That deck has a 69% win rate Bronze to Gold. It drops to below 60% at Diamond 1-4.
HSReplay is great but a lot of the free stats are next to useless.
The majority of players are Gold and below, so I don't think it's correct to ignore that segment. Their fun is not less important than your fun, even if they aren't as skilled or as tryhard as you.
I have no idea if the statement "the majority of players are Gold and below" is true and am not familiar with where one would go to find those stats, but regardless, their fun is equally important but their win rates are not.
If we're having a "nerf because it's not fun" discussion, no stats are necessary. If we're having a "nerf because of balance" discussion, we don't take stats from areas of the ladder where all of the better players remove themselves quite quickly by mechanics of the ladder.
And if someone is inclined to suggest that good players get stuck in Gold and below because of f2p considerations, Trump has put that argument to rest clearly and convincingly with the most recent f2Legend series.
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’ll echo P4dge... beating Paladins can be tricky but totally doable if you play around their deck. However, the current Warlock control is oppressive, HS has given Warlock everything it needs to be T1. Removal, healing, infinite primes, and anti-fatigue. Personally, I don’t get a lot of joy out of playing the Warlock deck because it’s boring... powerful... but boring. Hardcore Warlock players should be enjoying this meta and reaching legend regularly. I can’t explain why it’s not T1. I would really enjoy a conversation about how to beat it... but that’s a different topic.
But I digress, there are tools and techs available for beating Paladins. Folks complain about OMYogg... but I’ve seen opponents gets wrecked by its randomness... I myself have been wrecked by its randomness.
You beat the warlock deck by either presenting one threat and making them burn thru their multi-target removal inefficiently or put a lot of weapon damage in your deck, or in the case of warrior . . . both.
A few decks can outrace the drain soul shear delay tactics before Nether and Disaster come on line, but I find the most successful winners against the TICK are not the pure racing variety.
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.
HS has given Warlock everything it needs to be T1. Removal, healing, infinite primes, and anti-fatigue. Personally, I don’t get a lot of joy out of playing the Warlock deck because it’s boring... powerful... but boring. Hardcore Warlock players should be enjoying this meta and reaching legend regularly. I can’t explain why it’s not T1.
That's a good one :D. Just try it yourself and you will (maybe) understand how wrong you are and why. But after all, if you don't believe the numbers (from Vicious Syndicate, Tempo Storm or even HSR), you won't believe me either, so trying to convince you is pointless.
That deck has a 69% win rate Bronze to Gold. It drops to below 60% at Diamond 1-4.
HSReplay is great but a lot of the free stats are next to useless.
The majority of players are Gold and below, so I don't think it's correct to ignore that segment. Their fun is not less important than your fun, even if they aren't as skilled or as tryhard as you.
I have no idea if the statement "the majority of players are Gold and below" is true and am not familiar with where one would go to find those stats, but regardless, their fun is equally important but their win rates are not.
If we're having a "nerf because it's not fun" discussion, no stats are necessary. If we're having a "nerf because of balance" discussion, we don't take stats from areas of the ladder where all of the better players remove themselves quite quickly by mechanics of the ladder.
And if someone is inclined to suggest that good players get stuck in Gold and below because of f2p considerations, Trump has put that argument to rest clearly and convincingly with the most recent f2Legend series.
Something like 5% of HS players are Diamond or above. It’s not about Paladin not being fun. If the deck is oppressive to 95% of the player base in terms of its win rate that’s not good for the game in the long run.
I have beat it with DH, weapon shaman and with warrior because, as you said, it struggles with weapons...but, in my experience, it easily outplays both Paladins and Mage (assuming high rolls aren’t ridiculous) and any hopeful control recipe. So if one grinds through the ranks with warrior to those T1 decks... it should/would be smooth sailing to legend... simply my opinion... I definitely agree that warrior is probably the best deck for it right now. But I like variety and that’s just the way I enjoy the game. To each their own.
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 mean, despite how you FEEL the Tick should be in terms of tier listing, the fact of the matter is it just isn't putting up the win rate.
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 confuse "good" with "broken". The data says, that with most decks you have to be D5 to legend (which is around 5% of all HS players) if you want to have at least 50/50 against Paladin. If you are not that good (and 95% players are not) you will most likely lose against him, even despite being on the same skill level. Ye, that's wrong.
Games aren't balanced around what mediocre players can do. They are balanced based on the actual potential of cards.
If someone in Silver is playing a month old decklist because they can't be bothered to update it, then they absolutely should be stuck there. If someone in bronze is losing to secrets because they still haven't learned what secrets are available, then that's where they belong.
Tis isn't elitism. Balancing the game based on the experience of players who can't play it as it is intended can't work.
Lol, that last post made me think of the Starcraft forums.
Gold and Plat Leaguers who couldn't micro their way out of a paper bag talking about balance. Good times.
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.
Tell me about it Legend is basically paladin aids right now. Are paladins aggro, midrange, or control right now cause they seem to begin pressure turn 1 curve perfectly and also remove all your threats.
Obviously that's ridiculous and so is this discussion. I know there will be those who say, "yeah but there's a discussion to be had about paladin regardless of OP's lies," in which case by all means, start a thread and discuss it. But why are we acting like this deserves attention?
Pretty sure that's the discussion to be had, regardless of numbers. Paladin is one of the few tier 1 on ladder right now (with rush warrior). And to be fair to OP, it's hsreplay's stats which are misleading. I still don't get why non premium users go to hsreplay instead of VS for meta analysis.
But ironicaly, despite what i'm saying, I don't think it deserves a nerf. I think the current state of the ladder is more a result of low deck diversity (edit : I should say low viable card pool) rather than one deck being toxic and shutting down other deck experiments. Paladin is beatable, targetable with deck like rogue, or warrior (some people say priest also counters paladin? I never tried it, i'm not entirely convinced, but i haven't played priest this expansion).
I just wish shaman was actualy playable D:
I second the motion re: Shaman
Having said that, no, it is not HS Replay's misleading stats that resulted in the OP making a win rate up, because there isn't anything on HS Replay that contains that win rate regardless of how one parses the data.
I just believe the OP of a thread has a tendency to set the tone and direction of a discussion, and if we agree on that premise even a little, then this discussion isn't going anywhere because the OP was complete fantasy.
Genuinely and in all seriousness, I currently have some of my best win-runs using Shaman right now. It's really not in as bad a state as people make out. It just seems to be that people are trying to push an archetype or two with Shaman that simply isn't working - mostly because they are ones I have seen streamers trying to play a lot.
The difference seems to be that versions of Elemental Shaman and similar decks are definitely bad. Instead, I play a Spell Damage deck I created which doesn't even feature on HSReplay - I guess because it's a homebrew, so not a "popular" deck.
I snagged a control shaman list from somewhere and have been wanting to try it out, but haven't had time due to the Silas Warrior project.
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 confuse "good" with "broken". The data says, that with most decks you have to be D5 to legend (which is around 5% of all HS players) if you want to have at least 50/50 against Paladin. If you are not that good (and 95% players are not) you will most likely lose against him, even despite being on the same skill level. Ye, that's wrong.
Games aren't balanced around what mediocre players can do. They are balanced based on the actual potential of cards.
If someone in Silver is playing a month old decklist because they can't be bothered to update it, then they absolutely should be stuck there. If someone in bronze is losing to secrets because they still haven't learned what secrets are available, then that's where they belong.
Tis isn't elitism. Balancing the game based on the experience of players who can't play it as it is intended can't work.
It is elitist. You’re assuming people in lower ranks are simply mediocre. While some are, Climbing takes time and not everyone dedicates that kind of time to the game. So they could be good deck pilots but simply limited ones. There’s also the F2P players to consider who are gonna be limited in what decks they can play. Balancing everything around 5% of the client base leaves the game to die. This is something tryhards and elitists don’t understand. There has to be a middle ground.
Until someone cites a source, I call bullshit on the 5% meme.
As this claim has gained momentum, I have continued to try to find a source and there doesn't seem to be one out there. Until someone proves otherwise, I think it's yet another made-up statistic to bolster a weak argument.
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.
Lol, that last post made me think of the Starcraft forums.
Gold and Plat Leaguers who couldn't micro their way out of a paper bag talking about balance. Good times.
It's not quite the same. In StarCraft some players, due to their outstanding skills and APM, were able to use game mechanics in a way that "normal" players couldn't keep up with. Simply put, they were outperforming others because they were better than them and not everyone was able to accept it.
In HS however, there is a huge difference in performance between Paladin and non-Paladin decks and it's not necessarily because Paladin players are more skilled (that would be the case, if it only happened at higher ranks, where skill is undeniable). He wins across all ranks though, because he has an advantage in numbers and performance.
Until someone cites a source, I call bullshit on the 5% meme.
As this claim has gained momentum, I have continued to try to find a source and there doesn't seem to be one out there. Until someone proves otherwise, I think it's yet another made-up statistic to bolster a weak argument.
(here it says 6%+0.3% but the first time they did it it was 5%). I haven't seen and updated statement on that distribution since the new ranked format though.
I'm not sure how accurate this is. They may count inactive players, or players that only played wild and stayed at rank 20 in standard.
Obviously that's ridiculous and so is this discussion. I know there will be those who say, "yeah but there's a discussion to be had about paladin regardless of OP's lies," in which case by all means, start a thread and discuss it. But why are we acting like this deserves attention?
Pretty sure that's the discussion to be had, regardless of numbers. Paladin is one of the few tier 1 on ladder right now (with rush warrior). And to be fair to OP, it's hsreplay's stats which are misleading. I still don't get why non premium users go to hsreplay instead of VS for meta analysis.
But ironicaly, despite what i'm saying, I don't think it deserves a nerf. I think the current state of the ladder is more a result of low deck diversity (edit : I should say low viable card pool) rather than one deck being toxic and shutting down other deck experiments. Paladin is beatable, targetable with deck like rogue, or warrior (some people say priest also counters paladin? I never tried it, i'm not entirely convinced, but i haven't played priest this expansion).
I just wish shaman was actualy playable D:
I second the motion re: Shaman
Having said that, no, it is not HS Replay's misleading stats that resulted in the OP making a win rate up, because there isn't anything on HS Replay that contains that win rate regardless of how one parses the data.
I just believe the OP of a thread has a tendency to set the tone and direction of a discussion, and if we agree on that premise even a little, then this discussion isn't going anywhere because the OP was complete fantasy.
Genuinely and in all seriousness, I currently have some of my best win-runs using Shaman right now. It's really not in as bad a state as people make out. It just seems to be that people are trying to push an archetype or two with Shaman that simply isn't working - mostly because they are ones I have seen streamers trying to play a lot.
The difference seems to be that versions of Elemental Shaman and similar decks are definitely bad. Instead, I play a Spell Damage deck I created which doesn't even feature on HSReplay - I guess because it's a homebrew, so not a "popular" deck.
I lost my grove with shaman after the nerfs. While it made mage bearable, the nerf to watchpost screwed up my own decklist.
Since then I tried a very similar list to yours (less top ended, but with the same brukan + control idea) but I had slightly below 50% winrate with it (at diamond 3 - EU). Maybe my list was just wrong, i'll try again probably before the end of the month.
I have no idea if the statement "the majority of players are Gold and below" is true and am not familiar with where one would go to find those stats, but regardless, their fun is equally important but their win rates are not.
If we're having a "nerf because it's not fun" discussion, no stats are necessary. If we're having a "nerf because of balance" discussion, we don't take stats from areas of the ladder where all of the better players remove themselves quite quickly by mechanics of the ladder.
And if someone is inclined to suggest that good players get stuck in Gold and below because of f2p considerations, Trump has put that argument to rest clearly and convincingly with the most recent f2Legend series.
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’ll echo P4dge... beating Paladins can be tricky but totally doable if you play around their deck. However, the current Warlock control is oppressive, HS has given Warlock everything it needs to be T1. Removal, healing, infinite primes, and anti-fatigue. Personally, I don’t get a lot of joy out of playing the Warlock deck because it’s boring... powerful... but boring. Hardcore Warlock players should be enjoying this meta and reaching legend regularly. I can’t explain why it’s not T1. I would really enjoy a conversation about how to beat it... but that’s a different topic.
But I digress, there are tools and techs available for beating Paladins. Folks complain about OMYogg... but I’ve seen opponents gets wrecked by its randomness... I myself have been wrecked by its randomness.
You beat the warlock deck by either presenting one threat and making them burn thru their multi-target removal inefficiently or put a lot of weapon damage in your deck, or in the case of warrior . . . both.
A few decks can outrace the drain soul shear delay tactics before Nether and Disaster come on line, but I find the most successful winners against the TICK are not the pure racing variety.
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.
That's a good one :D. Just try it yourself and you will (maybe) understand how wrong you are and why. But after all, if you don't believe the numbers (from Vicious Syndicate, Tempo Storm or even HSR), you won't believe me either, so trying to convince you is pointless.
Something like 5% of HS players are Diamond or above. It’s not about Paladin not being fun. If the deck is oppressive to 95% of the player base in terms of its win rate that’s not good for the game in the long run.
I have beat it with DH, weapon shaman and with warrior because, as you said, it struggles with weapons...but, in my experience, it easily outplays both Paladins and Mage (assuming high rolls aren’t ridiculous) and any hopeful control recipe. So if one grinds through the ranks with warrior to those T1 decks... it should/would be smooth sailing to legend... simply my opinion... I definitely agree that warrior is probably the best deck for it right now. But I like variety and that’s just the way I enjoy the game. To each their own.
Where do you obtain the information that 5% of the players are Diamond and above?
Furthermore, since we reset every month, the question would be what percentage of players do not at any point during the month climb to plat or above?
I'm aware of how the leagues break down in Starcraft 2 and League of Legends, but it's a totally different setup in Hearthstone.
After a quick search of my own, I don't find any such stats.
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.
Chill out twisted...you’re getting weird. I can’t help it if you’re not a successful Tick Lock player.
I mean, despite how you FEEL the Tick should be in terms of tier listing, the fact of the matter is it just isn't putting up the win rate.
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 will not argue with that at all.
Games aren't balanced around what mediocre players can do. They are balanced based on the actual potential of cards.
If someone in Silver is playing a month old decklist because they can't be bothered to update it, then they absolutely should be stuck there. If someone in bronze is losing to secrets because they still haven't learned what secrets are available, then that's where they belong.
Tis isn't elitism. Balancing the game based on the experience of players who can't play it as it is intended can't work.
Lol, that last post made me think of the Starcraft forums.
Gold and Plat Leaguers who couldn't micro their way out of a paper bag talking about balance. Good times.
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.
Tell me about it Legend is basically paladin aids right now. Are paladins aggro, midrange, or control right now cause they seem to begin pressure turn 1 curve perfectly and also remove all your threats.
If Warlock beats Mage it means Mage player doesn't know how to play against Warlock most of the times. Only deck it beats reliably is Priest.
Warlock might seem powerful, but in reality other decks are just more powerful. One good Oh My Yogg! and you can be so screwed.
Genuinely and in all seriousness, I currently have some of my best win-runs using Shaman right now. It's really not in as bad a state as people make out. It just seems to be that people are trying to push an archetype or two with Shaman that simply isn't working - mostly because they are ones I have seen streamers trying to play a lot.
The difference seems to be that versions of Elemental Shaman and similar decks are definitely bad.
Instead, I play a Spell Damage deck I created which doesn't even feature on HSReplay - I guess because it's a homebrew, so not a "popular" deck.
I snagged a control shaman list from somewhere and have been wanting to try it out, but haven't had time due to the Silas Warrior project.
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.
It is elitist. You’re assuming people in lower ranks are simply mediocre. While some are, Climbing takes time and not everyone dedicates that kind of time to the game. So they could be good deck pilots but simply limited ones. There’s also the F2P players to consider who are gonna be limited in what decks they can play. Balancing everything around 5% of the client base leaves the game to die. This is something tryhards and elitists don’t understand. There has to be a middle ground.
Until someone cites a source, I call bullshit on the 5% meme.
As this claim has gained momentum, I have continued to try to find a source and there doesn't seem to be one out there. Until someone proves otherwise, I think it's yet another made-up statistic to bolster a weak argument.
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.
It's not quite the same. In StarCraft some players, due to their outstanding skills and APM, were able to use game mechanics in a way that "normal" players couldn't keep up with. Simply put, they were outperforming others because they were better than them and not everyone was able to accept it.
In HS however, there is a huge difference in performance between Paladin and non-Paladin decks and it's not necessarily because Paladin players are more skilled (that would be the case, if it only happened at higher ranks, where skill is undeniable). He wins across all ranks though, because he has an advantage in numbers and performance.
this is an old myth spread by blizzard to try to shut down elitism and rank shaming https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/end-of-month-players-rank-distribution-in-november-2019-0-3-in-legend-6-at-rank-5/
(here it says 6%+0.3% but the first time they did it it was 5%). I haven't seen and updated statement on that distribution since the new ranked format though.
I'm not sure how accurate this is. They may count inactive players, or players that only played wild and stayed at rank 20 in standard.
I lost my grove with shaman after the nerfs. While it made mage bearable, the nerf to watchpost screwed up my own decklist.
Since then I tried a very similar list to yours (less top ended, but with the same brukan + control idea) but I had slightly below 50% winrate with it (at diamond 3 - EU). Maybe my list was just wrong, i'll try again probably before the end of the month.