Hearthpwn

Not even a question, the answer is Zoo.

No other deck got wrecked as hard as zoo by patron (standard zoo, not demon lock).

Zoo is amazing against secret paladin

Zoo is strong against Druid, hunter and tempo mage

It's worst matchups in the current meta are probably CW and dragon priest, but even those are 50/50 matchups

Easier, meta has been super stagnant 

Morons working at blizzard as usual. 

I dont play the deck at all, it was balanced. If they wanted to nerf a card they should have nerfed emperor. That card limits design space for any combo card that is introduced in the future and will get nerfed at some point 

Quote from jaximus123 >>

It's sad to see one of my favourite decks - Control Warrior made obsolete because of this midrange meta.. and please to anyone don't give me the crap that Control Warrior still "works" or is "in a good spot" in this meta when you only won some games at rank 15 against some gimmicky crap.

Huh? Already made legend this season playing CW exclusively. It absolutely wrecks midrange paladin, I went 28-4 versus pally from 10-legend just last week. 

As others have mentioned, the list has no early game at all. Armor smiths, taskmasters and acolytes are all a must in CW imo. I've been wrecking secret pally all day long this season with CW. 

Quote from Asylum_Rhapsody jump

Quote from asteroidm jump

Out of curiosity Asylum what do you feel is the "bigger fish"?  Personally I think it's their card draw.  If and when I can deny their card draw I win against patron every time.  It's the single best way to defeat patron in my opinion.  And like Miracle before it, draw is the reason why the deck is so powerful. 

Honestly? I think the biggest problem is Emperor Thaurissan. Patron Warrior isn't something that needs to go away entirely because big combos can be cool and fun and good for the game, but it's Emperor that sends it over the top imo. People often ignore this because Emperor isn't literally the thing smashing them in the face when they die, but if nothing is done about Emperor then we're going to keep seeing big combo decks just like Patron Warrior continue to pop us as problematic.

Alternatively if you really only care about the things directly smashing you in the face though, Grim Patron itself could use a Health nerf. The most annoying thing about Grim Patron is that once the opponent has a ton of them out there's almost nothing you can do about it because everything that doesn't kill them outright is only going to exacerbate the problem. Bringing Patron down to 2 health brings it into the range of the standard class AoE spells, which I think would do a lot to help.

Don't target poor Warsong Commander and Frothing Berserker though. Those cards are not to blame just because they finally found a deck they're not terrible in.

Pretty much this, making any other nerf would be asinine. Emperor will continue to be a problem in other decks and will limit future combo design. 

if rogue wasnt  class, sure

Quote from LordPikachuStarscream jump

Shredder pulling from the deck seems stronger tbh. As a Hunter you can pull Mad Scientist from your shredder, and then a secret from that. 

This, shredder x2 would be in every deck forever

Quote from arrumph jump

The OP won ten straight games purely on the strength of his incomparable skill, and then lost five purely due to incredibly lucky RNG by his opponent. He must be really good at this game, huh? Shoulda won fifteen straight!

pretty much this, also stopped reading when he wrote that he never played Piloted Shredder

so... 10 card combo?

Let me draw my entire deck and play 8+ cards in a single turn and I will win with any deck

Nothing in HS is hard to play.

Every good deck has a win condition, or multiple win conditions, that it tries to draw and execute. There are some matchups that are difficult because the opposing hero/deck has multiple ways of removing/restricting your win condition, but that happens with all decks: aggro, midrange, control and combo. 

HS is a game of playing around matchups; the better you can play around the matchups, the more you will win. It has nothing to do with one archtype being 'easier' or 'harder' than the others. 

Quote from iandakar jump

Quote from GourmontHS jump

Alright, so, to sum up :

- Constructed ask to play around a lot more cards

- But also to consider your win condition and try to reach them

- Hence, playing on curve is far less important than it is in Arena

It seems that I have a lot of work in front of me, thank you very much !

Ak no nonono.  Playing on curve is also vitally important. It's just that your deck should naturally do that.  Remember that it's constructed: you are free to change your deck at will. Thus if you aren't getting your curve regularly, you just change your deck to make the curve work.  

What changes is what cards you add in.  Instead of just adding minions that help with tempo, trading well, giving you better advantage, your cards are working together to fit your goal.  In control warrior, you don't add in strong low mana creatures because you want removal, heal (armor), and card draw.  Thus Acolyte of pain, shieldmaiden, and armorsmith, but no 1 drops, no strong trading minions early on and the like. Early game, armor with armorsmith, cards with acolyte, removal with..everything else early game.  All to support the late game.

It's that sort of thing.

Think the off-curve comment came from my post. I didn't mean to not play the curve, but playing the curve is very different in constructed and in arena. Often times in arena you are simply playing the best minion you have in your hand, taking favorable trades and going face with the rest. In constructed however you often end up playing off curve to play around something your opponent has in hand / on board or to achieve your win condition. Also, a lot of cards that are played in constructed are not 'on curve drop' kind of cards in most situations whereas in arena, they are. 

Quote from Sinti jump

Quote from BeerLeague jump

someone already touched on it a little bit, but arena is far easier to play around and typically takes only a few possible cards into account. Usually you assume that people will play on curve their biggest creature, trade with you, or possibly use some removal. 

With constructed, you generally have to think about how your opponent can punish you for the play that you will make and consider your options. That means you must figure out what deck your opponent is playing as quickly as possible in the match in order to predict the cards that he/she will play or has in hand. Part of this is deck building as well, but if you are using proven decks that shouldn't be so much of an issue. 

In addition, optimal plays in constructed are not quite as clear as they are in arena due to the curve of decks and the much larger amount of spells to work with. Often times in constructed you will find that the optimal play is not staying on curve if you have other options in your hand. 

hahaha this made me laugh like nothing in a long time ... thanks man :-*

Okay, not sure why it's funny, but happy to help. 

someone already touched on it a little bit, but arena is far easier to play around and typically takes only a few possible cards into account. Usually you assume that people will play on curve their biggest creature, trade with you, or possibly use some removal. 

With constructed, you generally have to think about how your opponent can punish you for the play that you will make and consider your options. That means you must figure out what deck your opponent is playing as quickly as possible in the match in order to predict the cards that he/she will play or has in hand. Part of this is deck building as well, but if you are using proven decks that shouldn't be so much of an issue. 

In addition, optimal plays in constructed are not quite as clear as they are in arena due to the curve of decks and the much larger amount of spells to work with. Often times in constructed you will find that the optimal play is not staying on curve if you have other options in your hand. 

Quote from Grimaldus jump

Obviously there are cards like Healing Wave where the Jousts are not quite as important, but for cards like Master Jouster, the Joust is kinda important (though a 5/6 for 6 isn't that bad). I've tried desperately to get the guy to work, with my most success coming in a Dragon Warrior, but it still just doesn't seem like it's enough. It's infuriating to lose tied jousts, which seem to happen to me more than wins or losses.

Maybe Joust is just a poorly implemented mechanic. Thoughts?

IMO the conditionals needed to be not quite as harsh as they are. As they stand currently the only playable one is the hunter one as the drawback doesn't lose you games, it can only help you win them. Master Jouster, the paladin heal card and healing wave are boarderline playable, but the problem comes in when you have those cards in your deck to help stop the bleeding versus aggro / midrange. When you lose jousts in those situations you flat out lose the game.

The cards just needed to be slightly better in order to make them playable.

For master jouster that could have simply been giving him taunt naturally with the divine shield coming only after a successful joust. For the paladin one, probably recosting it to 6 mana, allowing it to naturally heal 4 and 8 when the joust is won would be balanced and playable.

The problem with joust, and the reason why I hate this mechanic, is that for it to be viable the cards either need balanced in either losing or winning the joust, as I mentioned above, or terrible when they lose the joust and OP as hell when they win. I am actually worried that Blizzard will take this in the later direction.