• 0

    posted a message on Group therapy! Need to blow off steam? Mega salty? Here is the place! V2
    Quote from BillyBoomhauser >>

    Questlock aside, Mage is really toxic in Wild at the moment. Was all over a Mage as an Odd Hunter and one turn away from killing him whilst I was at full health, before he played all his cards from hand and OTK'd me. His animations made his turn last forever whilst I just sat there and slowly died.

    Fun and interactive. Well done Blizzard. 

    I think I'll sit this season out. Like a previous poster mentioned, even winning makes me feel salty. I'm sick of this hyper-aggro rubbish.

     

     You play the most generic hyper aggro garbage deck in odd dh and you're sick of the hyper-aggro rubbish? Did you fall off a chair and hit your head when you were a young lad or what?

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on The massive Ignite issue in Standard
    Quote from SLima >>
    Quote from FortyDust >>
    Quote from lv426a11 >>

     

    p.s. *off-topic*  tell me again why renew and apotheosis got nerfed???

     Renew was too much value for one low price, and allowing it to be generated by Wandmaker made it way, way too good. Releasing it at a Cost of 1 was just plain wrong.

    Apotheosis was nerfed because of its interaction with Samuro, no other reason.

    I assume you are wandering down this path because you think Quest Mage should not be allowed to outlast a fatigue-style Priest deck. The thing is, the recent versions of Quest Priest are perfectly capable of beating Mage long before fatigue, even if the Priest never finishes the quest. They just win with a lot of heals and good boards that the Mage can't deal with. This is much a much healthier win condition than dragging every game into fatigue.

     I really want to know what kind of Quest Priest you are talking about here. Sorry, but it simply seems wrong. How does Quest Priest beat a Quest Mage? Building a board is useless because the Mage just freezes the minions over and over again. You straight up help them finish their quest faster by playing minions. Healing? Like, are you serious here? Quest Mage can burn you down from 30 health easily after Arcanist Dawngrasp is played. Healing is completely worthless against them. So, i want to know about this magical quest priest list that somehow beats Mage. It doesn't sound realistic at all. 

     Quest priest has the exact same winrate quest mage has (47%), and this is according to internal blizzard data, not "my incredibly relevant personal experience on ladder" (https://twitter.com/sky_tding/status/1435452830748344320/photo/1) . As to how, it's not particularly difficult, if a priest lands robes of protection and/or the 4/6 watchpost what do you think a mage can do exactly? In no way shape or form is it a good matchup but priests hardly roll over. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on HUGE nerfs and buffs coming soon!!!!
    Quote from JawsLoanCompany >>

    C'mon folks! Where's your sense of humor?

     Sense of humour? For a shitpost that isn't particularly inventive or original? No offence but it'll take more effort than that, posts like these are a dime a dozen on plenty of other websites.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Games must be over by turns 7 to 9

    And your "News" is garbage.

    Everyone knows already that Cheatstone can´t play more than 5-7 Turns....

     The average turn in which the game ends is...turn 8. Just like *drumroll* last expansion. Amazing.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on The problem with the game has and is mana cheat and draw
    Quote from Anarchy1 >>

    Power creep keeps the game fresh. Otherwise we would still play yeti on 4. 

     Well this is the other problem, that people legit think incorrect nostalgia-driven thoughts like playing yeti on 4 being a good play even when they're shown with classic hs that it never was the case. The only class that plays yeti is druid and they most certainly don't do so to curve it out on turn 4, I'll tell you that for a fact.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Is inevitability a good thing?
    Quote from 3nnu1 >>
    Quote from Scorpyon >>

    I think that "inevitability" as a general concept is a little too vague for it to have a concrete yes/no answer to whether it is a good thing. 
    In essence, what do really mean by it?
    And when we apply the concept to a specific situation, are we giving it the appropriate objectivity, or is it tempered with the subjectivity of our opinion on it?

    To be a little less vague in my reply here, I am certain that there are times when you face a matchup which appears to have a foregone conclusion that we consider to be an inevitable outcome (assuming that is the sort of thing you are alluding to) - and let's assume for a moment, that this is indeed the case and we put aside the possibility of variance and fortune (and skill perhaps) - well then you are left with an assured outcome that might be negative for you at this moment, but the flip side of this is that there will also be times when you are the assured victor. 
    Now, objectively that might seem like this takes the fun and skill out of the game - but that's because we are looking at it from a flawed premise where we have started with that assertion and hence why we reach it.

    Long-winded answer short, I think hard inevitability is detrimental in some amount, but the nature of variance and differing outcome means that the likelihood of that sort of inevitability actually happening is pretty low overall, so shouldn't really have a heavy impact on anything.

     Bro, this game has been reduced to rock paper scissors with the outcome largely determined by turn 4. You have your head in the sand.

     

     Go watch Joseph Anderson's video on hearthstone please, you'll find it enlightening. Much like all the people who live with those cute nostalgia goggles on 24/7 when it comes to the game not having aaaaaany inevitability in the past as compared to now.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 9

    posted a message on To everyone at Blizzard

    This isn't an airport, you don't have to announce your departure.

    Especially over a low tier 3, if not a tier 4 deck. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on WTF BLIZZARD !?!
    Quote from Pr1ncipe4i20 >>

    Anyway, game is not fun anymore. Shit autopilot decks everywhere now. Sadly the game turned into this. The game already has a low score on Google play and the playerbase is full LOW IQ or Children, so, Guess is time to go way. if u could stay way from this game for more than 2 months, keep on, don't come back, the game will be worse from now on.

     If I had a € for every time I read similar statements that weren't followed up by actual actions I'd be a millionaire.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Delete all Questlines?

    I'd be annoyed, it'd be back to the shit that was barrens and that'd be so boring. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on This Deck Destroys Quest Warlocks In Wild. Finally, Hearthstone Is Fun Again.

    There's a very simple way to see whether this deck destroys questlock, which is to see if it's played in high legend on literally any server (given that high legend is 50% lock if not more than that). 

    I don't really have to point out that this deck doesn't see play at all in high legend right? It's easy for you to show that this is good though, get to high legend using it and stay there (top 100-300 should be enough for x11 on any server) with a decktracker that shows, let's say, a 70+% wr against questlocks (destroys is rather subjective, to me it'd be like 80% but let's just put it at 70 for the time being). 

    Ball's in your court, you can do it next month since ladder resets tomorrow. Cheers.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone not fun in this state

    Unless he's thinking about quest shaman in wild (which is a burn deck, albeit a slightly slower one) then I have no idea how can you possibly call the one in standard burn because what, you scared of being hit by lightning bolt in the face twice on turn 8? Quest shaman strives to control the board with almost only spells and play defensively until it reaches its endgame condition (i.e. the quest completion) at which point it will go on the offensive by creating massive swing turns. Kind of like control warrior with the alex turn before unleashing grommash. Fucking pure combo deck that was, huh.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Making some cards more interesting (standard AND wild)

    "I want to nerf these cards into oblivion or making them absurdly toxic", heartpwn edition.

    No one would ever play ignite, ever again, in the history of the game. Just say what you actually want "Ignite should be deleted", that's easier, without any nonsense "omg I'm so cute and artsy look at this funky change I made that will result in the card never being used again". It's not difficult to do mate and it's disingenuous as all hell.

    No one would ever play the warlock quest either. Because guess what, the whole point is damaging yourself the whole game in order to redirect damage to your opponent. Which is also why aggro decks are good against questlocks, because if you do the opponent's job it kind of helps them kill you. Again, just say "I don't want anyone to ever play this card ever again", stop beating around the bush so much.

    I don't even want to go into the waygate change because it'll never be implemented to begin with so it's useless to discuss. It'd either stay unplayed as it is now (which is good) or be entirely broken, which would be far from good.

    Thankfully the meta isn't slow enough (probably won't ever be again outside of idk...bronze and silver ranks) for your benedictus change to affect anyone because wow, what a horrid change that'd be. If you want to play stupid cards play them for your own sake, kindly don't force your opponent to participate in this idiotic memery.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Battleground Battlemaster Removal

    1) it's not even remotely close to auto-include in every class (unless mages somehow started playing minions or hunters decided that cards costing more than 5 were good to include in face decks, amongst the first that come to my mind)

    2) This card is usually good at keeping greedy decks in check. Whether you like that or not is another matter entirely

    3) Why does everyone have to preface everything with "I've been playing since beta, in fact I created the game in my sleep when I was 3 years old and then blizzard stole my idea"? Would your complaints have less merit if you'd started playing last March?

    4) If the card is as busted as you seem to think it is, it'll be addressed again. 5 mana was way too little to pay for it but there are plenty of decks that are either very good (quest shaman, face hunter, aggro ele shaman/ele shaman, shadow priest, anacondra druid) or very popular (d6lock, quest mage) that don't use it and never will. The only class that regularly uses this card is paladin, rather literally. One variant of questlock uses it too (IIRC it's the best one, but without recent data I can't exactly be certain) and the 3 people on ladder still using quest rogue...so I seriously don't understand being so incensed about it, if I'm honest.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Pure Control is dead and buried, nerfs wont change that

    It's always kind of fun to see people use words without really giving 2 seconds of thought about the meaning of said words. What would be consideredpure control? I'd say something that was born literally along with the game, such as "pure" zoo, "pure" miracle and what have you (idiotic definitions but hey, apparently there's a need to use them). And, pray tell, what's the pure control that was basically the only deck known as "control" back in 2014? Why yes, it was control warrior. And do you know what control warrior had? An endgame. What Iksar doesn't like (and let's be clear, the  vast majority of the playerbase doesn't like it either, that's pretty much obvious) are control decks that do absolutely nothing but remove remove remove and just wait for their opponent to get bored to death, basically. While I personally don't mind playing against those deck as they're hilariously easy to farm, I can definitely see why control decks having an actual win condition other than their opponent being sleep-deprived would be prefereable to the alternative. How many control decks in the history of hearthstone had that "just bore your opponent to death" strategy? I can recall some kinds of odd warrior (those without the quest, clearly), dr boom warrior and last expansion's control priest, of those that were either good or viable. Even old tank up warrior during LoE had an actual plan since it ran Elise. 

    But yeah, there's nothing pure about your idea of control. If anything it's a bastardised definition that you call pure just because you like it and for no other reason. In addition to that, from what I recall Iksar said they'd be fine with such a deck existing so long as it wasn't good/popular (so basically, otk dh since its inception, a tier 3/4 deck until recently). The odds of such a deck existing now are 0 with the current state of hearthstone but that doesn't mean such a deck won't exist in the future, especially if their plans of a massive lowering of the power-level will become a thing.

    But yeah, if the only archetype you like playing is the ResidentSleeper control type, you better get used to the idea of only playing tier 3 decks if you're lucky, because you're unlikely to get anything better than that. Cheers.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Why is Rockbiter Weapon a nature spell??
    Quote from parishbishop >>

    good question. Same as with the Priest Quest. Why not make it Shadow, so we can make combo Quest Priest? Weird little things like that I notice all the time. It really hampers with deck building creativity. 

     Why on earth would a quest be of any spell school whatsoever? And why would a quest based on a pure character like Xyrella be a shadow spell, of all things?

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