Hearthpwn

Quote from Fog_za >>

Most times when mages play it against me it has a neutral outcome, or it screws them over. I've had one or two games in which it won the game for them, but mostly it sucks. I don't know why anyone would include it in their deck.

 Because it's fun. It causes things to happen in games that you cannot predict and moments that are unpredictable. Not everybody wants to win at all costs all of the time and box has given me some hilarious or very cool moments in games that a majority of cards simply can't give. Since regularly using a quest, discovery mage deck I've had multiple friend requests after games with people complimenting the deck and saying what a cool game we had, win or lose.

A majority of players aren't competitive players. They aren't hitting too 100 and going for tournaments etc and so sometimes they just want to have fun. Hanar and box are two of the most fun cards I've ever used. Sure, box does me over as often as it helps me but I don't play this deck because I'm expecting a steady, consistent strategy. I play it because it's the backend of an expansion following a rotation and so there are the fewest amount of cards available and I'm a bit bored. My games rarely feel similar and I have no idea how they'll go, this keeps it fresh for me at the moment. I have no interest in grinding ladder, I use my janky mage deck to get to around diamond 3 and it never feels a chore.

Quote from KingCarnage >>

Quote from Alp2760 >>

Quote from ArcyroX >>

yea I agree about Kripp, feel the same.

but you know who I miss the most for Hearthstone?
Disguised Toast...

 Yeah toast is a really entertaining content creator. He seemed to pop back very briefly before going again. It is a shame (for me, I assume he's having a good time) because I'm not interested in the game he plays and so there's no point watching.

 What kind of games does he play now?

 Auto battle stuff I believe. That team fight tactics game (I think it's called that) seems to be his main focus. Every few months I'll have a look up of his channel to see if he's done any HS content and that seems to be all he plays. I'm never going to play it so I just don't watch. Funny guy though and one who would step outside of the norm just to have a laugh.

Dekkster is very good, he's pretty chill but funny. My favourite creatir is Old Guardian, he doesn't get all hyper and whacky and he breaks down his thought process really well, creates budget decks and guides as well as videos of off meta decks and best decks to climb with etc. He really should have a bigger following than he does, I suspect it's the lack of over the top, crazy stuff that affects that though. The kids in stream seem to love that sort of thing rather than mature, calm conversation and strategy explanation.

Regis is ok but seems very much led by sponsor activity and is very sub focussed. It's totally fine and I get he is trying to make a living but I think his older videos, where he wasn't quite so big were just better and less pandering towards subs and sponsors.

Quote from ArcyroX >>

yea I agree about Kripp, feel the same.

but you know who I miss the most for Hearthstone?
Disguised Toast...

 Yeah toast is a really entertaining content creator. He seemed to pop back very briefly before going again. It is a shame (for me, I assume he's having a good time) because I'm not interested in the game he plays and so there's no point watching.

Yeah but they are also the ones doing all the work and making the content so it's fair enough that they will play and create the content they enjoy the most. It's similar to a TV show either going off the rails or finishing. You just have to find an alternative to fill the void.

I'm yet to replace GoT, sadly.

Quote from Hooghout >>

How does it feel. The way of the mindless? I would be deeply ashamed of myself, let alone publicly announce it reaching legend with demon hunter.

 The crowd that refuse to play DH and have some weird kind of judgement for anyone who does are just part of another group of sheep that are so judgemental about the group they look down on.

Doing anything purely to go against the grain is no bigger or more clever than following whatever trend just to fit in.

DH is very f2p or returning player friendly and is a cool concept as a class. It isn't really my cup of tea but I have had fun with some big demon decks, it just doesn't have the tools to really do a lot right now. I'm sure DH will get some different archetypes in the coming expansions and I'm not going to refuse to play it just because I think it gives me cool points not to.

Quote from TwistedCardmaster >>

Entire RNG spell mage is disgrace for Hearthstone and it represents game at it's worst. Since HS doesn't have many ways to interact with opponent's spells or battlecry effects, whole matchup feels uninteractive, frustrating and boring (inability to use any of your minions for like 7-8 turns straight isn't uncommon thing due to constant stream of stales and removals). Box is just nail in the coffin for your sanity.

Also, Yogg-Saron, Hope's End actually felt much more random and you never wanted the play it, when you were ahead (because it could backfire). Box on the other hand, seems to heavily favor it's user, so it can be played just for tempo, especially if you can cheat it out for less mana.

 It doesn't heavily favour the user. This is you refusing to think rationally and using your own bias to keep justifying the resentment you feel. Oh and please show these games where you can't use any minions for 7-8 turns straight. In all my experience using mage this is incredibly rare. 3 or 4 maybe but stop exaggerating and being hyperbolic because you think it makes your point better. It doesn't, it very much discredits it. I'd very much like to see a sample of games where the mage gets off 8 full board freezes. I've maybe done that once and that's only because of get lucky with magic tricks, discover other magic tricks and get board freezes from the quest. You can't even have 8 board freezes in a deck so you're relying on discovering them or generating them randomly.

If it's so great, go play a spell focussed mage for 50 games and pop the box at every chance you get. Better yet, why don't you do that and record the spells cast every time and then come back and have at least some data to back up your claim?

Box varies from good, to bad, to meh. I never use it whilst ahead because it's burned me too many times. It's milled me to death more times than I care to remember or ended up burning important cards because it decides to cast skull in to hand of Guldan. 

You Joan about the RNG of box but as an opponent that's better than the consistently powerful things other decks and cards can do. Brand on curve is usually much more soul destroying. There are plenty of other cards that end the game for the deck they are in but Mage has limited power tools.

The fact that your crying about a purely random card shows you how little power level they have in their own class cards. Mage has no galakrond, no charge, no healing, limited tempo or early game cards. 

If you're consistently losing to box then you're just a bad player. Sure, every now and then it will steal a game but if you took it away then what are you leaving mage with as a power play? Power of creation? Yeah I'm sure the other classes are quaking.

Honestly, you lot will cry about absolutely anything that isn't letting you win over and over again. It's incredibly self centered and childish but it never changes.

The deck I've been using in standard is centered around the quest and discovery/randomly generated spells and minions. It means I get a lot of spells fairly regularly and can have games with 3 or 4 boxes or evocations, for example.

I've played over 300 games in the last 5 or 6 weeks with this deck and have probably popped at least 400 boxes in that time, I feel fairly well accustomed to the box and it's outcomes.

Honestly? There's very little consistency in almost every sense with them. It isn't uncommon for them not to clear a board, they can comfortably end up drawing you through your deck or play 5 board clears on an already empty board.

To me, it's one of the best cards ever printed. I value the fun aspect more than winning, hence the deck I'm using because it has a 42% win rate (mainly thanks to the face hunter and demon hunter matchups being so, so, so bad).

It isn't unusually for it not to swing the game or even really impact it at all. It can also completely ruin your game or give your opponent a big boost. Basically, it does gat it says on the tin and out of the 3 options if swinging the game your way, your opponents way or having little impact, it seems fairly well split between all 3 outcomes.

I'd be really interested to see a breakdown of % chance for each thing, such as board clear, single target spells, recovery etc and able to see what chances each action has. Based on my experience it is pretty balanced and can make for some very funny moments which you just can't get without RNG. I'll sometimes just chuck a box out for the fun of it. Even on am empty board and both at 30hp. I'll absolutely miss it when it rotates out, that will be a sad day.

Quote from HS_trash >>

why this post even exist ???

 Attention seeking.

You could try making a very greedy, armour and clear focussed warrior. You need breathing space and time to stabilise in games against these decks so armour or healing will be your best friend. That leaves warrior or priest. Warrior can gain absurd amounts of armour and has some decent clears and removal. So if you aren't too bothered about beating other decks, you could just go all in on removal and armour gain and look to survive through their big plays, clear their board and win through fatigue.

Both decks will draw through their deck quite quickly, if you can get past turn 10 and be in a decent spot then you've got a good chance.

If you're playing legend rank players then it will be gutter rank, who also have a lower MMR. If you're playing a ranked mode of any game with an ineffective method, deck, team, build, whatever it is, then you're going to have problems. This is not unique to Hearthstone.

You either prioritise climbing and so use one of the decks suitable for that. There are actually quite a lot of different decks that will be effective, it isn't like it's pretty much one or two decks as the only viable options. Or you prioritise what you see as fun, which is making less effective decks but decks that you find more fun to use.

This month I've pretty much exclusively used a mage deck that I love. The win rate with this deck is fairly bad, about 42%, but it's super fun and most games feel very different because it relies on discover, the quest and randomly generated cards from things like mana cyclone. While it's really fun, I know that it gets absolutely crushed by any form of aggression. I have something like a 20% win rate against face Hunter and demon hunter. 

I can't get past diamond 3 with it because it's just too inconsistent but I don't bitch about it, I know what I've signed up for. I could switch to highlander hunter and go to legend but I'm not bothered, I actually quite like playing a deck like this because I get a lot less frustrated about losing, I know it isn't an optimal deck. I'm playing it because I enjoy the way it plays.

When I was in legend last month I switched to this sake deck and it was absolutely awful, an even lower win % and it totally tanked my rank. I really didn't care though and I could see I was getting matched with diamond and platinum players because my win rate was so bad but that's exactly what the system is designed to do. I ended up winning more games as a result because I was playing worse players using worse decks but my win rate was probably that of a platinum player at the point, so the system was pretty effective.

How do you know you're constantly paired with legend players anyway? You can't see their rank and even if you friend a few people and can see they are at really low legend ranks, this will surely still be a lot less common than playing people at platinum or diamond?

You're going to be matched against poor players and/or decks at legend rather than good players with good decks at say, platinum 5. That's still probably better for you, surely?

I don't think any new librams. I'm betting paladin will get more draw cards. That is their main issue.

I once made an analysis to find the sweet spot for Forbidden Shaping, but unfortunately I was inactive on this website for a year so all of my posts got deleted. At the time 8-cost was indeed better than 10-cost, in wild. Guess it's time to remake it, but standard only otherwise there would be far too many for me. Average is defined as an 8-mana 8-8, to provide a benchmark to compare everything else to.

Null hypothesis: 8-cost is the best cost. 8-cost analysis:

Terrible: , Beastmaster Leoroxx, Natalie Seline, Tortollan Pilgrim, Pit Crocolisk

Bad: , Jepetto Joybuzz, Tomb Warden, Heroic Innkeeper, Arcane Devourer (unless you have Twin Slice in your hand, where it's a 9/9, which is good), Twin Tyrant, Whirlwind Tempest

Average: Batterhead (heavily dependant on board state) Grommash Hellscream, Gruul, Fel Lord Betrug, Lucentbark, Mana Giant, Murozond the Infinite, Octosari (depends on your current hand and deck sizes), 

Good:Al'Akir the Windlord, Catrina Muerte, Enhanced Dreadlord, Hulking Overfiend, Ironbark Protector, Supreme Abyssal, Walking Fountain, Zzeraku the Warped (since you can always use your 1 mana left to attack something)

Excellent: Coilfang Warlord, Deathwing, Mad Aspect, Tirion Fordring, 

9-cost:

Terrible: Mogu Fleshshaper, Sathrovarr, 

Bad: Archivist Elysiana, Cenarius, Lord Jaraxxus, 

Average: Alexstrasza, Dragonqueen Alexstrasza, Nethrandamus, Nozdormu, Onyxia, Ysera, Unleashed, Ysiel Windsinger 

Good: Anubisath Warbringer, Burly Shovelfist, Malygos, Ysera

Excellent: King Krush, Pit Commander

Average value: About the same as 8 cost

10 cost analysis:

Terrible: King Phaoris, 

Bad:

Average:Jumbo Imp, Nozari, Sea Giant, The Boom Reaver

Good: Big Bad Archmage, Kalecgos, 

Exellent: Colossus of the Moon, Deathwing, Living Monument, Living Monument

Conclusion: you have a 1/11 chance to get something significantly worse than the average you'd get from 8 and 9 costs. 10 is the best.

For the sake of completion: 7 costs are also quite good.

Even worse: Dinotamer Brann, 

Terrible: Ancient of Lore, Ancient of War, Barrens Stablehand, Guardian of Kings, Lady Liadrin, Swampqueen Hagatha, Underbelly Ooze, Valdris Felgorge, Vereesa Windrunner, 

Bad:Animated Avalanche, Blastmaster Boom, Chef Nomi, Core Hound, Exotic Mountseller (again, unless you have twin slice), High Inquisitor Whitemane, Lightforged Crusader, Shu'ma, Siamat, Tak Nozwhisker, War Golem, Wasteland Scorpid, 

Average: Archmage Antonidas, Baron Geddon, Goru the Mightree, Kael'thas Sunstrider (since you won't be keeping twin slice in anticipation of him), Ravenholdt Assassin, Siegebreaker, Stormwind Champion, Tunnel Blaster, Wrapped Golem, 

Good: Arch-Villain Rafaam, Bloodboil Brute, Bonechewer Vanguard, Cursed Vagrant, Evasive Drakonid, Marsh Hydra, Priestess of Fury, Skeletal Dragon, Winged Guardian, 

As expected, worse than the average 8-drop. Probably still better than 6, though, so not bad.

To conclude: 10 is the best. 8 and 9 are about equal.

I agree that the expansion looks somewhat mediocre outside of Demon Hunter. Not many build-around legendaries or outstanding cards for new playstyles. A lot of "ok" cards, some weird stuff that doesn't look like it's gonna work out soon, like Spell Druid.

Still, I would just wait and see how things turn out. I wouldn't be surprised to see virtually unchanged Galakrond Rogue, Galakrond Warrior, Dragon Hunter and maybe Highlander Hunter and/or Mage staying at the top with very few new cards, with one or two Demon Hunter decks in the mix. But I think there's some possibility that some cards will have more of an impact than it might seem. I can't say which one specifically, but it wouldn't be the first time that a card looks very plain, if not useless, on paper, and ends up having a massive impact on the game.

Not even the developers saw the possibility that Even Paladin would be stronger than Odd Paladin when Witchwood came out. People thought Fungalmancer was a pack filler, and it became a staple for several decks across several classes. And while everybody agreed that Giggling Inventor seemed like a good card, I don't think many people expected to see Blood Knight becoming an important tech card for some time. When Saviors of Uldum came out, most of the quests were disregarded, and the Highlander archetype declared dead because of the existence of Bomb Warrior. Many quests failed, but Quest Druid became a very solid deck, Quest Priest is not entirely without success, even Quest Hunter is a good option these days (though the rotation might bury it). As for Highlander decks, Hunter continues to be very strong, Mage also has good potential to be relevant, Rogue and Shaman can also reasonably build Highlander decks, though with mixed success, especially the latter.

Also, we have seen a few cases last year, where the unimpressive sets from 2018 had some unexpectedly strong cards to offer. Mech Hunter was not a thing until Rise of Shadows, Control Mech Warrior was also not all that good in 2018. Sure, Omega Devastator massively contributed to the deck taking off, but the core of it was just waiting for the right meta. Bwonsamdi, the Dead, of all cards, became an important factor for a deck that everyone was raging about during Saviors of Uldum. Raiding Party became so good it had to get nerfed in Rise of Shadows, Wardruid Loti ended up in a strong deck, and Spirit of the Frog and Zentimo were so good that one nerf wave wasn't enough to stop Galakrond Shaman. And few people expected that Zerek's Cloning Gallery would become an essential card for Priest, ever.

It's not always the way it seems, is what I want to say. It could very well be, that Ashes of Outland has little impact beyond Demon Hunter, but early assessments have been so wrong so many times, that I'd not be so pessimistic about it. And even if the expansion won't inspire many new decks right away, it's absolutely possible, that the next expansion will change our perception of this one dramatically.