Control is dead cause.....you people dont know how to play it
No.
Control is dead because this meta is a failed paper-rock-scissor one.
If control have a free win vs aggro like Tickatus have vs control then all will be fine, aggro beats Tickatus what beat control what beat aggro, unfortunately this is not the case, aggro is super strong and many control decks like priest or warrior are lacking in good draw engines, very good healing (except paladin) and cheap mass removals.
Why play control? You have a lost match vs warlocks, a 50/50 vs other controls and no favorable match at all, in other words, you have to strugle vs everything and any hope vs warlocks.
Warlocks have a hard match vs aggro, a 50/50 vs other warlocks and free win vs anything else.
Aggro decks have a good match vs warlocks and a 50/50 vs other aggros.
Like I said, a failed rock-paper-scissor meta, to fix this is easy, just release insanely overpowered and undercosted mass removals, draws engines and healings for other non-warlock control decks, in a way the decks have a very easy free wins against aggro decks, nerf heavily the healing effects for warlocks making them even more weaken vs aggro decks and you get the perfect rock-paper-scissor meta.
this^
Control is actively suppressed by "created by" meta, outrageous mana cheating, and relative lack of support (ie - for every great control tool there are two better aggro tools per set).
To the op, Tickatus is a control tool. Amazing in the mirror, perfect vs combo/OTK builds. This card is not broken or unfair, it's just very powerful and - as pointed out by the devs on Twitter and Reddit - meant as a griefer tool. That means he's meant to piss opponents off, by design. It's an intended part of the game. Until Blizzard tones down the volume of consistent high roll and discover pools with highly targetable outcomes, control will rely on cards like Tickatus and rival RNG tools to try and compete.
Also, I have beaten Tickatus more time than I've lost to that card. It's strong, but it's not broken. It just does its job well.
Side note: I'm a hunter main that currently runs paladin and non-Tickatus warlock as well in standard, so my bias is toward aggro and decks that don't manifest 20-60 cards more than they started with. I find that stuff utterly aggravating and detrimental to the fun of game for the opponent and encourages more toxic builds than it does fun and competitive ones.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Rage quitting: the best way to ensure your opponent knows they beat a giant baby.
Also remember most Control decks are bad for a reason right now. For the 10 classes : - DH : have better to do than playing control - Druid : too slow and is more "mid" - Mage : too random, not consistent enough = not good enough - Rogue : Rogue can't play control due to not having any defensive tool - Shaman : the class have TONS of way to control. And not a single win con. - Priest : can't put any pressure on the opponent's HP for the whole game. Also, slow. - Paladin : don't have the tools to control, can mainly mid - Warlock : truly lack heal - Hunter : aggro or mid, can't control
The worst point is that even warrior, which should be THE control class, have a problem right now. The same as shaman : it has no serious win condition. And Rattlegore is a "good" card only for that reason. Warrior control now can only win with him (tons of counters) or with ETC combo (Tickatus annihilate that).
Well I don't know what you consider as control, but from a game speed perspective you ignore A LOT of decks here.
Guardian/clown drud, C'thun and quest shaman, DH OTK, Highlander mage, Sethekk (Bullshit) priest, Librams (boarderline mid range, but use a lot of late game value) and the deck people are complaining about Control warlock, which some say has too much heal. Just because a deck has a few weak spots don't make it unplayable. Paladin has 5 cards that set all enemy minions health to 1 and 2 cards for less than 3 mana that completely fucks big threats + massive healing, how much more do you need to play control? Sure Warrior can drag out the game longer, but not all control decks can be fatigue based. Is that what you define as control? Playing out all your opponents cards? Classic control warrior wasn't like that. No deck was like that before TGT I think. The only potentially problematic deck I see atm is stealth rouge...
So you like control? Play control shaman, this class has the best control tools at the moment. Add c'thun and hecklebots in your deck (4 extra cards, even 5 after you shuffle c'thun and bots to take out 2 cards from your opponent's deck). Use this list, play several games and you will notice you actually beat tickatus warlock in fatigue. Will you win most of your games? No. Why? Because aggro will crush you most of the time. So yeah, not tickatus is the problem in this meta, but aggro that got so much support. Dump hand by turn 3, play reader draw more cards. Rogues with only 2 cards in hand at the start of their turn? What about 8-9 and a board at the end of the same turn? 15 damage from hand each turn demon hunters or even worse, aggro DH that build a board, deal 10 damage to your face, clear your board and all these on the same turn. The support aggro decks received for the last few expansion is disgusting and control won't exist like this until the rotation.
Warlock is really weak vs aggro? I not sure anymore because the class have the best and cheap mass removals at your disposal, a lot, REALLY A LOT, of free healing by soul fragments for 0 tempo loss in broken cards, 1 mana 1/3 minion put 2 fragments, 2 manas 3 damage other 2 fragments, etc..., after that heal 2 for 0 manas, something is wrong here, things should cost something in sometime, or tempo or mana.
What is the weakness of warlock again? I feel the class become invencible, not a single weakness at all...
Wow, imagine that. Another copy/paste thread on this subject.
Thanks for reminding me about Illucia though. It's so ridiculously obvious most of the time when Warlock makes the play that corrupts Tickatus, It's an entirely reasonable shot to take. Even assuming you only hit it 1 in 10, which is a ridiculously low estimate, that should be enough to shave off 5-7% off priest's worst matchup.
EDIT: EXAGGERATED? you mean, pure unadulterated fantasy?
P.s. I love how "slow" has somehow become a bug instead of a feature of control.
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.
Do you have fun in game (with all matches 30 min long) where your only aim is to keep the board clear and heal yourself? I am not.
Happy to see counters for this, otherwise the game would be so stupid.
At least you cannot make a deck with only board clears and heals because you will lose.
Control decks in any case, are not killed only by Tickatus fortunately, but also by all value cards.
I hate Hearthstone like now, because it is indeed boring always the same, even when they add new cards. Control decks are one of the reasons why the game is boring.
Hearthstone's direction should be in combo-control. But also in this case, they have to be careful, because combo that win automatically the game (or practically) are also not fun.
I'll give you that: good point; Control Warrior had 70% winrate in its day, and I forgot the difficulties playing against Cubelock.
I remember Kripp's video on Wild Odd Rogue though. I think Control cards get nerfed more often than efficient Aggro cards [Demon Hunter aside understandably].
Its arguable that Zoolock always has and always will be the best though?
7 manas Boom hero card give CW a short life until the nerf to 9 manas.
Warlock cheating Voidlords and 10 manas hero card bringing all back.
Most of the time we have aggro and tempo metas but say control never been alive is exagerated.
There have been numerous very successful control decks, even metadfining ones (jade druid, CW.) However, a "control meta" sounds a lot better in theory than in practice, grindy control matchups have often been decided by bullshit like who draws their herocard first and who gets the best rolls from Archivist Elysiana.
If control is really dead because of tickatus, then aggro will dominate the meta. Do you think this tickatus deck works that well against aggro? And against combo? If so, then it might be a problem. Because it becomes a deck that can hard counter triple archetype at once. If not, then you dont have to worry about it, since after the aggro dominate the meta, people will stop playing tickatus because they starting to lose entirely against aggro. And when that time comes, you can play control and farming the aggro that dominate.
In other word, this makes the triple archetype balance instead. One will rise, and will fall, and the other will ready to takeover after one of them dominates, makes the archetype meta not forever stale after one proven to be works.
Imagine a world where control archetype can only countered by combo deck. A single archetype aren't supposed to can only beaten by other archetype. They will be annoying like in odd warrior and dr boom (standard) era because no other control deck could beat it.
So I would say, each of control deck should have a way to beat the other control.
Warrior can do as control deck because the armor can stacked from very first turn.
Priest can do as control because they can save their minion with hero power and clear easily so they can maximize board presence.
Warlock has natural weakness as a control. They have hand card advantage, but their hero power naturally dive them deeper to fatigue. That's why tickatus needed. It literally to make control warlock has a chance against another control.
There are WAY worst control killers than Tickatus in the meta rn, ETC warrior and OTK DH come to mind, and none of these decks have a terrible matchup against aggro unlike Tickatuslock has. Dont we have the salty thread for this kinda thing?
I am pretty fond of control priest right now. Even against Ticktatus, since I can pretty much soft counter it with either Galakrond or Archivist. Honestly, it is OTK decks like DH that makes tilt and switch to another deck. But I suppose it is worth noting that those to cards are rotating soon, and Tickatus is not.
Wow, imagine that. Another copy/paste thread on this subject.
Thanks for reminding me about Illucia though. It's so ridiculously obvious most of the time when Warlock makes the play that corrupts Tickatus, It's an entirely reasonable shot to take. Even assuming you only hit it 1 in 10, which is a ridiculously low estimate, that should be enough to shave off 5-7% off priest's worst matchup.
EDIT: EXAGGERATED? you mean, pure unadulterated fantasy?
P.s. I love how "slow" has somehow become a bug instead of a feature of control.
If you play Illucia it does not change anything, you play corrupted Tickatus and burn your deck anyway. It's useless.
Tf is wrong in this thread? This guy is like “I play homebrew! I’m original not like you stupid fucks”
like what? You get that your putting yourself above other people. What kind of shit attitude is that? How uneducated can you be to think you’re better than other people and what makes this even worse, people you’ve never met or actually talked too. Lmao
The guy felt I was personally attacking him bc I play tickatus and proceeded to call me brain dead. I then started to reply back to which it got side tracked into a different conversation. Perhaps read the actual thread before making comments on the thread? And ya if you play rez priest or secret mage, I think i’m better than you, I think a lot of people are better than you.
What i think is that worst type of decks are some that has some sort of infinite value or OTK combos. Thats seriously retarded. Tickatus is exactly what is needed to eradicate those netdecks. By the way where does the feeling of superiority by playing some control comes from?
So basically you tried to play some greedy type of deck, and your opponent played a card that is designed specifically to counter greedy decks that put no pressure on the board. Also on a side note, you can always play combo decks if you really want to, and punish those warlock players, Tickatus comes to play on turn 8 and a lot of combo decks can kill you before turn 8 from what I've seen. Have you ever thought about other players? And Im talking specifically about aggro players that you want to counter with your control deck. They probably have a lot of fun getting their board blown every turn and looking at you healing or armoring up so that they have no chances of winning, and you just sit there smiling. Every deck has its strengths and weaknesses, you can't win every single match, but you can at least try to have fun in this game and not whine on the forums
No tickatus doesn't come on turn 8. I had 2 tickatus at the cost of 1 and played both on turn 5. The mage conceded immediatly, I burned his mozaki and shit :-)
The dark portal, then felosofy, it was brilliant. This happens from time to time.
Wow, imagine that. Another copy/paste thread on this subject.
Thanks for reminding me about Illucia though. It's so ridiculously obvious most of the time when Warlock makes the play that corrupts Tickatus, It's an entirely reasonable shot to take. Even assuming you only hit it 1 in 10, which is a ridiculously low estimate, that should be enough to shave off 5-7% off priest's worst matchup.
EDIT: EXAGGERATED? you mean, pure unadulterated fantasy?
P.s. I love how "slow" has somehow become a bug instead of a feature of control.
If you play Illucia it does not change anything, you play corrupted Tickatus and burn your deck anyway. It's useless.
WTF is this? You play Illucia, burn 5 cards from his deck, and lock Y'shaarj out of replaying Tickatus. What's being lost in translation here?
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.
this^
Control is actively suppressed by "created by" meta, outrageous mana cheating, and relative lack of support (ie - for every great control tool there are two better aggro tools per set).
To the op, Tickatus is a control tool. Amazing in the mirror, perfect vs combo/OTK builds. This card is not broken or unfair, it's just very powerful and - as pointed out by the devs on Twitter and Reddit - meant as a griefer tool. That means he's meant to piss opponents off, by design. It's an intended part of the game. Until Blizzard tones down the volume of consistent high roll and discover pools with highly targetable outcomes, control will rely on cards like Tickatus and rival RNG tools to try and compete.
Also, I have beaten Tickatus more time than I've lost to that card. It's strong, but it's not broken. It just does its job well.
Side note: I'm a hunter main that currently runs paladin and non-Tickatus warlock as well in standard, so my bias is toward aggro and decks that don't manifest 20-60 cards more than they started with. I find that stuff utterly aggravating and detrimental to the fun of game for the opponent and encourages more toxic builds than it does fun and competitive ones.
Rage quitting: the best way to ensure your opponent knows they beat a giant baby.
Quote from Sellina >>
Well I don't know what you consider as control, but from a game speed perspective you ignore A LOT of decks here.
Guardian/clown drud, C'thun and quest shaman, DH OTK, Highlander mage, Sethekk (Bullshit) priest, Librams (boarderline mid range, but use a lot of late game value) and the deck people are complaining about Control warlock, which some say has too much heal. Just because a deck has a few weak spots don't make it unplayable. Paladin has 5 cards that set all enemy minions health to 1 and 2 cards for less than 3 mana that completely fucks big threats + massive healing, how much more do you need to play control? Sure Warrior can drag out the game longer, but not all control decks can be fatigue based. Is that what you define as control? Playing out all your opponents cards? Classic control warrior wasn't like that. No deck was like that before TGT I think. The only potentially problematic deck I see atm is stealth rouge...
So you like control? Play control shaman, this class has the best control tools at the moment. Add c'thun and hecklebots in your deck (4 extra cards, even 5 after you shuffle c'thun and bots to take out 2 cards from your opponent's deck). Use this list, play several games and you will notice you actually beat tickatus warlock in fatigue. Will you win most of your games? No. Why? Because aggro will crush you most of the time. So yeah, not tickatus is the problem in this meta, but aggro that got so much support. Dump hand by turn 3, play reader draw more cards. Rogues with only 2 cards in hand at the start of their turn? What about 8-9 and a board at the end of the same turn? 15 damage from hand each turn demon hunters or even worse, aggro DH that build a board, deal 10 damage to your face, clear your board and all these on the same turn. The support aggro decks received for the last few expansion is disgusting and control won't exist like this until the rotation.
Warlock is really weak vs aggro? I not sure anymore because the class have the best and cheap mass removals at your disposal, a lot, REALLY A LOT, of free healing by soul fragments for 0 tempo loss in broken cards, 1 mana 1/3 minion put 2 fragments, 2 manas 3 damage other 2 fragments, etc..., after that heal 2 for 0 manas, something is wrong here, things should cost something in sometime, or tempo or mana.
What is the weakness of warlock again? I feel the class become invencible, not a single weakness at all...
Control has never been alive.
7 manas Boom hero card give CW a short life until the nerf to 9 manas.
Warlock cheating Voidlords and 10 manas hero card bringing all back.
Most of the time we have aggro and tempo metas but say control never been alive is exagerated.
Wow, imagine that. Another copy/paste thread on this subject.
Thanks for reminding me about Illucia though. It's so ridiculously obvious most of the time when Warlock makes the play that corrupts Tickatus, It's an entirely reasonable shot to take. Even assuming you only hit it 1 in 10, which is a ridiculously low estimate, that should be enough to shave off 5-7% off priest's worst matchup.
EDIT: EXAGGERATED? you mean, pure unadulterated fantasy?
P.s. I love how "slow" has somehow become a bug instead of a feature of control.
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 don't understand why you are complaining.
Do you have fun in game (with all matches 30 min long) where your only aim is to keep the board clear and heal yourself? I am not.
Happy to see counters for this, otherwise the game would be so stupid.
At least you cannot make a deck with only board clears and heals because you will lose.
Control decks in any case, are not killed only by Tickatus fortunately, but also by all value cards.
I hate Hearthstone like now, because it is indeed boring always the same, even when they add new cards. Control decks are one of the reasons why the game is boring.
Hearthstone's direction should be in combo-control. But also in this case, they have to be careful, because combo that win automatically the game (or practically) are also not fun.
I'll give you that: good point; Control Warrior had 70% winrate in its day, and I forgot the difficulties playing against Cubelock.
I remember Kripp's video on Wild Odd Rogue though. I think Control cards get nerfed more often than efficient Aggro cards [Demon Hunter aside understandably].
Its arguable that Zoolock always has and always will be the best though?
There have been numerous very successful control decks, even metadfining ones (jade druid, CW.) However, a "control meta" sounds a lot better in theory than in practice, grindy control matchups have often been decided by bullshit like who draws their herocard first and who gets the best rolls from Archivist Elysiana.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
If control is really dead because of tickatus, then aggro will dominate the meta. Do you think this tickatus deck works that well against aggro? And against combo? If so, then it might be a problem. Because it becomes a deck that can hard counter triple archetype at once. If not, then you dont have to worry about it, since after the aggro dominate the meta, people will stop playing tickatus because they starting to lose entirely against aggro. And when that time comes, you can play control and farming the aggro that dominate.
In other word, this makes the triple archetype balance instead. One will rise, and will fall, and the other will ready to takeover after one of them dominates, makes the archetype meta not forever stale after one proven to be works.
Imagine a world where control archetype can only countered by combo deck. A single archetype aren't supposed to can only beaten by other archetype. They will be annoying like in odd warrior and dr boom (standard) era because no other control deck could beat it.
So I would say, each of control deck should have a way to beat the other control.
Warrior can do as control deck because the armor can stacked from very first turn.
Priest can do as control because they can save their minion with hero power and clear easily so they can maximize board presence.
Warlock has natural weakness as a control. They have hand card advantage, but their hero power naturally dive them deeper to fatigue. That's why tickatus needed. It literally to make control warlock has a chance against another control.
...some whiners THINK it is dead.
AGAIN:
- do you play standard or wild?
- what kind of class and deck you play?
- what is your count of games for one week and how many times did you encounter Tickatus deck?
EU 11/2015+ , f2p 03/2021+: DK 63 / DH 205 /Dr 277 / Hu 733 / Ma 6666 / Pa 1072 / Pr 1165 / Ro 1791 / Sh 1303 / Wl 707 / Wr 664
There are WAY worst control killers than Tickatus in the meta rn, ETC warrior and OTK DH come to mind, and none of these decks have a terrible matchup against aggro unlike Tickatuslock has. Dont we have the salty thread for this kinda thing?
I am pretty fond of control priest right now. Even against Ticktatus, since I can pretty much soft counter it with either Galakrond or Archivist. Honestly, it is OTK decks like DH that makes tilt and switch to another deck.
But I suppose it is worth noting that those to cards are rotating soon, and Tickatus is not.
If you play Illucia it does not change anything, you play corrupted Tickatus and burn your deck anyway. It's useless.
Thanks for proving my point.
What i think is that worst type of decks are some that has some sort of infinite value or OTK combos. Thats seriously retarded. Tickatus is exactly what is needed to eradicate those netdecks. By the way where does the feeling of superiority by playing some control comes from?
Just include C'thun and Activas Elisiana, +15 cards, problem solved.
OTK players suck.
No tickatus doesn't come on turn 8. I had 2 tickatus at the cost of 1 and played both on turn 5. The mage conceded immediatly, I burned his mozaki and shit :-)
The dark portal, then felosofy, it was brilliant. This happens from time to time.
WTF is this? You play Illucia, burn 5 cards from his deck, and lock Y'shaarj out of replaying Tickatus. What's being lost in translation here?
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.