Hearthpwn

Quote from draw5deal5summona55andgain5 >>

i hate this brawl with intense passion rip pack, CAN THIS MoTHERFUCKING GAME Do ANYTHING THAT WoNT PISS ME oFF, FUCK LIFE

It's for reasons like this that Hearthstone has one of the nicest free-stuff ability, ever since they allowed you to do quests and brawls against friends. If there's ever a brawl you don't want, load up one account on one device, and another account on another, and throw the match on your non-main account.

Brawlhalla, another F2P game, just launched a battle-pass, and I can tell you Hearthstone looks like a saint in terms of how easy it is to get your free stuff compared to Brawlhalla.

One of my favourite brawls - it isn't quite the 'Dominion' brawl (where you get coins, chickens and a couple spare parts) which I prefer due to the unique interactions from cycling your deck (ie. how good Fel Reaver and Deathwing are due to getting the bad cards out of your deck - just like Chapel in Dominion) - but it's pretty good.

There's certainly a degree of RNG, but beyond someone rolling really high (or really low), it's a good test of decision making; whether you go for current tempo (which is often a good choice) or sacrifice it for some really good tempo or value on later turn.

Isn't your first instinct to report this sort of post?

You'd hope people who find their way to HearthPwn are on average smart enough to realise this - but it's almost certainly a scam link.

Quote from draw5deal5summona55andgain5 >>

okay so i picked that title not specifically demanding a nerf but rather how it butthurts some people as its clear from some replies.

 You realise how suspect it sounds when you say "lol I was just joking" after you get heavily criticized? It sounds more like an attempt at backpedaling than a genuine comment.

Just on the casual front - I believe it's annoying as heck to face tier/competitive decks in there, but honestly Blizz has done nothing to make it a casual mode beyond the name (while there is a lack of ranks, there's still MMR). Therefore, the name is really the problem - it's not actually casual mode, it's unranked mode.

It's a problem in many games. I also play Brawlhalla, and while I had fun in the casual modes for a long time, since the introduction of a new season pass those casual modes have become swarmed with high level players and balanced matches for casual players have gone out the window. Slightly dick move, but I'm actually considering tanking my ranked ELO just so I can get a positive winrate and not have a migraine-inducing time trying to get the season pass stuff done myself. I don't want to do that, but am feeling a bit forced atm.

1. If you're copying MTG scry - which it seems like - then what you're describing is scry 2. So is it scry 2 by default, then +1 for each additional spell damage? Or is it scry 1 by default, boosted by spell damage?

2. Why would you use Diablo monk images for a Warcraft game? Same studio, sure, but it just seems odd when there are copious amounts of Warcraft monk images available. I mean, wouldn't the obvious candidates for a monk hero be either Chen, Aysa or Ji? Chen's the likely one, but if you were saving him for a legendary minion than Aysa or Ji would be fine.

Quote from ScarfaceRo >>

Snip

I'm just trying to think from the shoes of the people that may make this claim, or get frustrated to the point of considering it - there's a possibility that, consciously or otherwise, they feel like they have chosen the right deck for the meta, and may even feel like their results up to this point have shown that (if they get like a 65%+ winrate leading into high diamond) - and then all of a sudden, they start on a losing streak, and the feel like it can't possibly be the deck choice based on their previous results and their decision making into choosing the deck. It can't be a pocket on the ladder with a different meta, because why would they suddenly hit a pocket at this final hurdle - no, it has to be rigged, because everything was working well up to that point.

That certainly would be the mindset of every player, but that is one potential mindset that comes to mind based on my own experiences.

I'm personally very skeptical by nature - it's not impossible that there's some sort of matchmaking fixing in place, but there's also no solid evidence for it, and according to Ockham's Razor the simplest explanation is probably confirmation bias from those claiming that there's fixing going on.

I also think people underestimate how hard it is to account for the metagame and deck selection parts of the game. While I haven't had a competitive run on the HS ladder in a year or so, and never played it 'really' competitively (aiming for high legend would be my definition of this), I did play MTG competitively back in the day - and for me, the hardest part of any tournament was deck selection. I'm sure some people find this part easier than piloting, but compared to piloting a deck on the day, actually trying to figure out the best deck to take when there were ~10 viable metagame options was the real difficulty.

And my point is that sometimes you'd choose what you thought was the right deck for whatever reason/s you had, and just come up against a few bad matchups and fail to make day 2 or the top 8. Doesn't mean the pairings were rigged - you just rolled some bad matchups when you may have been pretty close to breaking through (the analogy being that you might be getting close to legend, but then you hit some bad matchups and it can be super frustrating, especially if it seemed like you made the right metagame call up to that point).

Also, thank god there are rank floors now. Imagine hitting one of these rough patches and sinking below D5.

As is, 58% of the time you get a card in the top 25% of potential cards - so 42% of the time, you are getting a card that is, at best, isn't even in the top quarter. 42% is almost half the time. If we widen it to 50% you're very likely to get a card in the 'top half' of cards (87.5% chance), but that means 1 time in every 8 (on average) you discover a card, you're going to get three duds that aren't even in the top half of cards.

The 75% figure is important because in constructed things are pretty cutthroat - and I'm pretty sure not even the full top 25% of cards would feature in decks, many not making the cut for various reasons (potentially not strong enough in the face of stronger options). The 50% figure is important because a 50-75% card might just be 'ok' (think Chillwind Yeti), but anything sub-50% is likely to be trash.

Long story short, these probabilities aren't high enough that discovering is a problem. Now, the specific pool that can be discovered from - that might be an issue. For example, despite these figures I have no issue running Dragon's Hoard in my Galakrond rogue deck. You're likely to hit a top half or top quarter legendary minion, which should at least end up being serviceable - but because of its ability to give you off-class legends, its potential to high-roll and snatch wins is arguably worth a card that might just end up getting you something on the power level of a Yeti or Boulderfist Ogre.

The kinds of people who smurf with competitive decks at low ranks are probably the kinds of people who leave shopping trolleys in the middle of parking bays, or don't leave a note after hitting an unattended parked car.

That is, they do shithouse things just because they can get away with it. Not a great character trait.

If only I had a dollar for every player using the 2 cobalts strategy...

Good luck trying to quit.. Game is the epitome of frustration but still addictive as fentonyl with crack sprinkled on top. It does have that going for it!

I agree with this 100%. In addition players who don't have the resources to experiment are almost forced to netdeck if you want to be somewhat succesful.

I actually like a very narrow environment of decks. It allows one to build specialised decks to counter those. Also it increases the skill ceiling because you know what to expect from the enemy deck and can play around it. Both is not possible in a wide and random arrangement of decks.

Also I hate the beginning of a new meta when top decks have not settled yet, when everybody and their grandma builds the greediest decks ever with soooo much lategame value that playing any kind of balanced slow deck becomes impossible. This is usually the only time I switch to face aggro decks until the lategame greed subsides.

Nice post :)

You might as well just cut the very few doubles you have (Only 4) and put Zephrys, Reno and Alex in for more value, this deck seems extremely weird to me but it sounds better as a highlander variant.

Not sure if the Chromatic Eggs are worth it, the regular Mecha Eggs are guaranteed 8/8s and work with Zilli. Rush and Deathwing is nice but Mecha Eggs are more of a safe bet.

Quote from Mugen8 >>

Uggggggh, so many players in the 18-20 bracket playing tier decks. It's just so damn annoying. Am I getting unlucky and running into legit players just coming back, or is there some reason that players running Galakrond shaman/Galakrond warlock/deathrattle rogue etc don't think they can just keep going and winning games?

I have zero issue if players play these decks, and rank up normally. But anyone that smurfs with a competitive/tier level deck is, IMO, the worst part about Hearthstone.

It doesn't even make much sense for portrait farming. If that's legit all you're playing for, why would you want to use tier decks in mismatches? Seems like a huge waste of time. And if you genuinely just enjoy the feeling of mismatches, that says a lot about your competitive mindset.

 20-18 is populated with the absolutely worst players in the game. What you're running into are those same players trying to rank up with good decka but failing to pilot them properly and thus remaining at 20-18.

They aren't gold or portrait farmers.They tend to stick around 20, go for 2 stars and then concede until 0 to avoid win streak, rinse and repeat.