even slightly off-meta picks that could actually win games now and then when they play well, rather than knowing they played well, and still getting downed by some forced-synergy OP deck that they've played 400 times this week because the designers made that the only real way to play this game, to the point where even the casual games are exactly the same.
I think we'd all love to see less pompous thread-making where people copy some statistics off a site and act as though they were The Father of Mathematics, condescendingly explaining to people that they are wrong to feel irritated about the direction a game they used to enjoy is going in, because "that's how math works".
Give us a screenshot of those stats so we can see the number of games played with each of those classes.
I freaking love such threads where OP just claims an absolute nonsense providing an “argument” based on HSReply gathered data which a priori can’t be used as the reliable source. Totem shaman, Murloc Paladin, Post nerf Galakrond warlock. Really?
If you are playing in high legend(top 2000-3000k) you may notice that there are not so many competitive decks right now. More than 70% of your matchups will be against rogues and demon hunters and the reason beyond that is that both of these classes have an access to strong tempo tools which is crucial in this meta due to lack of self-healing and defensive options. There is no such thing as class or archetype diversity right now. You join the face race or you die. Don’t believe me? Well, just go check streamers who play in high legend and you will see. You may enjoy ladder that consist of literally 4 decks(Gala priest, Tempo dh, Gala rogue, tempo warrior), but I find it boring.
I came back to HS after 2+ years only to find out it's extremely boring and even more rng that it was before. How it is even possible? 10 classes? Lol. Variety? Lol. I can create every deck I want, so what? Every single game in diamond 10 or diamond 5+ is/was against same dh or rogue deck. Exactly. Same. Decks. With... Yes. Almost exactly same card draws and boards (because they can draw, keep large hand all the time).
I'm bored after playing 2 weeks after 2+ years break. This is sad and ridiculous.
Hearthstone is nothing like actual competitive games, good grief. Tell me which part of your brain and logical thinking you need in order to have a babbling book giving you a polymorph, I'll be waiting for a while here. Hearthstone is a card game and as such, luck is already one of the most important things and with hearthstone itself, it's even more fundamental than other online ccgs because of the way it works.
Hearthstone is a children's card game, and I find it just fine for what it is. Let's not try to throw "train your brain and logical thinking" in the mix please, it really sounds absurd, to put it mildly.
Hearthstone is actually a game that requires some skill if you're playing at the higher ranks. You will have a 50%+ winrate if you play better than your opponents.
Yes, you can queue into your bad matchups a couple of times. And yes, you can win or lose games because of stupid RNG. But this counts for every single player in the game. So why do some people have 60%+ winrate with a deck, while other people barely manage a 40% with exactly the same deck? Pure luck? I don't think so. Winstreaks and losing streaks because if RNG exist for sure. And maybe the RNG in hearthstone determines more wins or losses than actual skill does. But in the end, the better player will always be the better player.
To react to OP: Just because a deck has 60% winrate in 200 games at bronze rank doesn't make it a good deck. The data you're looking at is very flawed. HSreplay is a fun place to look at certain decks and their winrates, but you can't just go and look for the highest winrate decks and expect them to be viable.