• 1

    posted a message on Immune minions.

    It's just not a great choice of the name of the mechanic. Should be named "unreachable", "unattainable" or something like that. I think immune was chosen over those because of most common use of it, immune while attacking, where it fits perfectly and describes permanent divine shield part of the mechanic, but permanent stealth part of the mechanic is missing.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Nerf this idiotic curse mechanism

    The counter is to kill them before they send enough curses to kill you. Bless/Naga Priest is probably the strongest counter. Miracle Rogue, Enrage Warrior, Aggro DH are also good against it.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 3

    posted a message on Grandmasters 2022 Last Call - Playoffs - Results & Decklists!

    nt Levik

    Posted in: News
  • 28

    posted a message on Battlegrounds Season 2: Coming August 30th!

    If something that directly affects players winrate (2 Hero Slots) is unlocked by something you can't earn in-game, you can't call this mode free to play. The difference between pay to win and pay to win faster is huge, and that's pay to win. They totally deserve the outrage they are getting this time.

    Posted in: News
  • 0

    posted a message on Castle Nathria, First Thoughts and Impressions

    The meta seems okayish. Imps and Hunter's dormant package probably gonna be nerfed soon, the latter would be great for Arena too because this package is beyond broken there. Naga Priest seems to get under the radar again so that's the deck I would expect to dominate after if not nerfed. Shaman is already very strong. Druids will rise a lot after the nerfs as well.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 5

    posted a message on Hearthstone is 2022

    Wow, this time you managed to write as many as four paragraphs before mentioning that the game is "rigged". Impressive.
    Calling intentionally lowering your MMR in order to act like the douchiest of bags against worse/less experienced players "getting a good RNG" and something "the game is designed for" is not that impressive. I suppose being the douchiest of bags is not something anyone should be proud of in general.
    Friendly reminder: with the new in-game report system you may actually finally be done with constructed hearthstone one day and we will see a colorful tantrum here about how you got banned by evil Blizzard for expressing your wonderful personality, because, you know, worse players tend to take these things to heart more often and will probably send a lot of reports.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Is the last fight before legend rigged?
    Quote from MrPrep >>
    Quote from AndreiLux >>

    Why are you asking me how?

     I'm not asking you. Why would I be asking you specifically?

    Because you quoted my post and asked a question directly related to my post. If you wasn't asking me specifically, never mind then.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Is the last fight before legend rigged?
    Quote from MrPrep >>

    And how would put a f2p player against a paying player make it lose automatically?

    It's been repeated over and over in this thread, but the problem with this line of reasoning is not that it is absurd, it's that there's no 'whales' in the gacha sense on Hearthstone. Whales are players who can change deck the most frequently because they have more cards. If I, a f2p, wants to play some deck they have to spare the dust, work towards it, craft the cards, then play the deck until it bores me to death or I can afford a new one.

    Why are you asking me how? For me it makes no sense. I'm asking him why he thinks that algorithm is "pointed at me" and why that "pointing" doesn't work at all. The line of reasoning that Hearthstone somehow rewards you for spending more money or having bigger collection is absurd exactly for the reason it's not a gacha game and there's no whales. I don't get what you're arguing.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Is the last fight before legend rigged?
    Quote from 3nnu1 >>

     Most people aren't stupid enough to put that kind of money into hearthstone, Blizzard has your money, the algorithim is pointed at people who don't have all the cards. 

    I'm F2P, I've never put any money into the game. Obviously, I don't have all the cards. I'm not a genius and make enough mistakes when I play. Can you explain how it became possible for me to get to legend 55 times?

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Is the last fight before legend rigged?

    This is either a low sample size or an example of confirmation bias. I have not noticed such a phenomenon in my 54 successful legend runs. Last fights have not been harder or easier than others.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on [Mech Mage] Getting ran through constantly
    Quote from Tuscarora87 >>
    Quote from AndreiLux >>
    They are able to clear, but you should be able to bring back your board multiple times most of the time.
    Quote from Wazabi >>

    There are many control decks around since the arrival of Prince Renethal. That's pretty much the reason why aggro isn't that effective at the moment. 

    Quote from Tuscarora87 >>

    It's really good at low level. Once you start facing good players and decks it becomes garbage.

     Are you sure? Stats suggest otherwise.

    VS podcast says it's beating janky renathal decks at lower levels, while it drops in legend. The deck has zero player agency and you get rolled over by any decent player.

    You exaggerate an already exaggerated opinion. Define "decent player". Is it top-200 legend player for you? Mech mage has a low skill cap and will be worse over time when junky decks die out, but not that dramatically. It will be worse mainly at top legend. It was a tier 2 deck with a positive winrate at top 1k legend before Renathal and tier 1 deck everywhere else, legend included. Tier 2 deck is not trash by any means. Dropping 1.5% winrate between top 1k legend and legend categories is not what guy who got back to HS a few days ago should care, it would be one of the best decks where he is playing. Last month I easily climbed to top 1.5k legend with it (I didn't play any further). The only way it would be bad is if Shamans and Big-Beast Hunter will completely dominate the format.

    Posted in: Standard Format
  • 1

    posted a message on Yeah baby, aggro is dead with 40 hp

    Aggro is absolutely not dead. Renathal is not that good and definitely overplayed.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on [Mech Mage] Getting ran through constantly
    They are able to clear, but you should be able to bring back your board multiple times most of the time.
    Quote from Wazabi >>

    There are many control decks around since the arrival of Prince Renethal. That's pretty much the reason why aggro isn't that effective at the moment. 

    Quote from Tuscarora87 >>

    It's really good at low level. Once you start facing good players and decks it becomes garbage.

     Are you sure? Stats suggest otherwise.

    Posted in: Standard Format
  • 0

    posted a message on Prince Renathal games too long?
    Quote from Thex_ >>

     As a generally more control-type player, i can say that the pleasure i'm getting from playing control decks is in having actual trades and interactions and having to outsmart each other, not just "oh i won therefore it was fun".
    This is also why i personally hate curselock, as imo it just feels more like bodyblocking your opponent constantly, rather than really trying to outsmart or outpace each other. It's literally "they played a big minion? Double Dragged Below", "they played lots of small minions? Abyssal Wave", "they haven't played anything substancial? Immolate or Mutanus" etc etc, and they just passively win through curses scaling too much, rather than having to constantly ask yourself and gauge "is this a good time to switch gears and move to the offensive?" because they don't have an offensive, they just win through games lasting longer.

    Anyway, i understand the value of wanting to have short games to quickly grind, or just have a couple of games inbetween two things or whatever, but reducing the pleasure of long games to "just wanting to have an advantage and win" is a misunderstanding. To me the game is at its best when it's slower and more methodical and relies on good decision making.

    Judging by the way you describe it, I think you actually prefer slower midrange rather than control, and, as a midrange player myself, both faster and slower, I totally agree with your logic, trades and interactions, being flexible with my game plan is what I enjoy too. But that's what we enjoy, not everyone, some like solitaire decks, for example. What everyone likes, no matter if they are prefer to just go face, trade on board, remove everything or setting up an OTK, is winning. If people wouldn't care about winning at least half of their games, they would play their fun decks with 30% winrate and not complain, but losing is not fun, so, since most of inefficient decks are slower ones, many players want slower games, because it means the decks they enjoy are more playable. It's not wanting an unfair advantage, more often it's wanting a fair game the way they see it.
    I'm not against slower games existence, I'm against describing slower games as objectively better thing and especially as "that means it's interesting and both players had their chance to win", as said the guy I initially replied to. It's not true, and you just made an example with you not liking games against Curse Warlock despite of their slower nature.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Prince Renathal games too long?
    Quote from Lethora >>
    Quote from AndreiLux >>
    Quote from Baba_Jagga >>

    Thats good thing. if games are long, that means they are interesting and both players had their chance to win.

    That doesn't mean games are interesting for both players. It means that deck whose goal in a matchup was to survive long enough succeeded.
    If a game was short, it was "interesting" for a faster deck's pilot, if it was long, it was "interesting" for a slower deck's pilot.

    If aggro players start conceding when running into Renathal decks we might have a problem (actually not, I'm quite sure all control players will be happy) but aggro matchups are short-timed anyway. They just run out of steam and concede or kill you before you are able to stabilize. Those games can be fun.

    I don't have a problem with Renathal at all, RenathaI looks not that strong currently and it will continue to bait Timmies, who don't understand that more cards in their deck at the start of the game is a bad thing, to use it way more than he deserves. Right now it looks worthy only in Priest, maybe Druid and Warlock, and it looks like a Priest/Warlock class card in general, because these classes disproportionally benefit from starting health increase.
    I'm just saying that for the most players winning is fun, so if they tend to win in long games, they like long games, think long games are fun and vice versa.
    I doubt that all control players will be happy if aggro somehow disappear and combo will be able to consistently survive long enough to kill them.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.