Hearthpwn

Quote from xNanoks >>

Your username is Malygoddd. One can only assume you played Maly Druid. Thus, you are salty about the nerfs. It is your right to condemn a company for making decisions you do not agree with, but it's another thing entirely to find yourself such an important individual to create yet another thread about these nerfs.

The best thing about the nerfs is that Control decks can have a decent run from time to time. Hunter is not oppressive, and has plenty of counters, like many before-mentioned Control decks. When I play against Hunter, I feel like I'm playing a fair game. Heck, even when I lose, I think it's a fair loss. When I played a Druid, there were many matches where I literally couldn't do anything. That's not fair. And it's infuriating. But it was the state of the game, and I accepted that. I teched what I could tech, and took my wins and losses. But it wasn't fun. To me, right now, the game is fun and fair.

There will always be polarization, always. It's the way card games work. But I can beat OTK decks with my Control decks, and Aggro decks can beat my Control decks. It's good. It remains oblivious to many that your deck shouldn't beat 100% of its opponents. Many of you are on a Hunter-hate-train right now, but we shouldn't have to remind you about other metas where it was far, and far worse.

And about DK Rexxar; yes, very powerful card. But basically, once in DK-mode, you spent your turns making Zombeasts and playing that Zombeast.

 Yes I do play maly druid and with success still, but I play many other decks. Where is the indication of salt? You talk about not being able to do anything against druids, but a lot of decks can’t deal with 12/12 on turn 5. Tell me how druid was oppressive and hunter isn’t. Against druid you died a slow death, but hunters don’t even allow you to play cards.

Quote from BoobTheNoob >>

The game is actually very balanced with Hunter being the best. Checkout HSReplay.net for stats and what to play. Almost every other class has a good option accept for Druid atm. At rotation most Hunters will weaken a lot. Probably secret Hunter will remain but without Rexxar.

As someone who took a break last year and does not own Deathstalker Rexxar I understand the salt but don't talk about balance being off just because your upset there already is a thread for that.

 There is no evidence of salt in my post. I’m not sure why people think that everything is “salty” when I’m merely stating the truth about the state of the game. Grow up.

Whenever you make a new thread you make me question how many mental problems you have.

>pretty balanced meta with all classes seeing almost equal play asides from maybe one class that has around 15-17% playrate

>”balance” changes

>hunter playrate is 30%

>druid playrate is 3%

I’ve kept an eye on the vicious syndicate playrate since they started making reports. I don’t think I can remember a time where the numbers have been so skewed, especially after balance changes.

The next time team 5 decides to destroy multiple archetypes that many people enjoy playing, maybe they should actually do some thinking. I understand some people may enjoy not facing certain decks anymore, but from a balance perspective, blizzard fucked up terribly.

I do however agree with the kingsbane nerf. Not because I don’t like the deck, but because it was a very oppressive and polarized deck. Shudderwock is not as understandable, as it was tier 3, could fail, and could be pressured by even some control decks. The druid nerfs were overkill. I believe they only needed to nerf either wild growth or nourish, not both. It was pretty obvious that hunter would be very powerful as it’s counters got nerfed and hunter itself didn’t.

When a player can’t reach legend with a good deck it is usually because they lack knowledge of the game in general. Learn what your opponents are playing and predict what they will do. Think of their possible plays and set up a game state favourable for you.

Even warlock, cubelock, odd rogue, odd warrior, odd paladin.

So because it has happened before means it’s not an issue? What type of logic is this shit?

Quote from TardisGreen >>

So OP hit a Hunter pocket meta at Rank 20?

 Not sure what you are saying... I’m hovering around 500 NA.

This clearly is not balanced. The spellstone is far too powerful and it has utterly destroyed the meta. Everything revolves around this deck and a deck has to have a pretty good winrate against hunter to be somewhat viable.

I really don’t understand why people enjoy playing this deck. It’s the same exact thing over and over again. Secret on 2 and 3, spellstone on 5, win the game.

So yeah, I feel the nerfs made the meta way way worse. I’d rather see a nourish on 5 than 12/12 spread across 4 bodies, as well as annoying secrets that protect them.

Druid and shudderwock have one thing in common: They have been around for a long time. Druid before the nerfs was not broken, as it only had one tier 1 deck being taunt druid, and then maly and mecha / tog being in tier 2. The class doesn’t have the highest winrate either. Shudderwock has pretty consistently been a tier 3 deck, and it left me wondering why it was nerfed.

If you look at Exodia Paladin, you can see the winrates are much higher and that this deck is clearly stronger than shudderwock was before the nerf. So why not nerf Exodia Paladin? Because it’s a new fresh deck? It’s a faster shudderwock with a more reliable win condition, so I’m not sure why this is any less annoying than shudderwock.

Every card nerfed is either rotating out or in classic. They’ve been in standard for a long time. The community gets tired of these cards, complains, and ultimately blizzard gives in and nerfs them. So the problem is clearly not the cards themselves as there are plenty of these combo decks that succeed more than shudderwock did, but rather how long these cards are in standard. Everyone is tired of growth into nourish tyrant. Everyone is tired of the almost inevitable shudder death with the terrible animations.

So assuming exodia paladin had another year in standard, everyone would most likely hate it due to seeing it so much (if it stayed somewhat relevant in the meta). It would get nerfed and people would say that it’s good that these cancer players get punished. But right now, no one cares because this deck is new and no one is tired of it.

So pretty much anyone who enjoyed kingsbane or druid or shudderwock or odd paladin is being punished only because of blizzards shitty system which makes us see cards for a while year. And yet we are the ones being punished, and we are the ones being pitted against eachother.

I love how the people saying it’s a punishment are the players that play secret hunter and emote when they play their 12/12 on turn 5.

You could make a deck that isn’t as cancerous as the three mentioned! 

Quote from Suskis >>

I am very disappointed in this expansio opening: in 58 packs I found only 2 legendaries. but what I found most irritating is the amount of duplicate cards (even in the same packs)

7 x Rain of Toads
8 x savage strikers
8 x Daring Fire-Eater
8 x Arcanosaur
10 x Cheaty Anklebiter (even 3 in a single pack)
12 x Totemic Smash!!!
14 x Elemental Evocations!!!!!

this must be the worst expansion in terms of cards per packs ratio.
I think Blizzard is sending me a clear message of FU!

 Don’t be too dissapointed, your signature claims you have opened 8 packs with 2 legendaries, I have played since TGT and spent over 1000 dollars, have not opened one pack with 2 legendaries.

The solution: Take tog and then choose the worst pick for the rest of your drafts. Swap decks on 8, the opponent won’t play ransom out of curiosity of what is in your deck (and for tempo).

12-0

Quote from Bee >>

Quote from Malygoddd >>

Arena is pretty boring, predictable, and way more rng based than constructed in my opinion. And I’m no shit arena player, I used to like it and I averaged almost 7. I just can’t bring myself to play it.

 How is arena predictable ? I mean sure, when you play a lot you kinda know what to expect from your opponents because you have an idea of what the good cards are and how often they are picked, for example at 8+ wins you expect a warrior to have super collider and some warpaths but it is still FAR less predictable than constructed, all the decks are different.

As someone said above, bad constructed cards can be amazing in arena, cards like steel rager and stoneskin basilisk are super powerful in arena and not too good for constructed, which brings diversity, boulderfist ogre is actually a good arena card, river crocolisk is ''alright'' on turn 2, that is why I like arena, I feel like I am experiencing the full content rather than facing the same decks over and over again.

And just because say fungalmancer appears pretty often, your opponent won't necessarily have it on turn 5 or in their deck.

 Because everyone uses arena helper and you can tell because you face the same cards almost every game. It goes like: Turn 1 Fire Fly, turn 2 2/3 or 3/2, turn 3 tar creeper or lone champion or giant wasp something like that. I don’t know, it just seems like a deja vu every time I play. You can say the same about constructed though, but at least I’m playing a deck I find fun in constructed, and not just playing with mediocre cards I’m forced to play.