You want to win? Pick Paladin. You want to lose? Pick Warrior.
Warrior is massively weaker than any other class in Wild atm. Their stronger archetype, called Pirate Warrior (tier 3 on vs) is absolutely nothing special anymore and Patches post-nerf is questionable as its impact seems subpar nowadays.
Paladin on the other hand, is broken on every card. Call to Arms will still be played as: it thins your deck, it lowers your chance of bad draw, it combos with Knife Juggler and many buffs are easier to play because you have too many threats at once (Quarter, Lvl up, Tarim have tons of targets).
Expect Paladin to still roll on the wild meta for years to come if Blizzard doesn't aggressively nerf Legendaries (Crystal Core in recent time, then nothing?).
Tarim is probably stronger in wild than in standard and by far, by far the best legendary. To put it into perspective:
_A full board of giant is worth 5/5 + 6x8/8 right? so 53/53 worth of stats. Tarim is able to put all of this to 21/21. It means he can do 32 damage the turn he is played!!!
_A full board of Silver hand recruit is worth 7/7 but 6/6 to allow Tarim to be played. the 6/6 then transform into 18/18 + a 3/7 that will need 3 hits to be removed!!!
Tarim is so strong at 6 that in the best scenario, he's worth 20 mana (2x C'thun).
If people don't realize this card put Dr. Boom into the trashcan...
Paladin needs a lot of nerfs and call to arms at 5 is a big joke from greedy blizzard not wanting to nerf legendaries.
Actually i think that FWA nerf pretty much destroyed Pirate Warrior, not Patches, but moving on :) Btw not sure what you're expecting from this thread, seems like ur just trying to vent or something ...
The last era where wild was much superior to standard was during the Renolock era more than a year ago. It was a skilled deck to play and not as oppressive as current paladin is.
Now with the clownfest it has become, Standard - even with his garbage tier pool of card and low deck number - might offer more viable variety.
blabla, can you back your claim? I can with stats: Tarim is in 10.1% of all deck. The deck he is in have a 63% winrate on average (which means he is a staple of the highest winning deck). When he is played, he wins 59.4% of the time. Aya, at the same 6 mana, is played in more decks (10.3%) but in decks that have 60.7% winrate on average and gets 58.6%wr the turn she is played.
The fact that Tarim is a couple percent stronger than one of the best legendary in the format is enough for me.
_A full board of giant is worth 5/5 + 6x8/8 right? so 53/53 worth of stats. Tarim is able to put all of this to 21/21. It means he can do 32 damage the turn he is played!!!
_A full board of Silver hand recruit is worth 7/7 but 6/6 to allow Tarim to be played. the 6/6 then transform into 18/18 + a 3/7 that will need 3 hits to be removed!!!
Play Brawl in the first scenario and it will put all of this to most likely 8/8. It means it can do 45 damage the turn it's played!!!
Play Brawl into six recruits + Tarim and it will put all of this to most likely a 3/3 which is worse than the six recruits the pala started with!!!
On the other hand, warrior is one of the few classes that can extend their life pool to survive a Tarim turn and then clear the board with ease. Just sayin'. I'm always wary of warrior. I've stacked a board with four Giants with ancestral spirit, had warrior play brawl into reckless flurry, into a weapon hit on my remaining giant, then execute. If I didn't have a second charged spellstone and giant I would have lost. Their board clear is insane.
Odd control warrior and quest warrior have positive winrates. They're just much more expensive and difficult to play, meaning that most players can't play them. It's also a slower playstyle, whereas aggro/midrange is quick to climb with and easier to play. This means much more people play paladin, and much more successfully.
I've been playing odd warrior, which got me to rank 5, taking out a lot of paladins along the way with the multitude of clears. Once you stabilize, the 4 armour a turn hero power is out of their range to burst down.
This is not to say I disagree with what you're saying about paladin having very good cards. But they are just about to get a nerf, and if you have the cards and patience, warrior can be quite good. Without CtA, warrior's distinctive control style can probably contend much better across the board against paladin. Instead of being pressured to clear their board due to one card they play (CtA), you can now wait for them to play out their hand and then board clear more efficiently. And for those decks that still will run CtA, you have one extra turn to react, one extra turn to armour out of lethal.
FWIW - one or another dev has addressed this issue on a number of occasions. Most recently, Peter Whalen appeared on the Angry Chicken podcast a few weeks ago. They discussed why it's misleading to simply look at global class win-rates as an accurate representation of game balance or relative class strength. We had a good example of why overall win-rates aren't too important during the first month of the WW release - Shaman looked like it was shit-tier, with a class win-rate of about 40%. Shudderwock Shaman had a class representation of about 97%, and a win-rate of 40%, while Even Shaman had a class representation of about 3%, and a win-rate of 56%. Perfectly viable class - one of the better to emerge from WW, to be honest - with poor representation in terms of win-rate, because everyone was playing the memes rather than the competitive deck. Apparently, this is an ongoing "problem" for Rogue - 10%-15% of Rogue decks on ladder are consistently Mill Rogue, despite the deck posting win-rates of about 40%. Presumably, some folks simply like piloting the deck. However, the perennial ladder presence of Mill Rogue has the effect of tanking the overall class win-rate by about 2%.
The other issue is simply the existence of high skill-cap decks. The average HS player is a C-student who has never played a card game before. Lots of folks simply aren't going to have the foresight, patience, or simple understanding to successfully pilot a difficult-to-play combo or control deck - tanking the win-rates of classes which feature perfectly viable decks for all the As and Bs. Recall Donais' old subreddit post, explaining how Patron Warrior posted terrible win-rates on ladder, despite dominating the top finishes in every region, as well as tournament play.
For these reasons, and others, instead of looking for nine classes with win-rates close to 50%, the devs are looking to have viable decks available for each class . . .
FWIW - one or another dev has addressed this issue on a number of occasions. Most recently, Peter Whalen appeared on the Angry Chicken podcast a few weeks ago. They discussed why it's misleading to simply look at global class win-rates as an accurate representation of game balance or relative class strength. We had a good example of why overall win-rates aren't too important during the first month of the WW release - Shaman looked like it was shit-tier, with a class win-rate of about 40%. Shudderwock Shaman has a class representation of about 97%, and a win-rate of 40%, while Even Shaman had a class representation of about 3%, and a win-rate of 56%. Perfectly viable class - one of the better to emerge from WW, to be honest - with poor representation in terms of win-rate, because everyone was playing the memes rather than the competitive deck. Apparently, this is an ongoing "problem" for Rogue - 10%-15% of Rogue decks on ladder are consistently Mill Rogue, despite the deck posting win-rates of about 40%. Presumably, some folks simply like piloting the deck. However, the perennial ladder presence of Mill Rogue has the effect of tanking the overall class win-rate by about 2%.
The other issue is simply the existence of high skill-cap decks. The average HS player is a C-student who has never played a card game before. Lots of folks simply aren't going to have the foresight, patience, or simple understanding to successfully pilot a difficult-to-play combo or control deck - tanking the win-rates of classes which feature perfectly viable decks for all the As and Bs. Recall Donais' old subreddit post, explaining how Patron Warrior posted terrible win-rates on ladder, despite dominating the top finishes in every region, as well as tournament play.
For these reasons, and others, instead of looking for nine classes with win-rates close to 50%, the devs are looking to have viable decks available for each class . . .
Depends on which site one looks at. On VS, even shaman is tier 4 with a 46% win rate. I trust that stat more having tried even shaman and found it to be weak, and having never lost a single game to it.
Never felt disappoint when play against Paladin no matter what deck i play. Paladin is a fair class (specially after CtA nerf). Its not like NagaSW Warlock (bye-bye) or Big Priest lvl of bulls*it.
This is more an salt en peppah tread. If you cry about tarim. Your or a burst mage. Or face hunter. Maybe a quest priest. But most other decks laugh at tarim
burst mage doesn't have problems with tarim in wild where you canFlamewaker the paladin's board every single turn, i've also seen people running copy of either Cinderstorm or Twilight Flamecaller in their wild burst mage deck to deal with paladins, i myself use a Volcanic Potion in my versions of aggressive mage decks to deal with CTA, it sounds dumb and counterintuitive but ehh what works works.
burst mage doesn't have problems with tarim in wild where you can Flamewaker the paladin's board every single turn, i've also seen people running copy of either Cinderstorm or Twilight Flamecaller in their wild burst mage deck to deal with paladins, i myself use a Volcanic Potion in my versions of aggressive mage decks to deal with CTA, it sounds dumb and counterintuitive but ehh what works.
naaah, it can't be truth those cards in non-reno aggressive mage will hurt himself more than pala
burst mage doesn't have problems with tarim in wild where you can Flamewaker the paladin's board every single turn, i've also seen people running copy of either Cinderstorm or Twilight Flamecaller in their wild burst mage deck to deal with paladins, i myself use a Volcanic Potion in my versions of aggressive mage decks to deal with CTA, it sounds dumb and counterintuitive but ehh what works.
naaah, it can't be truth those cards in non-reno aggressive mage will hurt himself more than pala
the thing is that most of the ggressive mage's minions in wild have more than two health so your board survives an forces the Paladin to spend a turn trading so yous till get the tempo of the game and can go face eve more until your burn reaches them, which is not hard to do, trust me, i basically farmed my colelction with aggro mage back in classic.
the thing is that most of the ggressive mage's minions in wild have more than two health so your board survives an forces the Paladin to spend a turn trading so yous till get the tempo of the game and can go face eve more until your burn reaches them, which is not hard to do, trust me, i basically farmed my colelction with aggro mage back in classic.
Well, that can work against pala but absolutely garbage against priest, warlock etc. No need to innovate (and make deck worse). There are a staple burn secret mage with Aluneth where u can change 1-2 cards, thats it. Of course if you wanna play competitive.
the thing is that most of the ggressive mage's minions in wild have more than two health so your board survives an forces the Paladin to spend a turn trading so yous till get the tempo of the game and can go face eve more until your burn reaches them, which is not hard to do, trust me, i basically farmed my colelction with aggro mage back in classic.
Well, that can work against pala but absolutely garbage against priest, warlock etc. No need to innovate (and make deck worse). There are a staple burn secret mage with Aluneth where u can change 1-2 cards, thats it. Of course if you wanna play competitive.
who said i was playing secret burn mage? i'm playing aggro mage, netdecking is always being behind the meta because the meta reports aways happen AFTER the new and unexpected thing happens, and thus everyone will expect it when they read the reports so it's better to be 1-step ahead and get your high ranks with things people don't expect yet, how else do you think your "staple decks" appear in the first place man??, they don't appear out of thin air, reading the meta>just netdecking aimlessly, that said: sometimes a netdeck is a proper answer to a certain meta but by thinking that the answer to every meta is always a netdeck you are only gimping and sabotaging yourself in the long run.
And here i am with my like 7 different paladin decks, most of which are meme decks to try and have fun with, and my 1 warrior deck, which is also a meme deck, and yet they all still have a decent chance against most decks they go against
simply put, its not the deck, its the person behind the deck that makes all the difference
burst mage doesn't have problems with tarim in wild where you canFlamewaker the paladin's board every single turn, i've also seen people running copy of either Cinderstorm or Twilight Flamecaller in their wild burst mage deck to deal with paladins, i myself use a Volcanic Potion in my versions of aggressive mage decks to deal with CTA, it sounds dumb and counterintuitive but ehh what works works.
You want to win? Pick Paladin.
You want to lose? Pick Warrior.
Warrior is massively weaker than any other class in Wild atm. Their stronger archetype, called Pirate Warrior (tier 3 on vs) is absolutely nothing special anymore and Patches post-nerf is questionable as its impact seems subpar nowadays.
Paladin on the other hand, is broken on every card. Call to Arms will still be played as: it thins your deck, it lowers your chance of bad draw, it combos with Knife Juggler and many buffs are easier to play because you have too many threats at once (Quarter, Lvl up, Tarim have tons of targets).
Expect Paladin to still roll on the wild meta for years to come if Blizzard doesn't aggressively nerf Legendaries (Crystal Core in recent time, then nothing?).
Tarim is probably stronger in wild than in standard and by far, by far the best legendary. To put it into perspective:
_A full board of giant is worth 5/5 + 6x8/8 right? so 53/53 worth of stats.
Tarim is able to put all of this to 21/21. It means he can do 32 damage the turn he is played!!!
_A full board of Silver hand recruit is worth 7/7 but 6/6 to allow Tarim to be played.
the 6/6 then transform into 18/18 + a 3/7 that will need 3 hits to be removed!!!
Tarim is so strong at 6 that in the best scenario, he's worth 20 mana (2x C'thun).
If people don't realize this card put Dr. Boom into the trashcan...
Paladin needs a lot of nerfs and call to arms at 5 is a big joke from greedy blizzard not wanting to nerf legendaries.
(source: hsreplay.net for the winrate %)
There's never a best, world constantly evolve.
Actually i think that FWA nerf pretty much destroyed Pirate Warrior, not Patches, but moving on :) Btw not sure what you're expecting from this thread, seems like ur just trying to vent or something ...
- Click Here To Join Us On Discord! -
Factually correct or not?
The last era where wild was much superior to standard was during the Renolock era more than a year ago. It was a skilled deck to play and not as oppressive as current paladin is.
Now with the clownfest it has become, Standard - even with his garbage tier pool of card and low deck number - might offer more viable variety.
There's never a best, world constantly evolve.
blabla, can you back your claim?
I can with stats:
Tarim is in 10.1% of all deck. The deck he is in have a 63% winrate on average (which means he is a staple of the highest winning deck).
When he is played, he wins 59.4% of the time.
Aya, at the same 6 mana, is played in more decks (10.3%) but in decks that have 60.7% winrate on average and gets 58.6%wr the turn she is played.
The fact that Tarim is a couple percent stronger than one of the best legendary in the format is enough for me.
There's never a best, world constantly evolve.
On the other hand, warrior is one of the few classes that can extend their life pool to survive a Tarim turn and then clear the board with ease. Just sayin'. I'm always wary of warrior. I've stacked a board with four Giants with ancestral spirit, had warrior play brawl into reckless flurry, into a weapon hit on my remaining giant, then execute. If I didn't have a second charged spellstone and giant I would have lost. Their board clear is insane.
Odd control warrior and quest warrior have positive winrates. They're just much more expensive and difficult to play, meaning that most players can't play them. It's also a slower playstyle, whereas aggro/midrange is quick to climb with and easier to play. This means much more people play paladin, and much more successfully.
I've been playing odd warrior, which got me to rank 5, taking out a lot of paladins along the way with the multitude of clears. Once you stabilize, the 4 armour a turn hero power is out of their range to burst down.
This is not to say I disagree with what you're saying about paladin having very good cards. But they are just about to get a nerf, and if you have the cards and patience, warrior can be quite good. Without CtA, warrior's distinctive control style can probably contend much better across the board against paladin. Instead of being pressured to clear their board due to one card they play (CtA), you can now wait for them to play out their hand and then board clear more efficiently. And for those decks that still will run CtA, you have one extra turn to react, one extra turn to armour out of lethal.
FWIW - one or another dev has addressed this issue on a number of occasions. Most recently, Peter Whalen appeared on the Angry Chicken podcast a few weeks ago. They discussed why it's misleading to simply look at global class win-rates as an accurate representation of game balance or relative class strength. We had a good example of why overall win-rates aren't too important during the first month of the WW release - Shaman looked like it was shit-tier, with a class win-rate of about 40%. Shudderwock Shaman had a class representation of about 97%, and a win-rate of 40%, while Even Shaman had a class representation of about 3%, and a win-rate of 56%. Perfectly viable class - one of the better to emerge from WW, to be honest - with poor representation in terms of win-rate, because everyone was playing the memes rather than the competitive deck. Apparently, this is an ongoing "problem" for Rogue - 10%-15% of Rogue decks on ladder are consistently Mill Rogue, despite the deck posting win-rates of about 40%. Presumably, some folks simply like piloting the deck. However, the perennial ladder presence of Mill Rogue has the effect of tanking the overall class win-rate by about 2%.
The other issue is simply the existence of high skill-cap decks. The average HS player is a C-student who has never played a card game before. Lots of folks simply aren't going to have the foresight, patience, or simple understanding to successfully pilot a difficult-to-play combo or control deck - tanking the win-rates of classes which feature perfectly viable decks for all the As and Bs. Recall Donais' old subreddit post, explaining how Patron Warrior posted terrible win-rates on ladder, despite dominating the top finishes in every region, as well as tournament play.
For these reasons, and others, instead of looking for nine classes with win-rates close to 50%, the devs are looking to have viable decks available for each class . . .
Ironically, warrior is the best class to play if you want to beat paladin consistently.
Never felt disappoint when play against Paladin no matter what deck i play. Paladin is a fair class (specially after CtA nerf). Its not like NagaSW Warlock (bye-bye) or Big Priest lvl of bulls*it.
those cards in non-reno aggressive mage will hurt himself more than pala
Play patron warrior and you hope to meet paladins.
No need to innovate (and make deck worse). There are a staple burn secret mage with Aluneth where u can change 1-2 cards, thats it.
Of course if you wanna play competitive.
Yes, Paladin is stronger than Warrior in the Wild?
But how does that make Blizzard greedy?
If OP could try to use some common sense instead of crying like an infant, this pointless thread could have been avoided.
And here i am with my like 7 different paladin decks, most of which are meme decks to try and have fun with, and my 1 warrior deck, which is also a meme deck, and yet they all still have a decent chance against most decks they go against
simply put, its not the deck, its the person behind the deck that makes all the difference