• 1

    posted a message on Netdecking in Casual
    Quote from DSchu102285 >>

    I think the biggest failure of Hearthstone is the amount of cards that just aren't ever played because they can't compete with an efficient cutthroat netdecks. It would be nice to have a game mode that doesn't allow netdecks and people who want to build their own decks can have some fun playing their "homebrew" decks.

    If you don't want to create your own homebrew deck then you could just stick to playing casual with your netdeck.

    And if you have a homebrew deck you could have the option to play ranked, casual or homebrew mode 

     

     

    Played Yu-Gi-Oh for many many years, some of which was competitive. Most Yu-Gi-Oh cards were also comparatively unplayable, it isn't just a HS thing. I'm sure Magic also shares at least some similarities as well.

    The thing is you can NEVER have a game mode without net decks while still also allowing players to construct their own decks (IE not an arena or predetermined TB mode). You could create a new mode that banned the top 100 most consistent/powerful cards across all classes & neutrals and you would still have lists popping up eventually for the most consistent decks for aggro, tempo, midrange, control, combo, & otk. It would just be on a watered down scale. Net decks exist because information sharing is something that you can't prevent (and honestly shouldn't want to if you want a community) and because the game allows player choice. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on How will Blizzard nerf Warriror?
    Quote from BlueberryQ >>

    Dr. Boom is the problem, in my opinion, as with all "infinite value" cards in HS.

    Interestingly enough, infinite value cards actually prevent 'do nothing' stall fatigue control decks from dominating other control mirror matches, which Odd/Control Warrior was/is also one of those stall and mindlessly play nothing but removal, hero power, emote, and pass.

    Infinite value prevents 100% reactive slogfests from taking over the meta more than what they otherwise could do right now.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 6

    posted a message on Rise of Shadows Developer Q&A - All Answers

    Removing the mech tag would completely fix everything tbh.

    No extra discovers from project (greatly reducing the value in the spell in standard) and no rush via Boom.

    Posted in: News
  • 1

    posted a message on Rise of Shadows Developer Q&A - All Answers

    I also think their response about class identity/strengths & weaknesses is silly.

    Got to make sure rogue is always weak to wide boards and almost every competitive deck the class creates is nerfed hard.

    Meanwhile you have warrior, priest, and mage that have chronic schizophrenia with all of the competitive decks that they have been allowed to make that completely overhauled their initial vanilla HS class designs (warrior turning from slow control to hyper aggressive via PW, to midrange via Dragon Warrior/Rush Warrior, to omegalul fatigue grinders via Dr. Boom control warrior; mage going from a tempo class/freeze mage combo deck with limited healing to one of the best self-healing classses via the now old DK Jaina, then you have priest that started as an awkward no win condition control (?) class that really was just a transparent IF Priest deck without Shadow Visions, transform into midrange Dragon Priest, into combo Razakus Priest, into Gallery OTK priest, into MB Priest, into N'Zoth control priest, into Steal Priest, etc).

    But sure, let's pretend we're all about making all classes limited as to what they can do and not give some classes (like rogue) no board clears, class healing (outside of Kingsbane/Tesspionage), or attrition-based control cards). I'm sure warriors, priests, and mages won't get to to branch out in their class design even more as the year moves forward ;) 

    Posted in: News
  • 2

    posted a message on Rise of Shadows Developer Q&A - All Answers

    So will Mecha'Thun become an unplayable archtype as a result of DH Warlock if Bloodbloom gets nerfed?

    Nerfing druid ramp just to give druid ramp later is odd to me. Why not just keep the old ramp cards as they used to be without having to almost duplicate similar cards just with different art?

    Posted in: News
  • 1

    posted a message on Why are people defending Token Druid?
    Quote from GibreelFury >>
    Quote from TheFubar >>
    Quote from DMH_Meta >>

    the issue is there aint enough aoe in standard. believe it or not but the loss of defile dragon fury volcano etc left warrior being the only class of achieveing some control over aggro. token druid aint the issue

     Neutral-Doomsayer, Wild Pyromancer, Abomination, Dragonmaw Scorcher, Mossy Horror, Missile Launcher, Baron Geddon, Tunnel Blaster, Batterhead

    Druid- Swipe, Stafall

    Hunter- Explosive Trap, Unleash the Hounds

    Mage- Shooting Star, Arcane Explosion, Cone of Cold, Blast Wave, Blizzard, Flamestrike

    Paladin- Consecration, Equality, Shrink Ray, Avenging Wrath

    Priest- Circle of Healing, Mass Dispel, Holy Nova, Mass Hysteria

    Rogue- Fan of Knives, Vanish

    Shaman- Beakered Lightning, Lightning Storm, Hagatha's Scheme, Hagatha the Witch

    Warlock- Shriek, Hellfire, Shadowflame, Lord Godfrey, Twisting Nether

    There is plenty of AOE available.  Token druid is fine IMO.  Aggro decks need to exist and I don't see a reason why this particular one deserves a nerf currently.  It's existence isn't eliminating entire archetypes from the meta and even as a top deck it's win rate against the other top decks isn't out of line.  Like any strong deck, it will continue to punish unrefined lists and force other decks to adapt.

     You know that the problem of that archetype is the existence of soul of the forest and Savage roar, right? And I guess you also know that the problem when you're playing against this deck is that you keep on spending your whole turns merely postponing their win condition without ever having a shot at putting in place one of your own, do you?

    Sounds a lot like some control match-ups to be honest. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on How will Blizzard nerf Warriror?

    No idea where this assumption that warrior is going to definitely be nerfed is coming from. A class being popular and on top doesn't mean it will be nerfed. We've had classes and decks be on top in other metas without being nerfed before. Something needs to be on top.

    As for the cards you mentioned;

    • Elysiana is not just a warrior card. It isn't going to be nerfed simply because players like control games, but don't like long games (lul). Jade Idol was much more powerful than this card and it was never directly nerfed.
    • Boom. Very rng hero power (some of which are useless, such as the deal one damage to everything. Plus, when first playing it it is almost a 7 mana do nothing card. Now look at the immediate swing of Gul'Dan & the consistent dependable free removal hero power it gave. Gul'Dan was never touched at all and you think Boom will?
    • Other midrangey 5 drops like Blackwing Corruptor and Drakonoid Operative had superior stats and either did something similar (with less rng) or had superior effects & were never nerfed. Why would Dyn-o-Matic be nerfed?
    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Why are people defending Token Druid?
    Quote from Eddan >>
    Quote from Eddan >>
    Quote from Rkaah >>

    You can't have all classes be relevant like "paper, rock, scissors" at this point. The amount of cards, combos, and tech make it super hard.
    I don't think you've done any dev work in your life because it's simple to see and know that balancing a game at this scale isn't as simple as you are trying to make it out to be.

    I realize you don't like playing against this deck, but it isn't even the highest win rate atm. Believe it or not, the meta is pretty healthy. We have three classes in tier 1, 5 classes in tier 2 up, and 7 in tier 3 up. That isn't bad at all. Each deck also has unique play now that Odd and Even are rotated. It's a good time to play, enjoy the games man.

     Why can't people see this on a grander scale then "I don't like the deck, i want it to burn", That was not the meaning behind the thread. This thread was made to question the deck, what its capable of and if it's good for the game. Is the amount of damage the deck can do in one turn with a low amount of cards reasonable or not? Is one of the biggest questions i want a discussion about. So many people misunderstand this.  I don't care if the deck is not the best, it's only important to analyze if this strategy is fair or not as things are right now. Could you imagine if something like this is not kept in cheek for the future? It would hurt the game. I hope you understand what i'm after a little bit better now.

    Ever consider that the deck, oh idk, keeps really oppressive control decks from dominating the meta in a world lacking Token Druid?

    You guys never learn. 

    Back during Jade Druid days you wanted Jade Druid nerfed because it was too oppressive. Well, then when it was nerfed you got Razakus Priest and realized that by axing the old top dog you got a new one. So what did you do? Complain about that, just to get Tempo Rogue. So you guys complained about that, not realizing that every time you complained about a deck you didn't like you just got another powerhouse deck. There is potential for the same to happen with super greedy decks if consistent aggressive decks don't exist in the meta.

    Also, determining if a deck's strategy is fair or not when standard is at its smallest possible card pool size is a pretty bad goal. You can't really determine if a deck is too powerful or not when whole classes are gimped because they lost out on the first expansion of the new year. You wouldn't get an accurate picture.

     I do know about this, but one must ask "At what cost?"

    So what if Token Druid got nerfed, could not other aggro decks possibly do the same? Like Murloc Shaman and Zoo? Or maybe an whole new deck comes around and helps keeping oppressive control decks in cheek?

    Or imagine this other scenario:

    Nothing happens to Token Druid. Druid get's more cards that pushes it towards Token as the best way to play the class, other classes gets no reliable removal or minions to help combat decks similar to this (Weak Taunt minions, weaker minions etc). The deck kills you faster, it's win rate increases and makes other decks unviable because of how popular it has become. So you become forced to play the deck yourself or play a so called counter to the deck if you wanna win. Would that be a fun and balanced game? But what if this could be prevented, what if we could highlight the dangers of the deck before this happens? Wouldn't that be great?

    Witch one of these scenarios would be the best for the game and it's player base?

     

    Regardless of whether or not Token Druid even existed you would STILL be required to play one of the top decks in the meta, or their counters. This will never change. Please get these subjective fun arguments out of here.

    See, the thing is that you and nobody else on here can really argue what is best for the players. I could easily ask you who you are trying to balance the game for. Control players? Ranked players? Casual? What about aggro players, midrange, combo, or OTK players? Just because some people don't like Token Druid or aggro in general that doesn't mean you represent a majority and, in fact, you have no objectives means of establishing evidence the majority of players are actually fine with the archtype. Personal taste for the game matters very little in the grand scheme of things. Sometimes slow decks win and are on top while other times they're bottom-feeding scum.

    Anyway, I digress. Token Druid will get better, but it is naive to think that not a single new AoE will be introduce in the next expansion, which means slower decks will increase in effectiveness. What is annoying is this incessant persistence from control players that think their playstyle must always be on top and whenever they lose to ANYTHING (be it token-based aggro, be it OTKs, be it even value decks that run more greed & value than them) it must always be addressed as a problem in their eyes. 

    Get over yourself. You aren't owed nerfs because you lose to something, or because you have to play an overdone popular deck to beat something else. I will be forever maddened by this idea (which players still haven't learned after all of these years). 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Why are people defending Token Druid?
    Quote from Eddan >>
    Quote from Rkaah >>

    You can't have all classes be relevant like "paper, rock, scissors" at this point. The amount of cards, combos, and tech make it super hard.
    I don't think you've done any dev work in your life because it's simple to see and know that balancing a game at this scale isn't as simple as you are trying to make it out to be.

    I realize you don't like playing against this deck, but it isn't even the highest win rate atm. Believe it or not, the meta is pretty healthy. We have three classes in tier 1, 5 classes in tier 2 up, and 7 in tier 3 up. That isn't bad at all. Each deck also has unique play now that Odd and Even are rotated. It's a good time to play, enjoy the games man.

     Why can't people see this on a grander scale then "I don't like the deck, i want it to burn", That was not the meaning behind the thread. This thread was made to question the deck, what its capable of and if it's good for the game. Is the amount of damage the deck can do in one turn with a low amount of cards reasonable or not? Is one of the biggest questions i want a discussion about. So many people misunderstand this.  I don't care if the deck is not the best, it's only important to analyze if this strategy is fair or not as things are right now. Could you imagine if something like this is not kept in cheek for the future? It would hurt the game. I hope you understand what i'm after a little bit better now.

    Ever consider that the deck, oh idk, keeps really oppressive control decks from dominating the meta in a world lacking Token Druid?

    You guys never learn. 

    Back during Jade Druid days you wanted Jade Druid nerfed because it was too oppressive. Well, then when it was nerfed you got Razakus Priest and realized that by axing the old top dog you got a new one. So what did you do? Complain about that, just to get Tempo Rogue. So you guys complained about that, not realizing that every time you complained about a deck you didn't like you just got another powerhouse deck. There is potential for the same to happen with super greedy decks if consistent aggressive decks don't exist in the meta.

    Also, determining if a deck's strategy is fair or not when standard is at its smallest possible card pool size is a pretty bad goal. You can't really determine if a deck is too powerful or not when whole classes are gimped because they lost out on the first expansion of the new year. You wouldn't get an accurate picture.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Why are people defending Token Druid?

    Aggro is meant to be a valid playstyle competitively. Token druid swarms the board easily because aggro swarms the board according to its own playstyle.

    Not every class is supposed to have a powerful answer to everything. (Rogues didn't exactly have an answer to wide demon taunt walls produced by Gul'Dan when the dk was in standard, yet you never saw any control locks complain about their lack of answer). 

    Control is not meant to be the only powerful playstyle.

    Sorry.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Netdecking in Casual
    Quote from Kaladin >>

    This debate pretty much comes down to one batch of the playerbase wanting to dictate what the others can play in 'their mode'. 

    Games should not be about allowing one group of people forcing another group of people how to play. 

    You may not be able to force others not to use certain decks, but that in nowise disallows you from playing what you want.

     It's like if you played rec level sports, and you and some buddies got together for a drop in game at the local venue where other players could drop in and play, and then a full team of professionals showed up and completely dominated everyone, and said, "Why are you complaining?  It's just for fun, who cares?"  Technically there's no rule they'd be violating....but it's a dick move.  

    This isn't an argument about what is or isn't in the current set of rules.  Clearly there are people who play Hearthstone that don't like queueing into high level competitive decks in a non competitive format.  Personally I like to play casual just so I can try out my far fetched ideas and play cards that don't otherwise see play.  To suggest that I just concede until I stop queueing into netdecks or just accept my loss and move on because "it's Casual, your losses don't matter" is to ask me to take zero enjoyment from playing and winning.  I'm not playing Casual to grind out 100 gold.  I'm playing it for the enjoyment.  There is no fun to be had from losing/conceding in 80 to 95% of my games.  No, my opinion isn't the only one that matters...but neither is my opinion completely meaningless.  Clearly there are players that want to have a mode that is free from high level competitive decks. 

    If they're not going to be working on a new mode (spoiler: they're not), they should at least be working on improving their existing modes.  Or....not, and leaving a section of their playerbase completely ignored. 

    I'm going to be real with you. What you want it impossible to do at the level you're insisting on. I'll slap together a quick example to show how you're wrong.

    Say I put the ten best cards of [insert playstyle here] on the chopping block. Done, you can't use those in any deck of this impossible mode you want. Yay, miracles and rainbows we can fun the fun out of our fun again! Okay, random Snidely Whiplash queues up their evil aggro net deck and mops the floor with you. *Boo!* "Face can't go face!" *Cue ban hammer on top ten worst aggro card offenders. *Aggro player shrugs and puts together quick zoo lock because low curves with quick life tap cycling is still faster than your [insert random N'Zoth Tiger Druid or Murloc Warrior here].* *Cue ban hammer again on top 10 net deck cards from every playstyle until you've whittled down to Boulderfist Ogres and 2/1 Murlocs.

    Mr. Random Snidely Whiplash still puts together an evil net deck, of sorts, in Clown Fiesta Homebrew Town, and mops the floor with you because hey, 1/2/3 mana minions are still faster than Boulderfist Ogre.

    /cuehappyneverafter

    Okay, so I took this more from of the POV of aggro vs control, but the reality still stands. You ban something from casual and players will still find the most optimized versions of aggro/midrange/control/combo that they can in such a mode and use that instead. You ban more stuff and they'll try to find new optimizations (aka "net decks"). Most casual homebrews are not optimizations of any of the playstyles, which means whatever weird net deck optimization other players can piece together will net more consistency at what they do for whichever playstyle they play when compared to a casual funsies homebrew that does not value as much comparative consistency.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Is Divine Spirit a problem?

    Transparent OTK hate is transparent. I actually played before Shadow Visions & IF priest was never a consistent OTK deck prior to Shadow Visions. See any IF priests anywhere in the meta now that rotations have happened?

    There are some obvious reasons for that (the most important being  that an IF priest deck that has only 2 Divine Spirits requires a deck full of almost nothing but cycling and decks like that without busted survival & removal on top of that just don't work on a competitive basis).

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Least fun I've ever had in HS
    Quote from mo_0x >>

    I honestly feel like there should be a seperate mode where non netdeck decks are the only decks playable

    The only problem with that is even with such a system eventually people wanting to be competitive in that mode would optimize lists made from the cards that would be playable, thus recreating net decks (just ones that are limited to a smaller card power of less powerful cards). Even with a rotating ban type of system there would still be net decks in between the old and new ban waves. It honestly is something you cannot avoid.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Is Kalecgos worth it?

    In wild Kalecgos has skyrocketed in usefulness for me personally. Kalecgos into a 10 mana potion during long games that lets you cast another 10 mana potion next turn if your opponent doesn't remove it. Or Kalecgos into FS and something next turn.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Pre-nerf Knife Juggler, had it not existed before, could have been released as a legendary in ROS.

    Mmmm, maybe an epic but I still don't think a legendary. While super powerful if it were only a one-of, meaning your draw/curve consistency into it would be lower than it wouldn't have been nearly as oppressive.

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