Quote from badassnewbie jump

Quote from DMaster2 jump

Quote from badassnewbie jump

http://www.liquidhearth.com/forum/hearthstone/494435-the-liquidhearth-matchup-chart

49.74% winrate in 947 tournament games.  That means at the top level, where people are competing for more than just a number on their legend rank, patron is winning about half the time.  I'm sure many people have opinions on this deck.  How do your opinions fare when taking data into account?  (I predict most people will just ignore the data in favor of their own anecdotal evidence.)

 

If you read the article, it also states that this ~50% number is actually an improvement of the 47% it used to be!

Oh wow, what a shocking tab. Maybe it should be considered that tournament play is literally shaped around Grim Patrons? And despite people using counter decks and techs it still have a 50% win-rate, that should tell you how broken that deck is and desperately need a nerf. Blizzard waited until TGT hoping a new meta would be created. That failed, Grim Patron is still the deck to play and now they have to go themselves and make it more reasonable.

lol what kind of backwards logic is this?  All tournaments tech against grim patron because it's overpowered?  Doesn't your point assume you're right before you're right?  Whether or not a deck is "overpowered" or not is based on the actual results.  If it's possible to tech against it to the point where it only wins about half the time, doesn't that mean it's not overpowered?

I just don't understand some people.  It's like they're absolutely convinced that this deck is overpowered no matter what.

Thats exactly the point! All pros tech against it because it is overpowered, they even say so. No circularity here. Putting this in terms of statistics: you have a biased sample, so inference about the winrate does not reflect the real winrate, or strength of the deck. If they would not bring conters or tech against it, it has to be expected, that the winrate would be much higher.

Not even the next candidate for complaints, secret paladin is played much in tournaments, just because it is not good against GP. And it is overall a very strong deck, which dominates the ladder, as there is not so many GP players.

You're talking about 2 completely different settings man. The problem with your stats is that you're talking about a circumstance where everyone know's each other's deck and how to counter it, A.K.A. tournaments. You should logically expect Patron to not have as good of a matchup in such an environment because everyone knows that everyone's running patron and everyone chooses decks that tech against it (this is why Malygos Warlock is so high up on the list). 

The problem with Patron decks is on the ladder. In such a place you cannot run a deck made to counter a certain deck because in doing so you will decrease your match ups of other decks. In the chaos that is the ladder, people do not run decks to specifically counter patron because there are other decks out there. Ladder isn't a 3 deck best of 5 conquest, its a mashup of millions of people. People can afford to run decks on the ladder that get crushed by patron because not everyone runs it, making Patron so easy to win with.

And there in lies the problem, Patron has too few decks that matchup well against it and Blizzard has not given enough cards that directly counter the Grim Patron and the Frothing Berserker combos for it to be hated out of the meta. You cannot simply look at data from an environment that people have the opportunity to make their lineups to kill the best decks and say that as a justification to why a non-interactive deck is balanced.

The shit is cancer...All i have to say...Distasteful..

Quote from Scipio_77 jump

Quote from BrosephStalin jump

Don't know if anyone's mentioned this, but I used to think Patron Warrior was OP and needed to be nerfed - maybe I still do, but only a slight one like lowering the Berzerker's health to 3. 

This was until I started playing Patron. After playing it some, I definitely don't think it's OP (I don't play it regularly, because I don't like it that much). I now notice how much of a struggle it is for the patron to draw the exact cards.. you're basically fishing around for a certain combo of cards, and if you don't get it, you're going to die.

Seriously, when I face Patron on ladder, I usually think it's going to be an easy game. Sometimes they'll land those big combos, I think more often than not, they don't.

I don't mean to be rude, but the likely scenario is that you are simply not very good at playing GP.

There aren't many pros or proven high-rank players out there that don't hold patron to be the best deck in the game. At worst it might conceivably enter into a meta where it faces a lot of counters (which happens in tournaments, as people have to counter it), but this hasn't never really happened in ladder play.

The deck has topped Tempostorm's meta rankings for 3 months going, being relegated to 2nd only once. That is not coincidence or ignorance speaking.

 

 

 

 

Quote from Scipio_77 jump

Quote from BrosephStalin jump

Don't know if anyone's mentioned this, but I used to think Patron Warrior was OP and needed to be nerfed - maybe I still do, but only a slight one like lowering the Berzerker's health to 3. 

This was until I started playing Patron. After playing it some, I definitely don't think it's OP (I don't play it regularly, because I don't like it that much). I now notice how much of a struggle it is for the patron to draw the exact cards.. you're basically fishing around for a certain combo of cards, and if you don't get it, you're going to die.

Seriously, when I face Patron on ladder, I usually think it's going to be an easy game. Sometimes they'll land those big combos, I think more often than not, they don't.

I don't mean to be rude, but the likely scenario is that you are simply not very good at playing GP.

There aren't many pros or proven high-rank players out there that don't hold patron to be the best deck in the game. At worst it might conceivably enter into a meta where it faces a lot of counters (which happens in tournaments, as people have to counter it), but this hasn't never really happened in ladder play.

The deck has topped Tempostorm's meta rankings for 3 months going, being relegated to 2nd only once. That is not coincidence or ignorance speaking.

 

 

 

 

I have little experience playing Patron, so yes I know I'm not very good with it. I think it's a good deck, but tends to be overrated by people. In tournaments, I've seen Patron Warrior lose more than it wins. 

Why is Patron Warrior vs Patron Warrior is not 50% in a Patron Warrior win rate chart?

The sad thing about Patron Warrior is that when they have their win condition on hand you pretty much can't do anything about it. All their setups are non intearactable reminds me of post nerf Miracle. Can't do anything about that Thaurissan discount as well. The only thing you can do against Patron Warrior is mitigate the draw on Battle Rage and Acolyte of Pain. It even forces you to be conservative on your minion drops late game because you can easily be punished if you play them aggressively. 

You're correct.  The deck isn't OP.  It is tier 1 though.  

How many cards in hand is ok for OTK to exist?

It is clearly a powerful deck. A tier one deck even. I think this kind of deck is the consequence to it being too easy to draw your entire deck in hearthstone. The same applied to the rogue that did its thing with Leeroy before, or that druid that is just waiting for force of nature, savage roar, innervate and a second savage roar. There are even malygos decks out there that are also waiting for 5ish cards to combo after drawing 2 specific cards that are one ofs. Honestly, I think it would be healthy for this game had the deck size been 40 or higher with the amount of draw that we have. This would lessen the consistency of these decks and add some more diversity to this game.

Diversity is key here. I do not think that the patron is a broken deck. It's good surely, but not unbeatable. The problem is more that this deck has garnered many followers because it is good and fairly cheap to build. You are just playing against it all the time, and it can easily deal tens or over twenty damage in a turn from no board given a good and cheapened hand. For added frustration, it can pull off its highest damage combo if you are way ahead on the board.

Another thing is that the existence of this deck invalidates many others. You can play your deck full of 1-2/Xs on the ladder, but patron will walk over you. You can hardly build a deck that cannot deal with the patrons going off.

This kind of deck leads to me playing decks that are also one big unstoppable combo. And that is unhealthy.

I love how people act like there isn't tons of sources to easily learn how to play patron and you have to do all the learning yourself, lol. At the end of the day, there might be 10% of the choices in any game that you have to make an audible on and making the right call can be hard, but that 90% of the time is gravy. Seriously, go look up "How to play patron" on youtube and see how many videos come up. 

I have no problem with the deck personally. I love how it is fairly affordable and very powerful in comparison to any other deck that could be made available to a new player, but these guys taking it to legend like "Patron legend bro, it was super hard and crazy, not many people can do that bro." anybody could make it to a respectable rank with this deck.

Is it op? when you compare its winrate/dust cost, there is a massive disconnect where no other deck for that dust cost could influence the meta the way this deck has. Is it op? I don't know, but i certainly don't consider some guy making it to legend with patron a good player by any stretch of the imagination and that is really saying something.

Most of people complaying here are aggro players who cry couse patron wrecks them , so no sympathy for them

There are some valid points also, tho

Quote from loshmi123 jump

Most of people complaying here are aggro players who cry couse patron wrecks them , so no sympathy for them

There are some valid points also, tho

Im not an aggro player and Im telling this idiot how wrong he is. News flash, patron doesn't just do good against aggressive decks.

Yes of course, it's been THE top deck for months for no reason at all.

Patron has a solid winrate against just about everything but Handlock, certainly gives you a chance against everything, around 50%...what other deck achieves this?

It's tournament % winrate is as is because people have to play handlock (or other less obvious counters) just to have a coutner deck as literally everyone runs 2 decks + a patron deck.

Winrate stats on ladder for this deck mean nothing as there are plenty of people using it as their first competitive ladder deck - it's cheap.

Quote from Plufflesnya jump

Why is Patron Warrior vs Patron Warrior is not 50% in a Patron Warrior win rate chart?

That's what I thought at first but if you click the link you see that's just a chart of all archetypes sorted by win rate. Not all decks versus patron.

It never was the absurd level people claimed it to be. But showing tournament statistics when every single player in any major tournament will have tech cards for patron is going to skew the win rate a few points.

If it has a 50% winrate in tournaments were people are actually trying to tech against it then it's stronger than what i expected. 

Xixo got #1 Legend NA and EU...

With Patron Warrior.

Quote from Volk jump

Xixo got #1 Legend NA and EU...

With Patron Warrior.

Xixo is an amazing player, it has nothing to do with the deck. He could have probably done this with paladin or hunter also. The stats concur that patron warrior isn't very strong. Props to him for rank 1 with a mediocre deck.