You could always play warrior. Or priest. Or shaman. All are capable of maintaining over 50% against TickLock, and if I can do it, you can do it.
Will be happy to share lists if necessary, but aside from the Control Shaman, nothing particularly out of the ordinary from readily available lists.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
I prefer use C'Thun instead, your deck have more cards to be mill and you have a chance to fight back when you get card from their decks, even if you don't get the key legendarys even other cards putting souls in your deck helps a lot.
The problem with Elysiana is being a dead card all the game vs anything else, C'Thun pieces is far more useful.
The problem is C'Thun is much easier to mill than Elysiana and most likely you will not be able to play it before second mill.
I don't know what game are you guys playing. When I play the game I find mostly aggro decks, and very few tickatus locks. How is tickatus a problem? The problem is the aggressive options are too op compared with the control ones
Is there a lot of tickatus at low ranks? I never face them.
I understand the concern with the card, but honestly, while it beats some games, there will be about twice as many games in which tickatus is dead weight and unplayable. It's a slow clunky card, and it needs 1. to be in the opponent's hand and 2. have an activator played; if you have a "greedy" control deck, good for you, but you need to change your playstyle accordingly and put enough pressure that tickatus is never a good play.
1/6? Do you think you’ll have 30 cards in your deck by turn 7?
No, which would be a relevant question if you somehow had a 0% chance of drawing the Archivist before turn 7.
Obviously the odds change based on when Tickatus is played and how many cards have been drawn, but calculating before a game starts and taking for granted 5 cards burned per Tickatus, 1/6 is the correct estimate.
WTF relevance does turn 7 have anyway? If you're going to call someone out for an estimate, you don't get to just assume best case scenario as a baseline.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
Is there a lot of tickatus at low ranks? I never face them.
I understand the concern with the card, but honestly, while it beats some games, there will be about twice as many games in which tickatus is dead weight and unplayable. It's a slow clunky card, and it needs 1. to be in the opponent's hand and 2. have an activator played; if you have a "greedy" control deck, good for you, but you need to change your playstyle accordingly and put enough pressure that tickatus is never a good play.
No, according to hsreplay, tickatus decks have a lower than 50% wr from bronze to gold rank, in plat it may be a bit better but definitely not more than 50%. In high ranks, that archetype is not even played as it insta loses to aggro and otk and has even match ups against most control decks with priest being the only class that tickatus can farm. People will never stop complaining about this card even if it's not obnoxious right now and always hit you with "tickatus is the reason for this aggro meta" when in reality it's just the strong support aggro decks received lately and the low cost for crafting them. Btw there are otk decks like life steal dh, mozaki mage and etc/korkron warrior that feed on tickatus. But ofc, better to whine than play around.
It's gonna make control and greedy, slow decks more or less unplayable for a year.
So Tickatus will make control decks unplayable, but OTK and combo decks, which do basically the same thing but with 100% efficiency and better winrate against meta decks, won't?
I prefer use C'Thun instead, your deck have more cards to be mill and you have a chance to fight back when you get card from their decks, even if you don't get the key legendarys even other cards putting souls in your deck helps a lot.
The problem with Elysiana is being a dead card all the game vs anything else, C'Thun pieces is far more useful.
The problem is C'Thun is much easier to mill than Elysiana and most likely you will not be able to play it before second mill.
Yes, in the warlock match C'Thun is worse than Elysiana but still helps only by the fact your deck have more cards to fight, C'Thun is better vs anything else.
In my experience, the meta has already answered Tickatus: pressure the lock to make it playing Tick on 8 game losing, or draw most of your deck by turn 8. Either way, ive only been able to play Tickatus once every game, not counting the times i couldnt even play it.
The only people still complaining about Tickatus are probably Priest players, since their control decks have poor card draw and take the full blow of double Tick everytime, which is why Blizz wont change Tickatus at all, they know half the playerbase get off by torturing priests LUL, endless source of entertainment. If you're playing priest you should be used to being bullied by the rest of the meta, nerfing Tick wont change that buddy.
In my experience, the meta has already answered Tickatus: pressure the lock to make it playing Tick on 8 game losing, or draw most of your deck by turn 8. Either way, ive only been able to play Tickatus once every game, not counting the times i couldnt even play it.
The only people still complaining about Tickatus are probably Priest players, since their control decks have poor card draw and take the full blow of double Tick everytime, which is why Blizz wont change Tickatus at all, they know half the playerbase get off by torturing priests LUL, endless source of entertainment. If you're playing priest you should be used to being bullied by the rest of the meta, nerfing Tick wont change that buddy.
Galakrond/Control Warlock has a 45-50% WR against the meta and Tickatus itself (let alone the second copy) is simply game-winning against certain decks. Yes, if you're playing aggro or tempo rogue, you're not worried about Tickatus, but there's no other card in standard that just wins a broad swathe of matchups regardless of board state.
Why would you calculate before the game starts? The estimate is useless and wrong. In case you were unaware, Tickatus costs 6. To corrupt it you need to play a 7 cost card. So with a coin you can play it corrupted on turn 7. However you're right it's the best case scenario. This means that you'll draw more cards potentially drawing Archivist or making it easier to burn.
How is the estimate wrong? "Useless" is highly debatable, but one can make an accurate calculation of odds at any point, including before the game starts. The usefulness of any calculation in a hypothetical is as useful or not as any academic exercise in a discussion, but "wrong" is a totally different subject.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
you have a 3 or 4 out of 30 chance to draw Archivist at the start of the game. Because you can draw the same cards (possible albeit unlikely) that number doesn’t change.
so you have a 1/10 or 2/15 chance.
as the game progresses too many variables are in play. Do you have massive card draw? Maybe. If you do, like I said, either draw Archivist early then great. However every card you draw that isn’t it you’re that much closer to having it burned.
if you have no card draw, by turn 8 you’ll have 8 less cards in your deck. So you start with 27 or 26 and then by turn 8 you’re at 19 or 20. So you now have a 1/20 or 1/19 chance to draw it.
But prior to drawing those cards, prior to everything else, when you're speaking of a deck of 30 cards, the archivist has an equal chance to occupy every one of the 30 card slots (assuming C'thun or other card-adding effect isn't involved. Every Tickatus takes 5 cards which is 1/6th of the deck. Archivist has a 5/30 or 1/6 shot to be in those 5 cards. As I said, that doesn't have a lot of practical value in the middle of a game, since the odds have been changing. The odds are either 0% (if you've drawn her already) or 5/x where x is the number of remaining cards in deck.
So, again, "useless" is debatable (actually it's just wrong, there are uses. Not a lot of them, but greater than zero). "Wrong" is not. You are talking about a totally separate stat from the poster who made the 1/6th claim. Just because you'll be privy to more information at a given time in the game does not mean a pre-game statistic is wrong. It simply will change as more information is garnered.
And while it is true that 1/6 will never be the actual exact odds within a game, saying something has "either a 0% or 5/x chance to happen depending on whether you've drawn her or not" is at least as "useless" a statement as the original 1/6. If your point is that lots of statistics don't have real-world applications, that's very true. That doesn't make them "wrong" in the mathematical sense.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1/6? Do you think you’ll have 30 cards in your deck by turn 7?
sooo (as a ladder player, a.k.a. 99% of the community) this means fk you, don't play what is fun to you....nice design
Gee, this thread again . . .
You could always play warrior. Or priest. Or shaman. All are capable of maintaining over 50% against TickLock, and if I can do it, you can do it.
Will be happy to share lists if necessary, but aside from the Control Shaman, nothing particularly out of the ordinary from readily available lists.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
The problem is C'Thun is much easier to mill than Elysiana and most likely you will not be able to play it before second mill.
I don't know what game are you guys playing. When I play the game I find mostly aggro decks, and very few tickatus locks. How is tickatus a problem? The problem is the aggressive options are too op compared with the control ones
Is there a lot of tickatus at low ranks? I never face them.
I understand the concern with the card, but honestly, while it beats some games, there will be about twice as many games in which tickatus is dead weight and unplayable. It's a slow clunky card, and it needs 1. to be in the opponent's hand and 2. have an activator played; if you have a "greedy" control deck, good for you, but you need to change your playstyle accordingly and put enough pressure that tickatus is never a good play.
Control is death. Accept it and move on with your life
No, which would be a relevant question if you somehow had a 0% chance of drawing the Archivist before turn 7.
Obviously the odds change based on when Tickatus is played and how many cards have been drawn, but calculating before a game starts and taking for granted 5 cards burned per Tickatus, 1/6 is the correct estimate.
WTF relevance does turn 7 have anyway? If you're going to call someone out for an estimate, you don't get to just assume best case scenario as a baseline.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
No, according to hsreplay, tickatus decks have a lower than 50% wr from bronze to gold rank, in plat it may be a bit better but definitely not more than 50%. In high ranks, that archetype is not even played as it insta loses to aggro and otk and has even match ups against most control decks with priest being the only class that tickatus can farm. People will never stop complaining about this card even if it's not obnoxious right now and always hit you with "tickatus is the reason for this aggro meta" when in reality it's just the strong support aggro decks received lately and the low cost for crafting them. Btw there are otk decks like life steal dh, mozaki mage and etc/korkron warrior that feed on tickatus. But ofc, better to whine than play around.
So Tickatus will make control decks unplayable, but OTK and combo decks, which do basically the same thing but with 100% efficiency and better winrate against meta decks, won't?
Yes, in the warlock match C'Thun is worse than Elysiana but still helps only by the fact your deck have more cards to fight, C'Thun is better vs anything else.
In my experience, the meta has already answered Tickatus: pressure the lock to make it playing Tick on 8 game losing, or draw most of your deck by turn 8. Either way, ive only been able to play Tickatus once every game, not counting the times i couldnt even play it.
The only people still complaining about Tickatus are probably Priest players, since their control decks have poor card draw and take the full blow of double Tick everytime, which is why Blizz wont change Tickatus at all, they know half the playerbase get off by torturing priests LUL, endless source of entertainment. If you're playing priest you should be used to being bullied by the rest of the meta, nerfing Tick wont change that buddy.
Galakrond/Control Warlock has a 45-50% WR against the meta and Tickatus itself (let alone the second copy) is simply game-winning against certain decks. Yes, if you're playing aggro or tempo rogue, you're not worried about Tickatus, but there's no other card in standard that just wins a broad swathe of matchups regardless of board state.
Why would you calculate before the game starts? The estimate is useless and wrong. In case you were unaware, Tickatus costs 6. To corrupt it you need to play a 7 cost card. So with a coin you can play it corrupted on turn 7. However you're right it's the best case scenario. This means that you'll draw more cards potentially drawing Archivist or making it easier to burn.
How is the estimate wrong? "Useless" is highly debatable, but one can make an accurate calculation of odds at any point, including before the game starts. The usefulness of any calculation in a hypothetical is as useful or not as any academic exercise in a discussion, but "wrong" is a totally different subject.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
The estimate is wrong because:
you have a 3 or 4 out of 30 chance to draw Archivist at the start of the game. Because you can draw the same cards (possible albeit unlikely) that number doesn’t change.
so you have a 1/10 or 2/15 chance.
as the game progresses too many variables are in play. Do you have massive card draw? Maybe. If you do, like I said, either draw Archivist early then great. However every card you draw that isn’t it you’re that much closer to having it burned.
if you have no card draw, by turn 8 you’ll have 8 less cards in your deck. So you start with 27 or 26 and then by turn 8 you’re at 19 or 20. So you now have a 1/20 or 1/19 chance to draw it.
But prior to drawing those cards, prior to everything else, when you're speaking of a deck of 30 cards, the archivist has an equal chance to occupy every one of the 30 card slots (assuming C'thun or other card-adding effect isn't involved. Every Tickatus takes 5 cards which is 1/6th of the deck. Archivist has a 5/30 or 1/6 shot to be in those 5 cards. As I said, that doesn't have a lot of practical value in the middle of a game, since the odds have been changing. The odds are either 0% (if you've drawn her already) or 5/x where x is the number of remaining cards in deck.
So, again, "useless" is debatable (actually it's just wrong, there are uses. Not a lot of them, but greater than zero). "Wrong" is not. You are talking about a totally separate stat from the poster who made the 1/6th claim. Just because you'll be privy to more information at a given time in the game does not mean a pre-game statistic is wrong. It simply will change as more information is garnered.
And while it is true that 1/6 will never be the actual exact odds within a game, saying something has "either a 0% or 5/x chance to happen depending on whether you've drawn her or not" is at least as "useless" a statement as the original 1/6. If your point is that lots of statistics don't have real-world applications, that's very true. That doesn't make them "wrong" in the mathematical sense.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.