1
You could bring even warlock, and take one sideboard with c'thun and one sideboard with X2 voidlord X2 cube and umbra or skull. In general i can see some decks trying this odd into non odd sideboards for specific matchups, maybe with warrior you could switch to chtun gunship? Idk
You can't take cube and voidlords for even warlock. How can this EVEN be a good idea?
13
Ha! "We're pissed off Blizzard! We demand Tournaments!"
"Sure, here ya go"
"Bastards! That's not what we asked for! You've ruined EVERYTHING!"
At least there's *some* movement towards it. For fucks sake.. .
3
Yep magic has 15 card sideboard for a deck of 60 cards when most of the time said deck is like 37 cards cause the rest are lands there for the sideboard is like 33 to 40% of ur deck. There is enough room to swing the deck chances of beating ur opponent. 5 cards for a 30 card deck does nothing except push a more polarized deck choice.
3
I'm inclined to agree, at least for the most part.
What will most definitely happen is that there will be a lot less diversity of decks because you simply can't bring any deck that has auto-lose matchups. For instance quest rogue or mecha'thun lock in the current meta.
I think it's an interesting idea (although not at all original) to articficially allow for a sideboard, however I'm not so sure that the current system can support this in a way where it will make for interesting tournaments.
3
Well, considering the way meta works we might probably be seeing always the same deck/class most of the time.
"Pocket picks" will not be a thing, you ill just bring the deck that is most solid all-around.
Also the way polarization is broken across the roof this format feels like it will not represent accurately what the best players are.
It's much easier to have a high variation of results when polarization comes into play. They'd have to start heavily designing sets to make use of the 'sideboard' for every class for this to work.
1
Hope that helps mate. I play on Asia too and haven't noticed problems. I'm in the UK on home broadband.root@un64u:/mnt/hdd# traceroute -n 182.162.132.1
traceroute to 182.162.132.1 (182.162.132.1), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
<removed>
7 84.116.136.98 23.180 ms 84.116.135.50 17.506 ms 20.875 ms
8 129.250.66.101 21.532 ms 17.522 ms 21.800 ms
9 129.250.4.125 23.780 ms 24.074 ms 25.943 ms
10 129.250.2.18 114.596 ms 108.080 ms 108.098 ms
11 129.250.3.207 104.093 ms 105.511 ms 110.394 ms
12 129.250.2.149 107.881 ms 101.569 ms 106.823 ms
13 129.250.3.189 176.113 ms 166.810 ms 172.823 ms
14 129.250.6.49 169.551 ms 171.004 ms 174.508 ms
15 129.250.2.214 183.665 ms 182.407 ms 176.003 ms
16 168.143.229.202 170.698 ms 176.663 ms 176.813 ms
17 211.118.180.149 159.702 ms 211.118.180.169 162.397 ms 1.213.145.25 163.231 ms
18 1.208.104.89 280.701 ms 287.661 ms 1.208.146.17 309.033 ms
19 211.53.88.178 291.754 ms 1.208.145.154 286.461 ms 1.208.175.94 276.133 ms
20 1.208.145.25 747.218 ms 1.213.151.109 295.018 ms 1.208.145.53 298.261 ms
21 203.233.117.210 298.069 ms 1.213.150.6 298.001 ms 203.233.117.186 294.978 ms
22 211.174.48.62 308.103 ms 110.45.128.74 287.197 ms 110.45.128.78 299.049 ms
23 182.162.152.238 303.611 ms 182.162.152.162 301.182 ms 182.162.152.226 309.063 ms
24 * * *
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *
1
So, you "contacted" blizz through chat and couldn't resolve?
what did they tell you?
Have you contacted your ISP?
Have you tried to replace something on your equipment? (cable, router, etc)
Are you using wifi, or cable connection?
This is the type of information we need to know
1
Quote from LessThan3IF Tracking's text was something like "Pick three cards from your deck....." as iandakar elaborated, then Tracking would be a no-brainer. But because it's the top three, the value of the card is essentially "does one card now at the expense of two others provide me with more value than all three cards over the subsequent three turns" - and that is purely situational.
1
Honestly, for the whole of Hearthstone, you have to look at Tracking from the perspective of what this game has in terms of the 'graveyard'/'discard'. Hearthstone has next to nothing in terms of graveyard interaction, and most of it requires the minion that was played to die first, with very little for the other things.
If Hearthstone had more graveyard/discard interaction like Yu-Gi-Oh, MTG, or Pokemon, then Tracking would be one of the most busted cards in this game, an odd combination of MTG's Brainstorm and Faithless Looting, or the ability of recent MTG card, Underrealm Lich (a 5 mana 4/3 that replaces every draw you would perform with tracking, look at your top 3 and choose 1, discard the other two).
With basically no real graveyard, Tracking becomes a good card for an aggressive deck, allowing you to dig through your deck for the card you need in a situation, or maybe in a combo deck with only a few pieces, making them easier to get (unless you get really unlucky).
I personally think that Hunter should not ever play Tracking though, there are better cards that draw or add cards for most of the Hunter decks, ranging from various deathrattle minions to cards like Master's Call, Secret Plan, and Quick Shot (though this one is Wild only), all of them conditional, but still better than Tracking in my opinion.
Overall, Tracking sucks, OP isn't wrong, and this thread exploded in three days, hot damn.
1
So is it fair to say that what we are theoretically heading towards here is "something" along the lines of:
The usefulness and overall power of Tracking as a card is based more on the prevalent meta (for the class) and dominance of either early or late-game based deck strategies than most other factors and hence (depending on the meta state) it can be viewed equally as a good and bad tech choice depending on those said meta circumstances?
Because I could kind of get behind that, I think.
Actually I would go more of the deck rather than the meta. For example, Beast Hunter will LOVE to use Tracking every time as they live and die by the tempo.
The usefulness and overall power of Tracking as a card is based more on the goals and driving force behind your deck and archetype focused around the dominance of either early or late-game based strategies your deck contains than most other factors and hence (depending on the deck) it can be viewed equally as a good and bad tech choice depending on those said circumstances.
You know, like any actually HEALTHY card that isn't utterly worthless or so OP it's an autoinclude. An honest look at tracking isn't a matter of "Is this good enough." It's about "is this a card I need for my strategy?" Meta calls matter indirectly only because the meta SHOULD determine your deck and strategy, then your strategy and deck determine the use of Tracking.
This is actually the state that most of our cards should be at. You should not want to put most cards into every deck or use it only because you want to be edgey or meme. You're supposed to have a goal then look for cards that fit that goal. If that goal makes Tracking appealing then yes, it's a great card to use. If not then you have no need for Tracking.
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
1
Is this card ever going to get any play?
I've had the "luck" of unpacking it FOUR times across three regions (one golden thank god). I just spent two weeks grinding away for the last of my Boomsday packs (I was at ~25 packs since legendary and it took like 38 packs to hit) and got ^&%$ Morrigan. I'm glad I won't be opening any more Boomsday packs, but just seeing that card in my card list makes me want to vomit in my mouth.
Is there ANY chance this junk card is going to get any play in the next 12 months? Is there a history of seemingly horrible legendaries getting play in later rotations? Even getting 400 dust for this thing just feels dirty.
1
Well at least ONE person got it......
1
For me it's not what they're giving out, it's how they're managing it. Free packs are great, even if it's one. But it was supposedly a big event to promote the game and get people hyped - and there's zero communication. Just seems pretty amateurish when you're running a multimillion (billion?) dollar company.
2
Ugh! Should never run Hellfire in your Zoolock deck.
It does depend on a number of factors - your deck (could you paste the decklist?) and as the others say, the archetype you're up against. I'm 6-1 vs Maly Druid but only 2-4 vs Taunt Druid. The problem with Taunt Druid is once they get Oakheart out.
General strategy though is to get the best value for money on the board. Mulligan for Flame Imp for example. Fungalmancer is key in this match up as it's the best way of making your minions big and keeping the board somewhat narrow. If you have enough attack on board, it doesn't matter so much how wide you go. You essentially just want to be bashing face as much as possible, and taking a few high value trades to maximise your board presence.
1
Bah to the Pepper Thread.......this place needs more positive threads.
Great work dude - don't suppose you offer Arena training? :D :D
1
They did state a week after the completion of the event - but no doubt that's now residing in the universe of deleted tweets and other deniable material....
1
Well I suck at the game itself, so I may as well get something out of it. Love my spreadsheets :D
1
No, I'd say the wording is perfect :D
1
I've got Secret Hunter and I love it. Especially when I have a Bomb Toss in there and convince my opp I'm Mech Hunter :D
I think the deck is a lot of fun, and I had a really strong run with it (I was 70% WR after 40 matches up to rank 11) but then hit a mysterious wall of 7 losses in a row. The matchmaking seemed to change and I came up against a lot of really expensive decks.
I myself am considering crafting Odd Rogue, but I just *hate* the idea of playing Baku. I die a little inside every time I heard "NONE WILL SURVIVE"
2
Maybe you should stop dusting him? You'd have Deathwing if you didn't :D