So Minionless Mage is a pretty popular design right now, and whether or not it can beat Control Lock often has a lot to do with whether or not you can avoid getting a C'thun piece milled by Tickatus.
I'm playing Lock vs Mage and this guy has the god draw of all time. I'm talking double Incanter's flow into double spring water into Phoenix with cram sessions. He has 24 cards drawn by turn 8 or 9, and more importantly, I find out later he has all 4 C'thun pieces either played or in hand.
I haven't drawn Y'shaarj so my Corrupted Tickatus is a complete crap shoot with 6 cards left in deck. And what does the opponent do? He completes C'thun and doesn't play anything to draw after, giving me a 5 in 7 shot to win the game with a mill. No reason whatsoever to do it, could have easily played for a few more turns until he could complete C'thun and have a fairly good shot to win. Or hell, just finish the C'thun and take your shot with the last arcane int to draw him. There's an important difference between playing for a longshot and just rolling over like an easy mode bot.
The result of that game really doesn't matter. Whether the C'thun is card 1-5 and he loses or card 6 or 7 and he wins doesn't change the fact that a guy who has made his way to D3 in the first day of the month can't adjust his play against the most obvious danger presented by his opponent.
I guess when you play every game the exact same with no regards for what your opponent does, Tickatus could get a little annoying for decks like that. And the best part is, these same kinds of players bitch about lack of interactivity when they wouldn't know what to do with it if they got it.
EDIT: Not that it has anything to do with what the correct plays were, but I did successfully mill C'thun and win the game.
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, the problem is that the payoff is ridiculous considering how easy it is to setup. But you got a mage player on its own game (working on the win condition without really interacting with the opponent stuff until the time comes), I'll give you that.
Woah, lots of stupid assumptions in this thread, do you have any evidence that the opponent could complete C'thun and draw it on the same turn ? Maybe he wasn't expecting tickatus ? Maybe he didn't care or just forgot ? Maybe he had Mordresh in hand ready to destroy you anyway ?
Did you even win that game ? Oh yes my friend the result of this match does matter, because if you lost against "a guy who can't adjust his play against the most obvious danger" then what does that make you ?
And do you have any evidence that this person that you can't interact with, is the same kind of person who complain about lack of interactivity ?
Sorry, you don't get why people hate Tickatus. And you're playing the easiest deck to pilot on earth with infinite removal, infinite healing and auto-win fatigue, so please, calm down.
Today I learned that aggro decks that play green cards and go face each turn while having endless resources, regardless of what deck the opponent is playing, are in fact more difficult to pilot than a control deck. The hearthstone community is a neverending source of surprising facts.
Pretty outlier game here, most of the time you would've played Tickatus on turn 8 and burned a c'thun piece. Or if you didn't, burnt one turn 10 with Y'shaarj. That's why people hate that card. Cause most of the time you can't play against it.
Today I learned that aggro decks that play green cards and go face each turn while having endless resources, regardless of what deck the opponent is playing, are in fact more difficult to pilot than a control deck. The hearthstone community is a neverending source of surprising facts.
There is no way to discuss with biased people who think aggro decks are braindead easy mode OP decks by default. Yes in all honesty soul fragment control warlock is much easier and much more forgiving than any aggro deck, and doesn't entirely rely on starting hand like most aggro decks. And it's quite ironic that you would rant about infinite ressources in a discussion about control warlock, who has access to life tap, about 20 additionnal health from fragments alone, the best removals in the game, the only hero card in the format and crazy strong at that, and can add cards in his deck and remove cards from yours.
Which aggro deck has never ending resources anyway ? Rogue and DH maybe ? Yes they draw their entire deck very quickly, but they waste cards for that, they can't just tap tap tap.
Of course, if you put one against the other, the hyper aggro face deck is going to be easier to pilot, as it is hard counter to control warlock, but that's not the point here.
Secret Paladin and Control warlock are the 2 easy mode decks from this expansion. And it has nothing to do with what type of archetype they are, it's just the power level of cards and combos they play.
Pretty outlier game here, most of the time you would've played Tickatus on turn 8 and burned a c'thun piece. Or if you didn't, burnt one turn 10 with Y'shaarj. That's why people hate that card. Cause most of the time you can't play against it.
Their point is, you can. You apply pressure to your opponent and don't let them get away with playing a 6 mana card that has no board impact.
Honestly, the main thing is now, Warlock has such a huge number of board clears, and Jaraxxus as a win condition, that Warlock has plenty of opportunities to sneak a Tickatus in, and maybe get lucky and burn something important.
Pretty outlier game here, most of the time you would've played Tickatus on turn 8 and burned a c'thun piece. Or if you didn't, burnt one turn 10 with Y'shaarj. That's why people hate that card. Cause most of the time you can't play against it.
Their point is, you can. You apply pressure to your opponent and don't let them get away with playing a 6 mana card that has no board impact.
Honestly, the main thing is now, Warlock has such a huge number of board clears, and Jaraxxus as a win condition, that Warlock has plenty of opportunities to sneak a Tickatus in, and maybe get lucky and burn something important.
Well you said it yourself. The point is you can't.
Pretty outlier game here, most of the time you would've played Tickatus on turn 8 and burned a c'thun piece. Or if you didn't, burnt one turn 10 with Y'shaarj. That's why people hate that card. Cause most of the time you can't play against it.
Their point is, you can. You apply pressure to your opponent and don't let them get away with playing a 6 mana card that has no board impact.
Honestly, the main thing is now, Warlock has such a huge number of board clears, and Jaraxxus as a win condition, that Warlock has plenty of opportunities to sneak a Tickatus in, and maybe get lucky and burn something important.
Well you said it yourself. The point is you can't.
Of course you can. Warlock's removal is mostly limited to the late game unless they get lucky. It's not impossible, but it's unlikely unless you build your deck to be super aggressive.
Though I sort of can't believe they let Warlock have TWO 3 damage for 2 mana spells.
An advice for everyone who's crying about Tickatus being "OP and broken": Try it yourself and see how frequent and consistent you can actually play the big guy. You not only have to draw him early enough (which it's easier to say than done, with such limited card draw as Warlock has now), you also have to corrupt him first, by playing one of exactly 4 cards(!) from your deck (while Tickatus must be in your hand obviously). All that before you die from constant board pressure and face damage or before your opponent draws most of his deck (which Mages, Rogues and Demon Hunters can do really fast now). If your enemy doesn't have serious brain damage it's not really easy to do.
Woah, lots of stupid assumptions in this thread, do you have any evidence that the opponent could complete C'thun and draw it on the same turn ? Maybe he wasn't expecting tickatus ? Maybe he didn't care or just forgot ? Maybe he had Mordresh in hand ready to destroy you anyway ?
Did you even win that game ? Oh yes my friend the result of this match does matter, because if you lost against "a guy who can't adjust his play against the most obvious danger" then what does that make you ?
And do you have any evidence that this person that you can't interact with, is the same kind of person who complain about lack of interactivity ?
Sorry, you don't get why people hate Tickatus. And you're playing the easiest deck to pilot on earth with infinite removal, infinite healing and auto-win fatigue, so please, calm down.
I know for a fact he could have completed it and drawn it the same turn. I have the replay, though it wasn't necessary as I saw the 3 cost C'thun pieces he played from the far left of his hand.
The not expecting or not caring about Tickatus is my point. People don't make the simplest most obvious changes in their play to beat the deck they're playing against.
He did not have Mordesh. I know this because he played a Font of Power and got to keep 3 creatures on the turn before I Tickatus'ed.
Yes I won the game. I milled the C'thun 4th card of 5. Not that it matters, as the point was he turned a sure win into a likely loss by bad play. Whether RNG saved him or not, it was a bad play.
So what assumptions did I make? I suppose you're right, it was a stupid assumption to assume my opponent would play the game with the slightest understanding of a common matchup. My bad.
EDIT: @ singbanana
You are correct, that's why I started my post with stating that the matchup depends largely on how fast the opponent can round up all 4 c'thun pieces. But in this case, since he was able to draw them and I was down to 12 or 14 life from burn and lifetap, he could have easily secured the win by ensuring I didn't get a chance to mill C'thun. Instead he played like I was a warrior or some such and just ignored the only thing that could possibly lose him the game.
For those of you missing the point, Tickatus gets a lot of hate by people who seem to believe there's no way to address the threat. And yet, when there's a way to perfectly play around him, people don't. I chose this game to highlight because it was one of the more egregious examples, but it is not a one-time occurrence by any means.
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 reason I hate tickatus is because control is now warlock. That’s it. No other control decks can compete. Warrior can’t keep up board state and then gets its finishers burned. Priest is even worse, auto concede to warlock, and priest is the definite control archetype. Tickatus once destroys any value game, but tickatus is never played once. Any control deck is focused on out valuing opponents so when tickatus is played twice by turn ten or eleven, it burns out ten cards for one legendary card being played twice and just destroys any value or combo the opponent has. It just so happens that control warlock is actually good now against aggro, with rusty and jaraxxus we have a deck that beats out aggro, mills combo pieces and out values all other control decks. All because of ONE card.
Well, priests and warriors were definitely able to win against Tickatus before Forged in the Barrens. Priest definitely didn't have a winning record, but priest was arguably the worst of the ten classes last meta. My ETC warrior, on the other hand, had a commanding record against Tickatus Lock. A semi-home brew control shaman had a better than 50/50 record against it as well, though it did rely on Archivist Elysiana.
All that is to say, reports of auto concession status are highly questionable. Though of course, if you're going to play as obliviously as my opponent in the OP . . . actually I suppose he did concede, he just played 10 or 12 turns first.
Having said all that, I will give RendInFriend credit for one very serious consideration: regardless of Tickatus himself, we may end up finding out that the new version of Jaraxxus is what really strangles out other control decks. That thing is murder in the long game, and so far, it feels much more powerful than the Tickatus package ever did.
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.
Woah, lots of stupid assumptions in this thread, do you have any evidence that the opponent could complete C'thun and draw it on the same turn ? Maybe he wasn't expecting tickatus ? Maybe he didn't care or just forgot ? Maybe he had Mordresh in hand ready to destroy you anyway ?
Did you even win that game ? Oh yes my friend the result of this match does matter, because if you lost against "a guy who can't adjust his play against the most obvious danger" then what does that make you ?
And do you have any evidence that this person that you can't interact with, is the same kind of person who complain about lack of interactivity ?
Sorry, you don't get why people hate Tickatus. And you're playing the easiest deck to pilot on earth with infinite removal, infinite healing and auto-win fatigue, so please, calm down.
I know for a fact he could have completed it and drawn it the same turn. I have the replay, though it wasn't necessary as I saw the 3 cost C'thun pieces he played from the far left of his hand.
The not expecting or not caring about Tickatus is my point. People don't make the simplest most obvious changes in their play to beat the deck they're playing against.
He did not have Mordesh. I know this because he played a Font of Power and got to keep 3 creatures on the turn before I Tickatus'ed.
Yes I won the game. I milled the C'thun 4th card of 5. Not that it matters, as the point was he turned a sure win into a likely loss by bad play. Whether RNG saved him or not, it was a bad play.
So what assumptions did I make? I suppose you're right, it was a stupid assumption to assume my opponent would play the game with the slightest understanding of a common matchup. My bad.
EDIT: @ singbanana
You are correct, that's why I started my post with stating that the matchup depends largely on how fast the opponent can round up all 4 c'thun pieces. But in this case, since he was able to draw them and I was down to 12 or 14 life from burn and lifetap, he could have easily secured the win by ensuring I didn't get a chance to mill C'thun. Instead he played like I was a warrior or some such and just ignored the only thing that could possibly lose him the game.
For those of you missing the point, Tickatus gets a lot of hate by people who seem to believe there's no way to address the threat. And yet, when there's a way to perfectly play around him, people don't. I chose this game to highlight because it was one of the more egregious examples, but it is not a one-time occurrence by any means.
Yeah, your exemple was a very fringe case where the C'thun player drew all their pieces before the Tickatus. The vast majority of the time that doesn't happen. So ofc maybe some players aren't used to playing aroud it, because except for some cases,they just can't. People don't complain about Tickatus because of the case exemple you gave. They complain because in the vast majority of other games there wasn't anything they could do. You're missing the point of people pointing out your very condescending post, saying people complain about Tickatus because they're too dumb to play around it, while in reality they're complaining that the vast majority of times they just can't play around it.
I understand that fully. The reason I'm condescending is exactly that.
People spend all the time bitching about a card and don't spend the brief amount of time necessary to realize they have a sure win against said hated deck. That's worthy of quite a lot of condescension in my book.
As for the "not used to playing against it" . . . that's the game. When you play a game of chess and you're staring at a mate in 1, if you miss the mate and subsequently lose, saying "I just haven't seen that board state enough times" will get you laughed out of the game.
The game in question was around the 15th game I've ever played with Tickatus, probably only the first or second I've ever played it against mage. And yet I was able to calculate the odds that he already had all 4 pieces of C'thun in hand or played, count the number of draw spells he had played (all of them), and realize it was best to hold the Tickatus till he played the C'thun rather than just pray he still had a piece in the deck and mill it. Am I saying this to act like I pulled off some brilliant play? No, quite the opposite. I'm saying it's a fairly easy thing to figure out even if you haven't been in the situation before.
EDIT: And I know there's going to be someone who says something disparaging about me acting like I'm smart or whatever version of that complaint comes up today. That's why I said in the OP the outcome of the game is irrelevant. I had a 28 point something percent chance to lose even after playing correctly in the situation, because this is a game with RNG as an element. How the dice ultimately come up is out of our hands, but whether or not we play the game correctly can weigh them heavily
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.
So Minionless Mage is a pretty popular design right now, and whether or not it can beat Control Lock often has a lot to do with whether or not you can avoid getting a C'thun piece milled by Tickatus.
I'm playing Lock vs Mage and this guy has the god draw of all time. I'm talking double Incanter's flow into double spring water into Phoenix with cram sessions. He has 24 cards drawn by turn 8 or 9, and more importantly, I find out later he has all 4 C'thun pieces either played or in hand.
I haven't drawn Y'shaarj so my Corrupted Tickatus is a complete crap shoot with 6 cards left in deck. And what does the opponent do? He completes C'thun and doesn't play anything to draw after, giving me a 5 in 7 shot to win the game with a mill. No reason whatsoever to do it, could have easily played for a few more turns until he could complete C'thun and have a fairly good shot to win. Or hell, just finish the C'thun and take your shot with the last arcane int to draw him. There's an important difference between playing for a longshot and just rolling over like an easy mode bot.
The result of that game really doesn't matter. Whether the C'thun is card 1-5 and he loses or card 6 or 7 and he wins doesn't change the fact that a guy who has made his way to D3 in the first day of the month can't adjust his play against the most obvious danger presented by his opponent.
I guess when you play every game the exact same with no regards for what your opponent does, Tickatus could get a little annoying for decks like that. And the best part is, these same kinds of players bitch about lack of interactivity when they wouldn't know what to do with it if they got it.
EDIT: Not that it has anything to do with what the correct plays were, but I did successfully mill C'thun and win the game.
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, the problem is that the payoff is ridiculous considering how easy it is to setup. But you got a mage player on its own game (working on the win condition without really interacting with the opponent stuff until the time comes), I'll give you that.
I love you Dreadsteed, I will never disenchant you!
Woah, lots of stupid assumptions in this thread, do you have any evidence that the opponent could complete C'thun and draw it on the same turn ? Maybe he wasn't expecting tickatus ? Maybe he didn't care or just forgot ? Maybe he had Mordresh in hand ready to destroy you anyway ?
Did you even win that game ? Oh yes my friend the result of this match does matter, because if you lost against "a guy who can't adjust his play against the most obvious danger" then what does that make you ?
And do you have any evidence that this person that you can't interact with, is the same kind of person who complain about lack of interactivity ?
Sorry, you don't get why people hate Tickatus. And you're playing the easiest deck to pilot on earth with infinite removal, infinite healing and auto-win fatigue, so please, calm down.
That's not it, keep searching.
Take a walk on the wild side...
BS, try it yourself and you'll see why you're so wrong.
He may not be 100% correct, but he's pretty damn close.
1 guy finishing a C'thun in 1 game makes you understand why people hate Tickatus. Ok.
There's plenty of reasons to hate that card.
Today I learned that aggro decks that play green cards and go face each turn while having endless resources, regardless of what deck the opponent is playing, are in fact more difficult to pilot than a control deck. The hearthstone community is a neverending source of surprising facts.
Pretty outlier game here, most of the time you would've played Tickatus on turn 8 and burned a c'thun piece. Or if you didn't, burnt one turn 10 with Y'shaarj. That's why people hate that card. Cause most of the time you can't play against it.
There is no way to discuss with biased people who think aggro decks are braindead easy mode OP decks by default. Yes in all honesty soul fragment control warlock is much easier and much more forgiving than any aggro deck, and doesn't entirely rely on starting hand like most aggro decks. And it's quite ironic that you would rant about infinite ressources in a discussion about control warlock, who has access to life tap, about 20 additionnal health from fragments alone, the best removals in the game, the only hero card in the format and crazy strong at that, and can add cards in his deck and remove cards from yours.
Which aggro deck has never ending resources anyway ? Rogue and DH maybe ? Yes they draw their entire deck very quickly, but they waste cards for that, they can't just tap tap tap.
Of course, if you put one against the other, the hyper aggro face deck is going to be easier to pilot, as it is hard counter to control warlock, but that's not the point here.
Secret Paladin and Control warlock are the 2 easy mode decks from this expansion. And it has nothing to do with what type of archetype they are, it's just the power level of cards and combos they play.
Their point is, you can. You apply pressure to your opponent and don't let them get away with playing a 6 mana card that has no board impact.
Honestly, the main thing is now, Warlock has such a huge number of board clears, and Jaraxxus as a win condition, that Warlock has plenty of opportunities to sneak a Tickatus in, and maybe get lucky and burn something important.
Penflinger and Tickatus are the reasons why ppl (me included) only play BG
Well you said it yourself. The point is you can't.
Of course you can. Warlock's removal is mostly limited to the late game unless they get lucky. It's not impossible, but it's unlikely unless you build your deck to be super aggressive.
Though I sort of can't believe they let Warlock have TWO 3 damage for 2 mana spells.
An advice for everyone who's crying about Tickatus being "OP and broken": Try it yourself and see how frequent and consistent you can actually play the big guy. You not only have to draw him early enough (which it's easier to say than done, with such limited card draw as Warlock has now), you also have to corrupt him first, by playing one of exactly 4 cards(!) from your deck (while Tickatus must be in your hand obviously). All that before you die from constant board pressure and face damage or before your opponent draws most of his deck (which Mages, Rogues and Demon Hunters can do really fast now). If your enemy doesn't have serious brain damage it's not really easy to do.
I know for a fact he could have completed it and drawn it the same turn. I have the replay, though it wasn't necessary as I saw the 3 cost C'thun pieces he played from the far left of his hand.
The not expecting or not caring about Tickatus is my point. People don't make the simplest most obvious changes in their play to beat the deck they're playing against.
He did not have Mordesh. I know this because he played a Font of Power and got to keep 3 creatures on the turn before I Tickatus'ed.
Yes I won the game. I milled the C'thun 4th card of 5. Not that it matters, as the point was he turned a sure win into a likely loss by bad play. Whether RNG saved him or not, it was a bad play.
So what assumptions did I make? I suppose you're right, it was a stupid assumption to assume my opponent would play the game with the slightest understanding of a common matchup. My bad.
EDIT: @ singbanana
You are correct, that's why I started my post with stating that the matchup depends largely on how fast the opponent can round up all 4 c'thun pieces. But in this case, since he was able to draw them and I was down to 12 or 14 life from burn and lifetap, he could have easily secured the win by ensuring I didn't get a chance to mill C'thun. Instead he played like I was a warrior or some such and just ignored the only thing that could possibly lose him the game.
For those of you missing the point, Tickatus gets a lot of hate by people who seem to believe there's no way to address the threat. And yet, when there's a way to perfectly play around him, people don't. I chose this game to highlight because it was one of the more egregious examples, but it is not a one-time occurrence by any means.
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 reason I hate tickatus is because control is now warlock. That’s it. No other control decks can compete. Warrior can’t keep up board state and then gets its finishers burned. Priest is even worse, auto concede to warlock, and priest is the definite control archetype. Tickatus once destroys any value game, but tickatus is never played once. Any control deck is focused on out valuing opponents so when tickatus is played twice by turn ten or eleven, it burns out ten cards for one legendary card being played twice and just destroys any value or combo the opponent has. It just so happens that control warlock is actually good now against aggro, with rusty and jaraxxus we have a deck that beats out aggro, mills combo pieces and out values all other control decks. All because of ONE card.
Well, priests and warriors were definitely able to win against Tickatus before Forged in the Barrens. Priest definitely didn't have a winning record, but priest was arguably the worst of the ten classes last meta. My ETC warrior, on the other hand, had a commanding record against Tickatus Lock. A semi-home brew control shaman had a better than 50/50 record against it as well, though it did rely on Archivist Elysiana.
All that is to say, reports of auto concession status are highly questionable. Though of course, if you're going to play as obliviously as my opponent in the OP . . . actually I suppose he did concede, he just played 10 or 12 turns first.
Having said all that, I will give RendInFriend credit for one very serious consideration: regardless of Tickatus himself, we may end up finding out that the new version of Jaraxxus is what really strangles out other control decks. That thing is murder in the long game, and so far, it feels much more powerful than the Tickatus package ever did.
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.
Yeah, your exemple was a very fringe case where the C'thun player drew all their pieces before the Tickatus. The vast majority of the time that doesn't happen. So ofc maybe some players aren't used to playing aroud it, because except for some cases,they just can't. People don't complain about Tickatus because of the case exemple you gave. They complain because in the vast majority of other games there wasn't anything they could do. You're missing the point of people pointing out your very condescending post, saying people complain about Tickatus because they're too dumb to play around it, while in reality they're complaining that the vast majority of times they just can't play around it.
I understand that fully. The reason I'm condescending is exactly that.
People spend all the time bitching about a card and don't spend the brief amount of time necessary to realize they have a sure win against said hated deck. That's worthy of quite a lot of condescension in my book.
As for the "not used to playing against it" . . . that's the game. When you play a game of chess and you're staring at a mate in 1, if you miss the mate and subsequently lose, saying "I just haven't seen that board state enough times" will get you laughed out of the game.
The game in question was around the 15th game I've ever played with Tickatus, probably only the first or second I've ever played it against mage. And yet I was able to calculate the odds that he already had all 4 pieces of C'thun in hand or played, count the number of draw spells he had played (all of them), and realize it was best to hold the Tickatus till he played the C'thun rather than just pray he still had a piece in the deck and mill it. Am I saying this to act like I pulled off some brilliant play? No, quite the opposite. I'm saying it's a fairly easy thing to figure out even if you haven't been in the situation before.
EDIT: And I know there's going to be someone who says something disparaging about me acting like I'm smart or whatever version of that complaint comes up today. That's why I said in the OP the outcome of the game is irrelevant. I had a 28 point something percent chance to lose even after playing correctly in the situation, because this is a game with RNG as an element. How the dice ultimately come up is out of our hands, but whether or not we play the game correctly can weigh them heavily
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.