Hearthpwn

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

  Or they looked at the overall picture of the data they got, realized it looked barely any different from their previous, and decided not to process it any further, wasting resources for almost no result.

That actually makes no sense because necessarily there would be change. Decks that hard counter another deck getting nerfed makes that first deck stronger. A say mid tier 2 deck that got countered by a tier 1 deck will get stronger with the nerfing of the tier 1 deck. The rock, paper, scissors nature of the game means that there will necessarily be change. 

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

  So the reason they didn't change the stats was that they were basically the same as the last report...And you claim that means they admit the stats are different...What ?

They reset the stats on selected decks but carried over the win rates from the classes that were not selected to be reset (their justification being the recent nerfs). They do this instead of resetting ALL of the stats from the previous report causing a skewing in the stats. It's a very sloppy way to try and control for the nerfs that does much more harm than good. What they could and SHOULD do is for every period (time frame in which they plan to use as a data point) have it be it be independent from the previous report period. They can use the previous data point as a means to show a trend (perfectly fine as it would further illustrate what effects the changes had on the meta as a whole). They, instead, decided to roll over data from the previous week for some classes basically blurring the results of the meta shift after the nerfs with data from the previous week. To give an example of how this effects the data we see C'Thun Warriors have seen a significant rise. Their data was not reset from teh previous week skewing the numbers. The nerfing of decks, specifically mid-range Hunter which punished decks like C'Thun Warrior, caused a rise in both their popularity and their strength in the meta. The data being carried over fro ma meta that previously did not favor that deck skews the numbers to make it seems as though it's not as prevalent as it is. This is the significant skewing of the numbers I am talking about. This is ignoring as well the other factors I have mentioned. 

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

Quote from Komorebi3 >>

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

  Dude, they're not trying to guess or whatever...They are using a very large number of games, and go from there. There's no opinion with that report, it's only facts.  {quote} Their so called facts simply do not represent reality. There are, for instance (since you brought it up) a ton more Warriors then there are Hunters as Warriors were countered by Hunters and Hunters got massively nerfed. It's why you see a ton of Warriors on Twitch at any given moment of time. This is also even ignoring the fact that they do not have ANY data at all from Legend rank which is where competitive (which is the data that really matters not what Joe Blow at rank 15 is playing) is played.  [quote] When hunter is above rogue and warrior and whatever, it's because hunter has a better winrate than these classes, period. When they say hunter is more popular, that's because hunters played more games than these other classes.

The win rates they use are completely unreliable as they do not reset data every new report, instead they carry it over which heavily skews data. 

 Your opinion is insignificant when compared to this, because your sample size is way smaller, and because I haven't seen you actually make data out of them.

  I have shown over and over again how they have allowed WAY too many variables for their "data" to be considered a metric of the meta. This means that it's nothing more than opinion based on heavily flawed data. Thieu data, if you know how the meta actually works, makes absolutely zero sense. It makes no sense if you actually pay any sort of attention either. Simply put, using it to make an arguement about hte meta is arguing based on a faulty premise. 

Erh, no, stats do not carry over.

If that were the case, it would be mathematically impossible for aggro shaman to go from 8% popularity to 1%. It would need an insane increase in games played ( At least 7 times, more if you needed to counterbalance more than only the previous report ) along with roughly 0% of players to play it the entire time. This claim does not hold up realistically.

So this part is done, you're wrong.

 

As to proving they're wrong, please do. They have data, you have none. Again, dust in the wind.

 

 They even say on their report, report number 22 that they reset the win rates for some deck but not other. You are literally arguing against what tehy are claiming themselves. 

The win rates of the following archetypes were reset, as we’ve observed a significant change in their performance: Aggro Shaman, Spell/Yogg Druid, Mid-Range Hunter, Secret Hunter, Dragon Warrior, Dragon Priest, Beast Druid, and Pirate Warrior. Note that the last three archetypes experienced a spike in their performance despite not being directly affected by the balance changes. The following archetypes were not reset, as we’ve observed no changes in their performance against the field (other than the matchups against the archetypes that were reset, of course): Mid-Range Shaman, Tempo Mage, Zoo Warlock, and Control Warrior.

Directly copied and pasted from Vicious Syndicate's website.

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

  Dude, they're not trying to guess or whatever...They are using a very large number of games, and go from there. There's no opinion with that report, it's only facts.  {quote} Their so called facts simply do not represent reality. There are, for instance (since you brought it up) a ton more Warriors then there are Hunters as Warriors were countered by Hunters and Hunters got massively nerfed. It's why you see a ton of Warriors on Twitch at any given moment of time. This is also even ignoring the fact that they do not have ANY data at all from Legend rank which is where competitive (which is the data that really matters not what Joe Blow at rank 15 is playing) is played.  [quote] When hunter is above rogue and warrior and whatever, it's because hunter has a better winrate than these classes, period. When they say hunter is more popular, that's because hunters played more games than these other classes.

The win rates they use are completely unreliable as they do not reset data every new report, instead they carry it over which heavily skews data. 

 Your opinion is insignificant when compared to this, because your sample size is way smaller, and because I haven't seen you actually make data out of them.

  I have shown over and over again how they have allowed WAY too many variables for their "data" to be considered a metric of the meta. This means that it's nothing more than opinion based on heavily flawed data. Thieu data, if you know how the meta actually works, makes absolutely zero sense. It makes no sense if you actually pay any sort of attention either. Simply put, using it to make an arguement about hte meta is arguing based on a faulty premise. 

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

Quote from Komorebi3 >>

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

Quote from Komorebi3 >>

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

If you really think that Hunter, especially Secret Hunter, is more popular at the moment than Mage and Rogue then I have a bridge to sell you .Talk about the numbers being WAY off. 

 I don't recall anyone saying that.

Vicious Syndicate has Secret Hunter stronger than rogue and stronger than Zoo Warlock. This proves what I have been saying all along that thier statistics are WAY off. 

 Popularity and strength are two different metrics...

They have, on their VS power Rankings Hunter above both Rogue, Warrior, and Warlock. They have, on their popularity numbers Hunters above Rgoue and Zoo Warlock (I use the ranked numbers as the overall numbers don't control for nearly enough variables). The fact is that Lock and Rogue are both extremely popular and powerful in this new meta yet VS has them below Hunter in BOTH categories. This shows that their numbers are way off like I have been saying for a long time. People take hte path of least resistance as well. If a deck is known ot be particularly powerful they will make that deck so that they can be competitive in the new meta. 

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

Quote from Komorebi3 >>

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

If you really think that Hunter, especially Secret Hunter, is more popular at the moment than Mage and Rogue then I have a bridge to sell you .Talk about the numbers being WAY off. 

 I don't recall anyone saying that.

Vicious Syndicate has Secret Hunter stronger than rogue and stronger than Zoo Warlock. This proves what I have been saying all along that thier statistics are WAY off. 

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

If you really think that Hunter, especially Secret Hunter, is more popular at the moment than Mage and Rogue then I have a bridge to sell you .Talk about the numbers being WAY off. 

Quote from DragonConsort >>

1.  How often hunter is played has nothing to do with how strong it is.  Hunter is the cheapest class in the game cost wise, so for many ppl this is their only choice.  Guess Control warrior always sucks since it isn't among the most played classes ever.

2. Rockbiter was not deceptively powerful, lol.  You see there is a card called frostbolt, and a card called quickshot, formerly a card called darkbomb.  Great thing about those is it does 3 damage (with sometimes extra effect), without damaging your own face or minion.  Rockbiter is infinitely worse than those cards.  Blessing of might is a permanent +3 buff but minion only.  Rockbiter was balanced at 1 mana, but I guess shaman salt can't see things clearly.

3. Nerf to cotw didn't diversify hunter either.  Hunter has just moved mostly to faster variants...good old smorc.  

Quote from robert_fanr >>

Quote from GrotDFO >>

Quote from robert_fanr >>

Quote from GrotDFO >>

Quote from robert_fanr >>

Quote from GrotDFO >>

Quote from Mr_butts >>

Quote from DragonConsort >>

Please provide a reasonable argument why 8 mana is appropriate to summon a 6/6 taunt with divine shield and deathrattle 5/3 weapon (Arcanite reaper is 5/2 and costs 5)?  We can play these games all day, but the nerf is already done so I don't know why this thread is continuing.  

 Tirion is a legendary thus you can only have one in your deck. I'd be totally fine if they kept CoTW at 8 mana but you could only have 1. The card by itself is overpowered for sure but what makes it broken is the fact that CoTW into CoTW has virtually no counter at all and certainly not in the current meta decks.

Also feel free to keep crying about how your precious hunter is only tier 3 now along with like half of the classes. If you actually decided to tweak your deck to fit what you're facing you'd realize just because reynoodle says it's tier 3 doesn't mean you can't win with it. I've seen plenty of Priests between rank 8-4 due to the new hero skin and I'm not destroying them every game even though they're "tier 3 or 4". You act like whatever tempostorm says is tier 1 has a 95% win rate and everything else is garbage. No class stays on top forever, you might be pretty new to the game but if your favorite class isn't good you're just going to have to learn to play with other classes and play for fun rather than just using the same deck day after day after day. 

Besides if a adding one mana to one card can turn one of the most powerful decks into hot garbage than idk how you can argue that that card isn't broken and deserves nerfing...

 Reynad, the guy who couldn't break top 100 legend if his life depended on it, lol. The tempo snapshot has been garbage for months now and disconnected from reality. Actual data shows that Hunter is only surpassed by midrange shaman in terms of win-rate, it's been that way for a long time.

 You are probably referring to Data Reaper Report .

Their data , although is a good representation of the overall ladder is not a great tool to analyse the actual power of a class or card .

The true power of a class is seen when it performs well vs top players (like in tournaments or at the highest ranks of play).

There you can see that any non-face hunter is garbage now . Tempostorm still has a better understanding of how a class performs in a very competitive environment .

 Yea'.. no, sorry bro, that's complete bullshit. That true power you speak of is just your opinion, also with the ban system in place, it really doesn't mean anything, as you can abuse a class' power that is otherwise mediocre (ex: oil rogue, freeze, other combo decks). If not for midrange shaman being as broken as it is, midrange aswell as secret hunter, even without COTW would be next in line at the top of the meta as the Data Reaper report clearly shows, even at very high legend ranks.

I don't even know why you're mentioning tournaments because hunter does extremely well even there, the latest call tourn. shows that aswell, with most decks cutting COTW, so yea', what you said is complete non-sense.

 You prove my point exactly .

I only said that the nerf was bad because it limited the hunter class to once again be a SMOrc only class as you could've seen from the people who played hunter at last call . And that strategy isn't even that good . It can be easely countered by heals or taunts .

Call of the wild is now unplayable and so is any non-face hunter .

What does this mean ??

Instead of creating a more diverse and fun experience THE NERF limited the options of an already limited class even more , so in my opinion it was a bad one .

 Sigh...why do i even bother... the decks are literally on the front page, there's 4 mid-range hunters and 2 secret hunters. There are no SMOrc hunters, even the more aggressive ones run Ragnaros for god's sake. Hunter is a top class, it doesn't need CotW and it doesn't need to SMOrc to be good, and that's not an opinion. 

 There you go: http://www.vicioussyndicate.com/vs-data-reaper-report-22/

Look where hunter is in the charts . (it used to be tier 1 and now it's only tier 2 (face version), other versions are much lower)

Tempostorm was quicker to spot the meta changes but the new data reaper report shows the same thing .

Quote from CBenoitWG >>

Quote from Komorebi3 >>

Ermh, to anyone crying hunter sucks now, you might want to see the tournament decks post-nerf...

In Americas Last Call, they might not all run 2 COTW ( some even doesn't run any ), but they're here, in number, unlike true trash classes that barely have a single representation ( 1 Paladin, 1 Rogue, 1 Priest ).

 Hmm... I wonder who was the winner..? Oh right the guy that didn't bring Hunter.

Ermh, to anyone crying hunter sucks now, you might want to see the tournament decks post-nerf...

In Americas Last Call, they might not all run 2 COTW ( some even doesn't run any ), but they're here, in number, unlike true trash classes that barely have a single representation ( 1 Paladin, 1 Rogue, 1 Priest ).

Quote from DragonConsort >>

Quote from Mr_butts >>

Quote from DragonConsort >>

Please provide a reasonable argument why 8 mana is appropriate to summon a 6/6 taunt with divine shield and deathrattle 5/3 weapon (Arcanite reaper is 5/2 and costs 5)?  We can play these games all day, but the nerf is already done so I don't know why this thread is continuing.  

 Tirion is a legendary thus you can only have one in your deck. I'd be totally fine if they kept CoTW at 8 mana but you could only have 1. The card by itself is overpowered for sure but what makes it broken is the fact that CoTW into CoTW has virtually no counter at all and certainly not in the current meta decks.

Also feel free to keep crying about how your precious hunter is only tier 3 now along with like half of the classes. If you actually decided to tweak your deck to fit what you're facing you'd realize just because reynoodle says it's tier 3 doesn't mean you can't win with it. I've seen plenty of Priests between rank 8-4 due to the new hero skin and I'm not destroying them every game even though they're "tier 3 or 4". You act like whatever tempostorm says is tier 1 has a 95% win rate and everything else is garbage. No class stays on top forever, you might be pretty new to the game but if your favorite class isn't good you're just going to have to learn to play with other classes and play for fun rather than just using the same deck day after day after day. 

Besides if a adding one mana to one card can turn one of the most powerful decks into hot garbage than idk how you can argue that that card isn't broken and deserves nerfing...

 Lol at the assumptions.  Hunter is not my favorite class at all.  Druid, then priest, then rogue......then everything else is far behind though I enjoy something of all the classes.  Just hate stupid nerfs and crybabies getting their way regardless of what class or card it is.  Sometimes cards need to be nerfed, yes Sylvanas at 5 was probably OP.  However these forums are filled with nerf threads, a neverending barrage, and blizzard is stupid enough to listen to these people......the low rank players who lack skill and knowledge and most of all an objective outlook.

Forget about Call of the Wild even, every nerf blizzard did was because of public outcry.  Sets the message that cry loud and we'll nerf whatever you want.  It is making Hearthstone a joke of a competitive game, if it ever really was one in the first place.  

Quote from DragonConsort >>

Please provide a reasonable argument why 8 mana is appropriate to summon a 6/6 taunt with divine shield and deathrattle 5/3 weapon (Arcanite reaper is 5/2 and costs 5)?  We can play these games all day, but the nerf is already done so I don't know why this thread is continuing.  

"Only Druids have a 1 mana 2/2 or anything stat-wise similar (Living roots) making them an outlier. I did the math based on that 2/2 being worth 2 mana which makes it exactly what I said."

Yeah because obviously counting druid cards as the basis for Force of Nature doesn't make sense since that's not the same class...Wait...

"If it were somehow not an outlier and was worth 1 mana that would knock the cost down to 6 by your own logic. That would be 1 mana for the initial 2/2, 3 mana for the 2 card draw, then 2 mana for the additional 2 minion."

I myself said in the original post you could count these effects as cantrips instead of pure draws, which would knock the cost down to 1 mana/card.

"Mirrior image is 3 0/2 minions with taunt. If you want ot say, compare it to minions with similar stats (of which there are few) a 0/2 would be worth 0 mana but hte draw for the additional 2 cards would be 3 mana."

Look, I'm just gonna point at my previous point for the draw part, and drop this here, for reference purposes as to what the card actually does. Mirror Image

As to your other points...Yeah, a deck that has like 20 upvotes in several days isn't popular ; There's Amaz's deck that does seem a little popular, but it's very obviously a fundeck, and definitely not freaking midrange shaman.

As to hunter being weak without COTW, nobody has debated that, or at least certainly not me. However, several of the problems you mention seem to be due to stubbornly playing midrange hunter like it's always been played. Instead, get a freaking N'Zoth, for starters, and jump on the cantrip train, because if you want efficient draw, that's the name of the game.

Quote from BVanScoy1 >>

 No deck in this meta runs a board clear powerful enough to counter COTW. Anyfin Paladin might, okay, but that's about it. Maybe the extremely rare tempo mage that somehow runs Flamestrike, or gets it through RNG, but for most intents and purposes, no boardclear counters COTW, and even if they did, most of the time, they lost the trade, because you got 5 damage done ( Let's say that's worth 3 mana... ) already, and they probably paid just as much as COTW costs to clear it. Even Pyromancer + Equality, which also clears the paladin's own board, doesn't truly counter COTW if you factor in card and mana costs and the self board clear.

Auchenai Soulpriest + Circle of Healing works, Elemental Storm clears Call of the Wild (very common in mid-range Shaman decks), Revenge + Ravaging Ghoul, and more. I believe only 2 classes cannot efficiently clear Call of the Wild (Hunter and Rogue). A majority of these combinations allow room for building a board AFTER the Call of the Wild minions are cleared as well if not create a board themselves (Ex: Lightning Storm + Maelstrom Portal). When it was 8 mana that meant that the Hunter literally spent 8 mana to do 5 damage (it's now 9 making it much worse). You also ignore in your last sentence that Wild Pyromancer + Equality is 4 mana to clear a now 9 mana card leaving the Paladin with plenty of mana to create a board after clearing against a class with no comeback mechanics.

One and a half decks can counter this card ( And we're not saying "reliably" or "card for card", here, we're saying "at all" ), and that somehow registers as this card being counterable in a game that has 9 classes ? Even scrapping collection bottoms and factoring in unplayed cards will at most yield 5 boardclears that actually get rid of COTW, disregarding playability and actual cost VS COTW's. And even if this card was countered by a board clear, what does it matter when this card actually is a semi-finisher ? 5 damage on play, plus however many minions you had on board.

That is, again false. If you want me to go through the list of ways to clear Call of the Wild entirely I am willing to do so. Lastly, it isn't even close to a finisher anymore as by turn 9 the Hunter won't even have a board to use to their advantage by using Call of the Wild. When it was 8 mana it was because it allowed the Hunter to use what they had been working towards literally the entire game (board control) to their advantage, if the opponent was able to interrupt that or if the Hunter did not draw well the Hunter would more often than not lose as tehy would not have the pressure built, the board needed, or the finishing power needed (depending on at which point the Hunter was not able to curve out well) to win the game. 

 This card's balance doesn't even function mathematically. 3 times 3 mana cards, except you'd have to actually draw those cards in the first place, 2 cards draws are worth 3 mana : Oh my, 12 mana in a single card ? We could round it up to 11 because cantrips are worth 1 mana, but we're still way above 9. And that's before we even get to the reason these "subcards" are worth 3 mana : That they have RNG built in them, which COTW doesn't.

 

According to you in this part of your post, cards like Force of Nature should be 9 mana, Mirror Images should be what, 3 mana? It's completely nonsensical. Lastly, Animal Companion isn't costed at 3 because of the RNG effect, the minions you get from Animal companion are each WORTH 3 by themselves, the RNG is a relic that really needs to be done away with. It honestly should be a choose 1 card similar to how Druid cards work as the minions from Druid choose one cards are on curve minions. So likewise the cost of Call of the Wild should not be effected at all. 

 Stop kidding around, this card simply follows the latest Team 5 balance trend that is to give classes completely bonkers stuff until they work, regardless of whether or not the cards are actually balanced. People saying this card shouldn't exist aren't after hunter because of some conspiracy against SMORC, they're after this card because its very existence is a balance failure.

It's not conspiracy to say that there is blatant anti-Hunter bias as it is CLEARLY demonstrable. People try and hold Hunters to a standard that they clearly hold to no other class in the game. It can both be conscious and unconscious bias but it is bias nonetheless. Hunters needed a way to be able to leverage their game plan (board control) to their advantage and they got it. The recent change takes this off the table leaving Hunters in as bad of a spot as they were before getting Call of the Wild.