Man, I was just watching the latest Clark Hellscream video where he does a tier list of all the "most degenerate" decks in the history of Hearthstone. Holy crud, what an example of recent event bias!!!
I understand that it's meant to be an entertaining vid and also I get that comparing decks from totally different time periods in the game is difficult, but some of the comparisons made are just absolute bat shit crazy. His top of the top "SS tier" decks are somewhat reasonable, but then you see last-meta weapon rogue in the same tier as pre-nerf Quest rogue, pre-nerf Barnes rez Priest, and NAGA SEA WITCH GIANTS LOCK???
Lunacy mage is only one tier below all that, sitting next to Midrange Shaman (a deck that had literally zero unfavorable matchups . . . there was nothing anyone managed to make with a consistent >50% winrate against it) and the pre-nerf Cube Lock.
Apparently the original Warsong Commander / Grim Patron warrior was less degenerate than current-day Lunacy Mage and last-meta Weapon Rogue. I like Clark Hellscream and his content (when he isn't platforming Zeddy), but that list smacked of short memory and bias toward current issues. Honestly, I think it's a microcosm of a lot of what goes on in this orum.
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 didn't mean to suggest the control/combo thing was semantic. I'm just literally saying I myself don't really get into that particular argument. I understand it can be relevant at times.
As for Jaraxxus, I guess it's sort of circular. Upon further reflection, I realize that there probably won't be a time when Tickatus is voluntarily excluded from the deck, HOWEVER, the reason it will stay in the deck is not anything to do with other control decks. It is probably going to stick around in hopes of either hitting your opponent's Jaraxxus in the mirror or at least getting you ahead in the fatigue game ALSO IN THE MIRROR. If I'm correct about Jaraxxus, he will be the win condition that discourages other control decks, but you'll still get into the degenerate Lock vs Lock race to Tickatus game which frequently shows up today.
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.
Seems like it's been debated for an entire meta and counting. Folks assured us that control was doomed in the last meta, back when mercenary allowed triple Rattlegore to eat warlock for lunch. They were wrong, but they were damn sure it was not debatable.
Now, as I have said repeatedly, I am concerned about Jaraxxus's rework. That does seem to be a serious issue. But there isn't any reason to believe Tickatus is any more impactful now than it was a month ago. Furthermore, if Jaraxxus actually can do what Frost Lich Jaina and Deathstalker Rexxar did before him, then sooner or later the meta will refine the deck to the point where Tickatus isn't even included. Ultimately, whether Tickatus stays in the deck will depend on the prevalence of combo options, but as for a control vs control meta, Jaraxxus is all you need.
Are you claiming Control isn’t doomed?
I mean Control barely exists and certainly not in the way it used to. Quasi combo/control and midrange/control hybrid decks have replaced the archetype.
I'm not particularly concerned with subdividing the archtype to that extent. But then again, I've never really thought the distinction between control and combo was very instructive for most debates. Obviously, most combo decks have a more fragile win condition, but in the case of the Silas Warrior deck I've been talking about here, 28 cards in the deck are identical to how I would build a control warrior, and 2 card choices suddenly redefine the entire archetype. It's just not all that interesting to debate those distinctions.
However, I have been very willing to concede that playing the value game is a fool's errand against Jaraxxus. Tickatus could rotate tomorrow and that problem would still exist. That's why my point is not that there isn't a problem. My point is Tickatus ain't the problem.
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.
Seems like it's been debated for an entire meta and counting. Folks assured us that control was doomed in the last meta, back when mercenary allowed triple Rattlegore to eat warlock for lunch. They were wrong, but they were damn sure it was not debatable.
Now, as I have said repeatedly, I am concerned about Jaraxxus's rework. That does seem to be a serious issue. But there isn't any reason to believe Tickatus is any more impactful now than it was a month ago. Furthermore, if Jaraxxus actually can do what Frost Lich Jaina and Deathstalker Rexxar did before him, then sooner or later the meta will refine the deck to the point where Tickatus isn't even included. Ultimately, whether Tickatus stays in the deck will depend on the prevalence of combo options, but as for a control vs control meta, Jaraxxus is all you need.
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.
Well written and I agree, Shadow Hunter Vol'jin has a lot of potential for trying to mess up Tick Lock and others.
However, I just hit 28-13 with Silas Warrior against Tick Lock. It's not that hopeless a match. It's my hope that by the end of this meta, I will finally have enough individual stats that it actually IS a relevant sample size, at which point we can finally draw some conclusions.
How does your deck fair against, well everything else. It’s gotta be hard to maintain that armor level against aggro and mid range decks. Do you have a secondary win condition?
messed up the quote box a bit
Anyway, the mage matchup basically goes the way every other opponent vs mage goes right now. If they manage to get Lunacy in the first few turns, it's a complete crap shoot, though probably not going to go my way. If the mage deck is forced to play its own game, I basically never lose, as whatever comes out of Font of Power is going to die easily, and the burn isn't enough to stand up to the armor gain.
Paladin is a hell of a fight. Surprisingly enough, the paladin match DOES often come down to the combo turn. Usually a win involves fending off as much of the early game as possible, getting to a low life total, swinging the board and the armor total with a Barov plus Rancor turn, and then deploying either kargath prime or saurfang plus rushers to hold onto the tempo game after the board clear. A loss looks like . . . um, any part of that going wrong.
Rogue is generally a decent matchup. For one thing, I've learned to hard mulligan for ooze and things that can kill watch posts. If it's the poison rogue (surprisingly common at high legend), they generally play as if the opponent won't be playing any weapon destruction. The rest just depends on how much damage the watch posts manage to do.
Haven't had much issue with the occasional hunter or death rattle stuff. I suspect the god draw of the Deathrattle Demon Hunter would take me out, but I just haven't seen much of them.
Ironically, I occasionally see a different type of mage which uses Wildfire and Mordesh. That mage takes me down with ease just because it holds the armor total down and demands answers to more creatures than spell mage ever has. It's much better set up to handle my deck, but as most things in this game, one has to accept a bad matchup or two with most decks they pick. I suspect this type of mage will see more play after whatever nerfs happen, so the Silas Warrior may be doomed at that point, but que sera.
It's not a bad deck to be playing in this meta, honestly. I'm not making a lot of headway beyond top 500 legend due to the prevalence of paladin, but we shall see how it goes after the nerfs.
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.
Well written and I agree, Shadow Hunter Vol'jin has a lot of potential for trying to mess up Tick Lock and others.
However, I just hit 28-13 with Silas Warrior against Tick Lock. It's not that hopeless a match. It's my hope that by the end of this meta, I will finally have enough individual stats that it actually IS a relevant sample size, at which point we can finally draw some conclusions.
I'm keeping track of a few stats like at what turn was a corrupted Tickatus played, my highest armor and their lowest life in game (two stats that have an obvious relevance when paired together). The conversation above about how hard it is to get to 30 armor is basically never an issue against Tick Lock, both because they help with armor vendors, and they rarely stay at 30 life.
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.
If there is a relevant difference between combo and control with regards to this particular topic, I'm interested. I don't really think that people are losing to me because they don't understand the matchup, though. I suppose it's possible, but against control decks who draw lots of cards, the first priority of Tick Lock is to get Tickatus online and try to make sure you have enough time to mill as many cards as possible. It's been my experience that no one is holding Tickatus against me, and they obviously know I don't have C'thun in my deck due to the lack of animation of the 4 pieces splitting at the beginning of the game.
Control and combo decks can be similar simply because a combo deck needs to survive to pull off its combo, a good example would be the some of the OTK Paladin decks that used Shirvalah or the DK hero power. Some combo decks have so much draw that they have no semblance of control to them, like old Hakkar druid or Nomi decks. The real defining feature of most combo decks is a multi card high burst damage combo, like yours. I’d argue throwing C’Thun in the deck doesn’t make it a combo deck because it’s simply one card and a win condition when you need one, whereas the main goal of the deck is to starve your opponent of resources. Looking at your decklist the objective is to gain armor and slam 1 minion after you give it to your opponent. That’s a combo. And I’d still wager people have no clue what they’re playing against when you queue up against them. As I said that deck doesn’t exist on hsreply right now, which is a very popular source of deck information. From personal experience not knowing what your opponent playing can be quite disorienting. But now we’re delving into personal opinion. At any rate I applaud you going against the grain with deck choice.
Fair enough. I can go with that distinction.
I thought C'thun Warrior pretty much had to use him to win the game, but I suppose just adding the four cards gives you a potential fatigue win (the ultimate Chad win in control matchups) without actually playing him.
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.
23-11, 4 win streak against Tick and counting. About a fifth of the way to a relevant sample size.
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're right, 72% played winrate is not sooo high....
If played winrate is the measure of a card's strength, Mecha'thun is (or at least WAS) the strongest card in all of Hearthstone.
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.
In my case, I started from another person's list so can't claim credit, but as far as I can remember it's
2 Imprisoned Gan'arg
2 Shield Slam
1 Soulbound Ashtongue
1 Acidic Swamp Ooze
2 Bulk Up
2 Corsair Cache
2 Minefield
2 Bladestorm
1 Bulwark of Azzinoth
1 Feat of Strength
2 Ironclad
1 Lord Barov
1 Kargath Bladefist
2 Outrider's Axe
2 Rancor
2 Scrap Golem
2 Stonemaul Anchorman
1 Overlord Saurfang
1 Silas Darkmoon
Feat of Strength is the 30th card and highly questionable. If you want extra insurance against Tickatus, that should be another Ashtongue, though my 20-11 record against that deck is with a singe Ashtongue. Saurfang is not wonderful, but is a better draw engine than anything else I can come up with. In a meta with lots of aggro, you could fit in the battlecry/frenzy: "deal 1 damage to all other minions" guy to spruce up the Saurfang power.
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 don't see how the non-C'thun version of control warrior has much to worry about with Tickatus.
But, if you're having a different experience, just play the Silas/Ashtongue win condition. Their armor vendors will help you get there. And yes, I'm aware you're totally dependent on drawing Silas, just as they are totally dependent on drawing Tickatus.
The reality of the matchup is warrior will come out over 50%.
Vicious Syndicate typically had Control/Galakrond Warlock favored over Control Warrior, whether ETC or Silas-based. It is easier for Warlock to draw Tickatus than for Warrior to draw period, particularly with Shield Block rotating. Losing Shield block / Bloodsworn has pretty much killed Silas OTK as a reasonably consistent win condition.
Bloodsworn has nothing to do with the OTK win condition and Shield Block has at least been replaced with the 4/5 Frenzy draw guy as far as amount of draw one can include in a deck.
There have been countless instances where the population of players' matchup stats don't jive with the upper levels of play, and I would have to conclude from my own experiences that this is one of them. Having watched C'thun mages throw the game multiple times against Tickatus after they had it conclusively won, I'm going to take my own record in the matchup more seriously than the population's . . . NOT because the sample size is big enough to draw conclusive proof, but because the population is filled with players who have no concept of what they have to do to maximize their chances in an individual matchup.
Also, now that I'm thinking of it, the 4/5 frenzy guy plus outrider's axe points towards a much more consistent draw engine than shield block and . . . Battle rage? I guess.
The guy who has been arguing against anecdotal evidence for years is now arguing that his own anecdotal evidence is more valid than actual data........the hypocrisy is amazing.
No, but your streak of straw men is definitely intact, you keep winning those arguments no one is having.
The phrase "more valid" appears nowhere in my post in spirit or letter. I explained very specifically why I find my experience more relevant than the population data; nowhere in that do I question the validity of population data. But then again, we've already been thru the definition of bad faith posting. Just like your "this guy hasn't heard of libram" stuff, you can't even come up with something that isn't already addressed by the post you're quoting.
Apologies to the other folks who commented on what I said, 3nnui has continually misquoted and lied about my posts for days now. As to the combo vs control distinction, there are times when that distinction is relevant, but I don't really see why control warrior that chooses to win with a three-card combo is suddenly not a control deck but a deck that chooses to win with a four-card combo (C'thun) is still control. I've seen several folks include C'thun warrior as a control deck without comment, so I assume those who call me out for "not understanding" the difference agree with that characterization.
If there is a relevant difference between combo and control with regards to this particular topic, I'm interested. I don't really think that people are losing to me because they don't understand the matchup, though. I suppose it's possible, but against control decks who draw lots of cards, the first priority of Tick Lock is to get Tickatus online and try to make sure you have enough time to mill as many cards as possible. It's been my experience that no one is holding Tickatus against me, and they obviously know I don't have C'thun in my deck due to the lack of animation of the 4 pieces splitting at the beginning of the game.
Finally, as to the accusation of trolling, no, I'm very sincere in my posts. If I'm posting for a reaction, I'll tell you that's what I'm doing.
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.
20-11 against Tick lock with Silas. And counting . . .
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.
Of all the games I've dropped to Tickatus with Silas warrior, not a single one involved not being able to get to the requisite amount of armor.
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 don't see how the non-C'thun version of control warrior has much to worry about with Tickatus.
But, if you're having a different experience, just play the Silas/Ashtongue win condition. Their armor vendors will help you get there. And yes, I'm aware you're totally dependent on drawing Silas, just as they are totally dependent on drawing Tickatus.
The reality of the matchup is warrior will come out over 50%.
Vicious Syndicate typically had Control/Galakrond Warlock favored over Control Warrior, whether ETC or Silas-based. It is easier for Warlock to draw Tickatus than for Warrior to draw period, particularly with Shield Block rotating. Losing Shield block / Bloodsworn has pretty much killed Silas OTK as a reasonably consistent win condition.
Bloodsworn has nothing to do with the OTK win condition and Shield Block has at least been replaced with the 4/5 Frenzy draw guy as far as amount of draw one can include in a deck.
There have been countless instances where the population of players' matchup stats don't jive with the upper levels of play, and I would have to conclude from my own experiences that this is one of them. Having watched C'thun mages throw the game multiple times against Tickatus after they had it conclusively won, I'm going to take my own record in the matchup more seriously than the population's . . . NOT because the sample size is big enough to draw conclusive proof, but because the population is filled with players who have no concept of what they have to do to maximize their chances in an individual matchup.
Also, now that I'm thinking of it, the 4/5 frenzy guy plus outrider's axe points towards a much more consistent draw engine than shield block and . . . Battle rage? I guess.
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 can't play C'thun as your win condition, because Tickatus will destroy you, you should play silas + ashtongue instead!
"Tickatus destroys silas or ashtongue or shield slam..."
I mean... what's the difference? Tickatus will still screw you over big time. Together with Lord Jaraxxus you won't have a chance.
Sure, it's a 3 card combo, but two of them you can run multiples of.
I'm just telling you, I've played over 80 games with the thing so far, and since there's no Zoo Lock to speak of, when you see your opponent is lock, you hard mulligan for silas above all else, and draw like crazy. More often than not, you win.
I can post game results if necessary, though I'm the first one to admit the sample size is small. However, with all the card draw you can pack into control warrior, it's not that bad a task to assemble the combo.
I WOULD recommend running a second ashtongue if you have issues though. That's the only "tech" you can consider against Tick.
Btw, Jaraxxus is a general nuisance to control as a whole, but it will never be able to take you out in time. With the removal in warrior, obviously you can't hold out forever but you can hold long enough to get the combo. Only real danger is Tickatus hitting Silas.
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.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
⚙
Learn More
Cosmetics
Related Cards
Card Pools
✕
×
PopCard Settings
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Elements settings
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
Man, I was just watching the latest Clark Hellscream video where he does a tier list of all the "most degenerate" decks in the history of Hearthstone. Holy crud, what an example of recent event bias!!!
I understand that it's meant to be an entertaining vid and also I get that comparing decks from totally different time periods in the game is difficult, but some of the comparisons made are just absolute bat shit crazy. His top of the top "SS tier" decks are somewhat reasonable, but then you see last-meta weapon rogue in the same tier as pre-nerf Quest rogue, pre-nerf Barnes rez Priest, and NAGA SEA WITCH GIANTS LOCK???
Lunacy mage is only one tier below all that, sitting next to Midrange Shaman (a deck that had literally zero unfavorable matchups . . . there was nothing anyone managed to make with a consistent >50% winrate against it) and the pre-nerf Cube Lock.
Apparently the original Warsong Commander / Grim Patron warrior was less degenerate than current-day Lunacy Mage and last-meta Weapon Rogue. I like Clark Hellscream and his content (when he isn't platforming Zeddy), but that list smacked of short memory and bias toward current issues. Honestly, I think it's a microcosm of a lot of what goes on in this orum.
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 didn't mean to suggest the control/combo thing was semantic. I'm just literally saying I myself don't really get into that particular argument. I understand it can be relevant at times.
As for Jaraxxus, I guess it's sort of circular. Upon further reflection, I realize that there probably won't be a time when Tickatus is voluntarily excluded from the deck, HOWEVER, the reason it will stay in the deck is not anything to do with other control decks. It is probably going to stick around in hopes of either hitting your opponent's Jaraxxus in the mirror or at least getting you ahead in the fatigue game ALSO IN THE MIRROR. If I'm correct about Jaraxxus, he will be the win condition that discourages other control decks, but you'll still get into the degenerate Lock vs Lock race to Tickatus game which frequently shows up today.
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'm not particularly concerned with subdividing the archtype to that extent. But then again, I've never really thought the distinction between control and combo was very instructive for most debates. Obviously, most combo decks have a more fragile win condition, but in the case of the Silas Warrior deck I've been talking about here, 28 cards in the deck are identical to how I would build a control warrior, and 2 card choices suddenly redefine the entire archetype. It's just not all that interesting to debate those distinctions.
However, I have been very willing to concede that playing the value game is a fool's errand against Jaraxxus. Tickatus could rotate tomorrow and that problem would still exist. That's why my point is not that there isn't a problem. My point is Tickatus ain't the problem.
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.
Seems like it's been debated for an entire meta and counting. Folks assured us that control was doomed in the last meta, back when mercenary allowed triple Rattlegore to eat warlock for lunch. They were wrong, but they were damn sure it was not debatable.
Now, as I have said repeatedly, I am concerned about Jaraxxus's rework. That does seem to be a serious issue. But there isn't any reason to believe Tickatus is any more impactful now than it was a month ago. Furthermore, if Jaraxxus actually can do what Frost Lich Jaina and Deathstalker Rexxar did before him, then sooner or later the meta will refine the deck to the point where Tickatus isn't even included. Ultimately, whether Tickatus stays in the deck will depend on the prevalence of combo options, but as for a control vs control meta, Jaraxxus is all you need.
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.
Well written and I agree, Shadow Hunter Vol'jin has a lot of potential for trying to mess up Tick Lock and others.
However, I just hit 28-13 with Silas Warrior against Tick Lock. It's not that hopeless a match. It's my hope that by the end of this meta, I will finally have enough individual stats that it actually IS a relevant sample size, at which point we can finally draw some conclusions.
How does your deck fair against, well everything else. It’s gotta be hard to maintain that armor level against aggro and mid range decks. Do you have a secondary win condition?
messed up the quote box a bit
Anyway, the mage matchup basically goes the way every other opponent vs mage goes right now. If they manage to get Lunacy in the first few turns, it's a complete crap shoot, though probably not going to go my way. If the mage deck is forced to play its own game, I basically never lose, as whatever comes out of Font of Power is going to die easily, and the burn isn't enough to stand up to the armor gain.
Paladin is a hell of a fight. Surprisingly enough, the paladin match DOES often come down to the combo turn. Usually a win involves fending off as much of the early game as possible, getting to a low life total, swinging the board and the armor total with a Barov plus Rancor turn, and then deploying either kargath prime or saurfang plus rushers to hold onto the tempo game after the board clear. A loss looks like . . . um, any part of that going wrong.
Rogue is generally a decent matchup. For one thing, I've learned to hard mulligan for ooze and things that can kill watch posts. If it's the poison rogue (surprisingly common at high legend), they generally play as if the opponent won't be playing any weapon destruction. The rest just depends on how much damage the watch posts manage to do.
Haven't had much issue with the occasional hunter or death rattle stuff. I suspect the god draw of the Deathrattle Demon Hunter would take me out, but I just haven't seen much of them.
Ironically, I occasionally see a different type of mage which uses Wildfire and Mordesh. That mage takes me down with ease just because it holds the armor total down and demands answers to more creatures than spell mage ever has. It's much better set up to handle my deck, but as most things in this game, one has to accept a bad matchup or two with most decks they pick. I suspect this type of mage will see more play after whatever nerfs happen, so the Silas Warrior may be doomed at that point, but que sera.
It's not a bad deck to be playing in this meta, honestly. I'm not making a lot of headway beyond top 500 legend due to the prevalence of paladin, but we shall see how it goes after the nerfs.
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.
Well written and I agree, Shadow Hunter Vol'jin has a lot of potential for trying to mess up Tick Lock and others.
However, I just hit 28-13 with Silas Warrior against Tick Lock. It's not that hopeless a match. It's my hope that by the end of this meta, I will finally have enough individual stats that it actually IS a relevant sample size, at which point we can finally draw some conclusions.
I'm keeping track of a few stats like at what turn was a corrupted Tickatus played, my highest armor and their lowest life in game (two stats that have an obvious relevance when paired together). The conversation above about how hard it is to get to 30 armor is basically never an issue against Tick Lock, both because they help with armor vendors, and they rarely stay at 30 life.
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.
Fair enough. I can go with that distinction.
I thought C'thun Warrior pretty much had to use him to win the game, but I suppose just adding the four cards gives you a potential fatigue win (the ultimate Chad win in control matchups) without actually playing him.
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.
23-11, 4 win streak against Tick and counting. About a fifth of the way to a relevant sample size.
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.
If played winrate is the measure of a card's strength, Mecha'thun is (or at least WAS) the strongest card in all of Hearthstone.
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.
@Kinkyjohn
In my case, I started from another person's list so can't claim credit, but as far as I can remember it's
2 Imprisoned Gan'arg
2 Shield Slam
1 Soulbound Ashtongue
1 Acidic Swamp Ooze
2 Bulk Up
2 Corsair Cache
2 Minefield
2 Bladestorm
1 Bulwark of Azzinoth
1 Feat of Strength
2 Ironclad
1 Lord Barov
1 Kargath Bladefist
2 Outrider's Axe
2 Rancor
2 Scrap Golem
2 Stonemaul Anchorman
1 Overlord Saurfang
1 Silas Darkmoon
Feat of Strength is the 30th card and highly questionable. If you want extra insurance against Tickatus, that should be another Ashtongue, though my 20-11 record against that deck is with a singe Ashtongue. Saurfang is not wonderful, but is a better draw engine than anything else I can come up with. In a meta with lots of aggro, you could fit in the battlecry/frenzy: "deal 1 damage to all other minions" guy to spruce up the Saurfang power.
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, but your streak of straw men is definitely intact, you keep winning those arguments no one is having.
The phrase "more valid" appears nowhere in my post in spirit or letter. I explained very specifically why I find my experience more relevant than the population data; nowhere in that do I question the validity of population data. But then again, we've already been thru the definition of bad faith posting. Just like your "this guy hasn't heard of libram" stuff, you can't even come up with something that isn't already addressed by the post you're quoting.
Apologies to the other folks who commented on what I said, 3nnui has continually misquoted and lied about my posts for days now. As to the combo vs control distinction, there are times when that distinction is relevant, but I don't really see why control warrior that chooses to win with a three-card combo is suddenly not a control deck but a deck that chooses to win with a four-card combo (C'thun) is still control. I've seen several folks include C'thun warrior as a control deck without comment, so I assume those who call me out for "not understanding" the difference agree with that characterization.
If there is a relevant difference between combo and control with regards to this particular topic, I'm interested. I don't really think that people are losing to me because they don't understand the matchup, though. I suppose it's possible, but against control decks who draw lots of cards, the first priority of Tick Lock is to get Tickatus online and try to make sure you have enough time to mill as many cards as possible. It's been my experience that no one is holding Tickatus against me, and they obviously know I don't have C'thun in my deck due to the lack of animation of the 4 pieces splitting at the beginning of the game.
Finally, as to the accusation of trolling, no, I'm very sincere in my posts. If I'm posting for a reaction, I'll tell you that's what I'm doing.
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.
20-11 against Tick lock with Silas. And counting . . .
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.
Of all the games I've dropped to Tickatus with Silas warrior, not a single one involved not being able to get to the requisite amount of armor.
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.
Bloodsworn has nothing to do with the OTK win condition and Shield Block has at least been replaced with the 4/5 Frenzy draw guy as far as amount of draw one can include in a deck.
There have been countless instances where the population of players' matchup stats don't jive with the upper levels of play, and I would have to conclude from my own experiences that this is one of them. Having watched C'thun mages throw the game multiple times against Tickatus after they had it conclusively won, I'm going to take my own record in the matchup more seriously than the population's . . . NOT because the sample size is big enough to draw conclusive proof, but because the population is filled with players who have no concept of what they have to do to maximize their chances in an individual matchup.
Also, now that I'm thinking of it, the 4/5 frenzy guy plus outrider's axe points towards a much more consistent draw engine than shield block and . . . Battle rage? I guess.
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.
Sure, it's a 3 card combo, but two of them you can run multiples of.
I'm just telling you, I've played over 80 games with the thing so far, and since there's no Zoo Lock to speak of, when you see your opponent is lock, you hard mulligan for silas above all else, and draw like crazy. More often than not, you win.
I can post game results if necessary, though I'm the first one to admit the sample size is small. However, with all the card draw you can pack into control warrior, it's not that bad a task to assemble the combo.
I WOULD recommend running a second ashtongue if you have issues though. That's the only "tech" you can consider against Tick.
Btw, Jaraxxus is a general nuisance to control as a whole, but it will never be able to take you out in time. With the removal in warrior, obviously you can't hold out forever but you can hold long enough to get the combo. Only real danger is Tickatus hitting Silas.
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.