Hearthpwn

the only problem that i have vs aggro(face specially) is that even if you tech against those decks, you need to:

A) draw the cards you teched

B) If they are taunts you need to hope that they cant silence it 

C) find a way to NOT gimp by this i mean i COULD run a paladin decks with 6 heals and 8 taunts and probably not lose to face decks but the rest of the matchups will be an insta lose most of the time.

On a side note, i think that one of the reasons that face decks are so powerful is that the leper gnome is waaaaay to mana efficient i mean a 2/1 that deals 2 damage on death for 1 mana is crazy

Quote from dwl_ jump

Make Tech choices if you're weak to Aggro. Examples:

Run Sen'jin Shieldmasta over Piloted Shredder. Run Mind Control Tech over BGH, run Heal like an Earthen Ring Farseer or Antique Healbot etc.

You're a Warrior players so you have to know that Patrons is way worse then these Face Decks.

i don't play patron, CW for life.

Quote from Brews1 jump

Quote from kkbubble jump

Quote from KillerDrag jump

Most of people play Eboladin, zoo or Patron warrior now.

Hearthstone is a bunch of communist player.

zoo is fine, that's a control deck

grim patrons are fine too, its Frothing-warsong that's the issue

Are you seriously thinking zoo is a control deck, just stay at rank 25 where you belong.

i could say the same to you buster, ask any pro, zoo is a control deck that keeps board control through the use of cheap, efficient minions.

kkbubble, I play mostly control decks as well, but I'm confident that the meta will slow down with TGT.  Right now it's very boring to have around 3/4 of the games be against Hunter, face paladin or Patron Warrior, but that will change with TGT, especially early when we will have a lot of people trying out all sorts of nonsense.

Quote from jp3069 jump

kkbubble, I play mostly control decks as well, but I'm confident that the meta will slow down with TGT.  Right now it's very boring to have around 3/4 of the games be against Hunter, face paladin or Patron Warrior, but that will change with TGT, especially early when we will have a lot of people trying out all sorts of nonsense.

yeah i hope so

I mean please this is getting old. Aggro exists for a reason. Aggro is the easiest deck to start up with and it is most likely the very first decks where people find their satisfying success in this game.I brought lots of friends into this game, what do you expect from these people who just started to play Hearthstone? Spend money right away so they don't get crushed on ladders? No! They want to feel good, they want the sweet victory. In order for someone to enjoy this game, first they have to like this game. No one I know ever enjoy defeats. Even you yourself came here posting comments after the cruel defeats because you cant stand it anymore. 

If you cant beat them, become one of them. Or, even better, build your innovate decks that can shit on all the aggros out there. Coming here and trashtalking after your defeats is like asking for grandma's cookie after you shit yourself, grow up.

Quote from Tsubalachi jump

I mean please this is getting old. Aggro exists for a reason. Aggro is the easiest deck to start up with and it is most likely the very first decks where people find their satisfying success in this game.I brought lots of friends into this game, what do you expect from these people who just started to play Hearthstone? Spend money right away so they don't get crushed on ladders? No! They want to feel good, they want the sweet victory. In order for someone to enjoy this game, first they have to like this game. No one I know ever enjoy defeats. Even you yourself came here posting comments after the cruel defeats because you cant stand it anymore. 

If you cant beat them, become one of them. Or, even better, build your innovate decks that can shit on all the aggros out there. Coming here and trashtalking after your defeats is like asking for grandma's cookie after you shit yourself, grow up.

i don't have a problem with aggro, just these two decks that are the fastest and least interactive aggro decks

The problem here is not face op or not counterabla. the Problem is that a lot of classes dont have viable heals/sustain to actually do something against those decks.

Rogue and shaman for example, because blizz denied those classes a viable 1 drop/2 drop. 

TGT actually brings not much to the table when it comes to beat aggro. Everything is super slow and most anti aggro cards are underwhelming. Facehunter will stick around. Another problem is the retarded mulligan system which just kills you every 3rd game with control because you didnt draw 1,2 drops.

However TGT does something better than push control decks, namely push midrange decks! Those decks can afford to run enough 1,2 drops to wrack aggro.

There will be a beast druid, beast hunter, and midrange dragon decks, those will propably claim the meta, if patron gets nerfed which is a must because combo beats control 10/10. There is also malygos shaman that is looking extremely strong with the new cards.

I don know why so many people crying over aggro and stick to control, just shift to midrange, you can win a game with only 2 +7 mana cards you know?!

Do you know why people play face hunter/eboladin/zoolock/other cancer decks? My honest opinion is that yes, control decks are way more fun to play because they require skill. But to be competitive, you're gonna need a ton of dust to make those control decks, or have RNGESUS grant you all the legendaries when opening packs. Since the latter is unlikely, most people will opt to play cheaper competitive decks. Hate to break it to humanity here, but face decks are simply cheaper and easier to obtain.

I do play many of these face decks, but I'd honestly much rather be playing handlock or control warrior. Why don't I? Missing the cards, it's as simple as that.

Quote from UltimateBourne jump

Do you know why people play face hunter/eboladin/zoolock/other cancer decks? My honest opinion is that yes, control decks are way more fun to play because they require skill. But to be competitive, you're gonna need a ton of dust to make those control decks, or have RNGESUS grant you all the legendaries when opening packs. Since the latter is unlikely, most people will opt to play cheaper competitive decks. Hate to break it to humanity here, but face decks are simply cheaper and easier to obtain.

I do play many of these face decks, but I'd honestly much rather be playing handlock or control warrior. Why don't I? Missing the cards, it's as simple as that.

yeah that does really suck.

not nearly as bad in hearthstone as it is in MTG though

Admins plz ban for another face hunter tread. This is so boring.

PS: personally I prefer to play vs face decks, rather then any boring and endless games vs control decks.

Quote from CodeDmitry jump

Every deck is frustrating when they win against you, unless you overcome it, but once you do you think you were always okay with it, and that's just not true.

Exactly, the problem it isn't aggro it's a perception of the player base.

Quote from AcidanceHS jump

Admins plz ban for another face hunter tread. This is so boring.

PS: personally I prefer to play vs face decks, rather then any boring and endless games vs control decks.

its only boring if you're bad and not paying attention

Quote from AcidanceHS jump

Admins plz ban for another face hunter tread. This is so boring.

PS: personally I prefer to play vs face decks, rather then any boring and endless games vs control decks.

"Favorite Class: Hunter"

I always thought that control decks beat aggro, aggro beats combo, and combo beats control. A triangle effect of sorts.

But honestly aggro can still just get really lucky and hope for their opponent's bad draws.

Quote from UltimateBourne jump

Do you know why people play face hunter/eboladin/zoolock/other cancer decks? My honest opinion is that yes, control decks are way more fun to play because they require skill. But to be competitive, you're gonna need a ton of dust to make those control decks, or have RNGESUS grant you all the legendaries when opening packs. Since the latter is unlikely, most people will opt to play cheaper competitive decks. Hate to break it to humanity here, but face decks are simply cheaper and easier to obtain.

I do play many of these face decks, but I'd honestly much rather be playing handlock or control warrior. Why don't I? Missing the cards, it's as simple as that.

there are ton of other decks that arent as expensive as handlock or control warrior. you can swap couple cards as u see fit as well if you are missing something. They arent as competitve though obviously  but i take it you arent going for ranked legend.

the real issue i think is that people want results with little work. this translates to the playstyle+deck they choose. mainly face hunter and aggro paladin or any other turn 6 kill deck.

Thats also the whole point of netdecking, let others do the work for you and copypasta.

I understand some people feel satisfaction only from winning games, so the dude with gold will win with handlock, the dude without with face hunter and the really cheap dude with gold with face hunter again.

Quote from Skiddo_Publiq jump

Quote from UltimateBourne jump

Do you know why people play face hunter/eboladin/zoolock/other cancer decks? My honest opinion is that yes, control decks are way more fun to play because they require skill. But to be competitive, you're gonna need a ton of dust to make those control decks, or have RNGESUS grant you all the legendaries when opening packs. Since the latter is unlikely, most people will opt to play cheaper competitive decks. Hate to break it to humanity here, but face decks are simply cheaper and easier to obtain.

I do play many of these face decks, but I'd honestly much rather be playing handlock or control warrior. Why don't I? Missing the cards, it's as simple as that.

there are ton of other decks that arent as expensive as handlock or control warrior. you can swap couple cards as u see fit as well if you are missing something. They arent as competitve though obviously  but i take it you arent going for ranked legend.

the real issue i think is that people want results with little work. this translates to the playstyle+deck they choose. mainly face hunter and aggro paladin or any other turn 6 kill deck.

Thats also the whole point of netdecking, let others do the work for you and copypasta.

I understand some people feel satisfaction only from winning games, so the dude with gold will win with handlock, the dude without with face hunter and the really cheap dude with gold with face hunter again.

yeah

some pros, such as Trump, recommend Zoo as your first deck as it is quite cheap and effective, and teaches you a lot of core game mechanics among other things. i agree with that a lot, if people started out with zoo as opposed to hunter, they would develop their skills much better,and not play a cancer deck

Quote from kkbubble jump

Quote from AcidanceHS jump

Admins plz ban for another face hunter tread. This is so boring.

PS: personally I prefer to play vs face decks, rather then any boring and endless games vs control decks.

its only boring if you're bad and not paying attention

its boring cuz games is toooooo long, and the prize is the same

Quote from Kanekinumb jump

Quote from AcidanceHS jump

Admins plz ban for another face hunter tread. This is so boring.

PS: personally I prefer to play vs face decks, rather then any boring and endless games vs control decks.

"Favorite Class: Hunter"

I never play hunter since unleash combo nerf and making 500 wins a year ago.
And "Favorite Class: Hunter" only cuz I played a lot of wow long time ago, and in wow I play only hunter ofc :D

Anyone clamoring about "not another Face Hunter thread!" doesn't realize that the TRUE fun in HS (or any CCG) is whining about things you don't like and probably don't understand. Let people have their fun and point and laugh at them as you wish.