Just gathering some data. I know generally the vocal part of the player base is pretty anti-Hunter, so I wanna do a quick poll to get the gist of what people think about it and why.
Because of its hero power to deal face damage, and basically only that... the class seems pretty well set on being aggressive and I've never been a fan of playing as aggro or against it. So there's my vote.
On a side note, I really like that they gave hunter a card like Dwarven Sharpshooter to augment their hero power so that they could potentially play less aggressively. And in the past there was that other card that turned your hero power into a buff or something, which was neat.
I would definitely like hunter more if there were some more control options in standard.
Because of its hero power to deal face damage, and basically only that... the class seems pretty well set on being aggressive and I've never been a fan of playing as aggro or against it. So there's my vote.
On a side note, I really like that they gave hunter a card like Dwarven Sharpshooter to augment their hero power so that they could potentially play less aggressively. And in the past there was that other card that turned your hero power into a buff or something, which was neat.
I would definitely like hunter more if there were some more control options in standard.
I feel exactly the same. I want to like the class but as a control player, it's hard to enjoy it.
I don’t consider myself a Hunter main but throughout 2020; Highlander Hunter was my anchor whenever I needed a good ladder deck to climb. And it carried me 7 times to legend. So I am forever grateful for that 2 mana deal 2 damage hero power:)
Although it's one of my favorite decks, I think that I'm not being subjective when saying that Face Hunter was and always will be one of the most skill rewarding decks, that even in times when it wasn't top of the meta could get you decent win rate.
Even though I don't play it myself (I like midrange decks most), I've always found hunter fair and actually quite fun to play against. Don't know why it's hated so much. But the same holds for all that demon hunter stuff people kept complaining about (well I admit, Soul DH in its prime was kind of obnoxious).
What I like about both classes is that they make little use of the things I hate most in hearthstone: Excessive card generation and excessive randomization.
Don't know why it's hated so much. But the same holds for all that demon hunter stuff people kept complaining about (well I admit, Soul DH in its prime was kind of obnoxious).
Well, not everyone likes to be dead on turn 5... Also, of all aggro decks in the meta, Hunter is almost always the most straightforward one and easiest to pilot (he is the one responsible for the stereotype of aggro decks being mindless smorc). In comparison, Zoo Warlock at least requires some kind of strategy and is heavily reliant on the board. You lose the board, you lose the game, because you don't have many options to come back and regain the initiative.
The Hunter is a completely different story. He is based on simple synergies, involving combining 1-2 cards, which are usually very cheap, effective and can often be played in one turn, event without any preparation (which also makes them completely uninteractive for the other player). Something like:
Don't know why it's hated so much. But the same holds for all that demon hunter stuff people kept complaining about (well I admit, Soul DH in its prime was kind of obnoxious).
Well, not everyone likes to be dead on turn 5...
I have way more fun being dead on turn 5 against a hunter than being dead on turn 20+ against a priest or a warlock, where it feels like none of the cards that I played even mattered at all because they have infinite answers for everything. (While rarely even playing a minion, of course.)
Hunter is my absolutely favorite class... as a Death Knight.
I absolutely adore playing the control game of grinding out an opponent, and no hero does it in anywhere near as fun a fashion as Deathstalker Rexxar.
...
On the other hand, I absolutely abhor standard Hunter, and find the idea of playing as a standard hunter the most boring and unfun experience imaginable.
Even though I don't play it myself (I like midrange decks most), I've always found hunter fair and actually quite fun to play against. Don't know why it's hated so much. But the same holds for all that demon hunter stuff people kept complaining about (well I admit, Soul DH in its prime was kind of obnoxious).
What I like about both classes is that they make little use of the things I hate most in hearthstone: Excessive card generation and excessive randomization.
Weird, because I've always thought that hunter has often had midrange options.
Even though I don't play it myself (I like midrange decks most), I've always found hunter fair and actually quite fun to play against. Don't know why it's hated so much. But the same holds for all that demon hunter stuff people kept complaining about (well I admit, Soul DH in its prime was kind of obnoxious).
What I like about both classes is that they make little use of the things I hate most in hearthstone: Excessive card generation and excessive randomization.
Weird, because I've always thought that hunter has often had midrange options.
I didn't mean to deny that. But I guess the most complains about hunter concern the aggro version, so I commented with regard to that.
I really like the discussion here. I'm in a similar boat as some, I'd like it if Hunter had control options that didn't inherently stink because of Hunter's class design. I've been a Hunter main since 2015, when i started playing. I wasn't comfortable playing aggro when I was new because the content creator I'd been watching (Trump) was so control focused as a player, i would always trade because that's what he did lol. I personally think Hunter needs a top-down rework of its mechanics. From the ground up in makes sense, Hunter is aggressive and plays on curve. But the advent of Demon Hunter really makes anything Hunter used to do seem laughable.
I think Hearthstone players have long memories and aren't very forgiving, and that's rubbed off on the Devs a bit. There's still people out there who remember Undertaker Hunter being strong and haven't let that go in terms of how they perceive the class. And now with Iksar admitting they weren't giving Hunter strong/unique buildaround cards on purpose because Hunter would then *play* those cards in their *one* good deck, I've got a sour taste in my mouth. The class needs to be revisited.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
please don't bully my son
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Just gathering some data. I know generally the vocal part of the player base is pretty anti-Hunter, so I wanna do a quick poll to get the gist of what people think about it and why.
please don't bully my son
hunter iz a sik class blud
Because of its hero power to deal face damage, and basically only that... the class seems pretty well set on being aggressive and I've never been a fan of playing as aggro or against it. So there's my vote.
On a side note, I really like that they gave hunter a card like Dwarven Sharpshooter to augment their hero power so that they could potentially play less aggressively. And in the past there was that other card that turned your hero power into a buff or something, which was neat.
I would definitely like hunter more if there were some more control options in standard.
I feel exactly the same. I want to like the class but as a control player, it's hard to enjoy it.
Take a walk on the wild side...
I don’t consider myself a Hunter main but throughout 2020; Highlander Hunter was my anchor whenever I needed a good ladder deck to climb. And it carried me 7 times to legend. So I am forever grateful for that 2 mana deal 2 damage hero power:)
Although it's one of my favorite decks, I think that I'm not being subjective when saying that Face Hunter was and always will be one of the most skill rewarding decks, that even in times when it wasn't top of the meta could get you decent win rate.
Even though I don't play it myself (I like midrange decks most), I've always found hunter fair and actually quite fun to play against. Don't know why it's hated so much. But the same holds for all that demon hunter stuff people kept complaining about (well I admit, Soul DH in its prime was kind of obnoxious).
What I like about both classes is that they make little use of the things I hate most in hearthstone: Excessive card generation and excessive randomization.
Ceterum censeo classum magi esse delendam.
Well, not everyone likes to be dead on turn 5... Also, of all aggro decks in the meta, Hunter is almost always the most straightforward one and easiest to pilot (he is the one responsible for the stereotype of aggro decks being mindless smorc). In comparison, Zoo Warlock at least requires some kind of strategy and is heavily reliant on the board. You lose the board, you lose the game, because you don't have many options to come back and regain the initiative.
The Hunter is a completely different story. He is based on simple synergies, involving combining 1-2 cards, which are usually very cheap, effective and can often be played in one turn, event without any preparation (which also makes them completely uninteractive for the other player). Something like:
It's turn 2, he has spent 3 points of mana in total, got from it value worth 6-7 mana and created board, that is already hard to deal with...
I have way more fun being dead on turn 5 against a hunter than being dead on turn 20+ against a priest or a warlock, where it feels like none of the cards that I played even mattered at all because they have infinite answers for everything. (While rarely even playing a minion, of course.)
Ceterum censeo classum magi esse delendam.
Ok there's a bit of a disconnect here for me.
Hunter is my absolutely favorite class... as a Death Knight.
I absolutely adore playing the control game of grinding out an opponent, and no hero does it in anywhere near as fun a fashion as Deathstalker Rexxar.
...
On the other hand, I absolutely abhor standard Hunter, and find the idea of playing as a standard hunter the most boring and unfun experience imaginable.
I like Hunters themes, aesthetic and the gameplay of its non-aggro archetypes. I dislike playing against aggro hunter.
Weird, because I've always thought that hunter has often had midrange options.
I didn't mean to deny that. But I guess the most complains about hunter concern the aggro version, so I commented with regard to that.
Ceterum censeo classum magi esse delendam.
I really like the discussion here. I'm in a similar boat as some, I'd like it if Hunter had control options that didn't inherently stink because of Hunter's class design. I've been a Hunter main since 2015, when i started playing. I wasn't comfortable playing aggro when I was new because the content creator I'd been watching (Trump) was so control focused as a player, i would always trade because that's what he did lol. I personally think Hunter needs a top-down rework of its mechanics. From the ground up in makes sense, Hunter is aggressive and plays on curve. But the advent of Demon Hunter really makes anything Hunter used to do seem laughable.
I think Hearthstone players have long memories and aren't very forgiving, and that's rubbed off on the Devs a bit. There's still people out there who remember Undertaker Hunter being strong and haven't let that go in terms of how they perceive the class. And now with Iksar admitting they weren't giving Hunter strong/unique buildaround cards on purpose because Hunter would then *play* those cards in their *one* good deck, I've got a sour taste in my mouth. The class needs to be revisited.
please don't bully my son