Hearthpwn

You must be pretty good since even by your own ratings the deck is basically even to unfavoured vs almost everything lol

Quote from Ace1a >>

Quote from Phoesias >>

delete Tickatus plz. 

Some people said „blabla low winrate blabla“

Tickatus has one of the highest winrate and THE highest winrate „when played“ in Warlock 

 My rush warrior lost twice to Tickatus earlier today. Lost 10 cards total and went into fatigue, it was over. Really hoping he gets nerfed in this balance patch which will be announced anyday now, maybe even today!

 It's not getting nerfed. It will very likely be mage and paladin. They do extremely broken things that shouldn't be allowed in a game of hearthstone.

Tickatus could be bad for the game but not for the reasons you think. You want to know some decks REALLY bad for the game? I will give an example. OTK DH. There are other examples like OTK DH that are bad game design, but they are more subtle and people don't realise it. OTK DH though is a deck that absolutely should not exist.

The best classes in the game barely discover.

The problem people are experiencing is that cards like refreshing spring water put all of the deck's power onto a couple of cards. It feels as if they draw that card, you lose the game.

Quote from BaloeTheFear >>

Totally disagree, i play EU and 5 of the 10 games are hunter but I beat them easy with warrior and control warlock and midrange/face shaman, not sure about priest but I think they also can beat them. I think the meta is pretty stable now shaman is a bit to weak tho.

 Yea, the issue with shaman is blizzard seems to not want to give it card draw. It doesn't even have far sight. It has a 3 mana draw one card at the end of your turn. Feelsbadman. Shaman can feel really bad when it's the best deck in the game though. They could though push a midrange variant that is more minion based with some burn spells. That's what they have tried to do with elementals actually, but with no card draw, the deck runs out of gas. If you are going to play a deck that runs out of gas, you may as well play something faster like face hunter.

Quote from axx >>

Having less polarized matchups should definitely be a goal. Playing a matchup where you have 30-40% chance to win is a lot more fun than one at 10-15%. But it can be a tricky thing to balance in a game where players deliberately develop counter strategies. 


Personally I don't think a deck like face Hunter should ever be tier 1. It should be tier 2-3 and something that can be brought out to punish slower, greedier strategies. 

A card like Tickatus is mainly problematic because it feels terrible to play against. It's winrate isn't that high. But another aspect of it is that it potentially locks out other control strategies, forcing the meta into a corner. 

 Tickatus is fine if they gave control proactive win conditions. The win conditions which can beat tickatus warlock in a control deck aren't very good. They are:

1. Rattlegore - slow, need to draw it before tickatus gets rid of it, and with jarraxus the warlock can deal with it (even if you faceless it).

2. Clowns. This is actually pretty good vs warlock. If you put clowns in priest with some good draw etc you can achieve an even matchup vs warlock. Probably even better than even if you take out a lot of the anti aggro tools for more card draw. You then lose to aggro then.

That's it. They didn't give in class win conditions to priest and shaman for control decks unfortunately. This is why tickatus feels so bad. Tickatus is way too slow and irrelevant if the warlock is playing any sort of midrange/tempo/aggro deck. Basically any deck that does anything beats it. It punishes the control decks too much though. Some people may think this is a good thing since control vs control makes games take ages, but if they just gave control powerful 10 mana plays then it would be fine. Warlock has jarraxus and tickatus. Why can't priest and also shaman get some really powerful 10 mana win conditions. 10 mana plays have to be super strong and basically win you the game to be viable to play. Jarraxus is gain 5 armor and equip a weapon for 9 mana. It does nothing. That's ok though since you get a lot of value from it later (if you didn't have 0 mana taunts though, jarraxus or twisting would feel HORRIBLE to play since your opponent just develops a board).

It's always going to be very complex rock paper scissors. There is a game theory solution to the game. There are some ways to calculate this through simulations. In rock paper scissors the correct solution is to throw each a third of the time in a random fashion. In a more complex game the optimal solution could be, for example 18% paladin, 12% priest, 15% warrior, 5% rogue etc etc all the way up to 100%. If the meta is in an unoptimal state, this can give rise to more of another class being played that otherwise may not be played. For example, if everyone finds warlock fun and wants to play it despite losing, more hunter will come into the meta simply because there will be players who want to beat warlock. More hunter in the meta might give rise to more warrior and paladin coming into the meta too. Due to the aspect of players having fun, players playing unoptimal, and the short length of time between expansions and mini sets, the meta never approaches being optimal.

Where a meta is really bad is if the optimal solution is everyone plays the one deck. if one deck is so strong the only way to be even against it is to play the same deck, that created a completely busted game. You really want a meta where the majority of the classes feature in the optimal solution for the game at some percentage.

My main problem with class design is putting too much power into one card rather than making all cards feel good to play. For example, kazakus imo isn't the best design since we all feel forced to play it and can't play four drops unless the four drops are completely insane. It basically means there is no point printing 4 drops. Scabbs, a card people thought would be broken, doesn't see play. Rogue has nothing to spend mana on anyway. Further, no minion mage had too much power centred on

The acidic swamp ooze isn't needed. That needs to go. The deck has no card draw, but that isn't your fault. Blizzard just refuses to give any sort of card draw to shaman. You are better off with loot hoarders even than acidic swamp ooze. You probably also don't want primordials but rather taleon fordring in order to pull your prime, because that's about all the draw you have. The problem with primordial is 8 drop minions arnt insanely good like 5 drops, but they are alright. There are some high rolls like plagued photodrake though! Supreme Abyssal usually feels bad lol. Arcane devourer isn't the worst though. You definitely have some low rolls too. Beastmaster, cenarius, natalie seline. The others arn't too bad though, so I do get it.

Quote from Bengalaas >>

The game is mostly fine right now.

The main problem that people are having is that the established decklists are still from the time of mage dominance and are ill equipped to handle the new meta. 

 No it's not. It's actually pretty busted. Just not for the reasons he stated. The legend meta is very bad. Rush warrior is dominating EVERY deck. The stats show that it is unfavoured vs priest, but if you use nohandsgamer's list it becomes favored (you just need to play around hysteria religiously at every point). The only deck that seems to be doing ok is control warlock, but that deck loses to most everything else in the game. It's also only 50/50.

TL:DR - rush warrior is so broken right now, the only deck that beats it is itself. There is some promising control warrior might beat it though, but no one has refined that list yet. Until then though, it's a rush warrior meta.

This deck is hot garbage and we all know you keep posting complete garbage. It's just silly at this point. What if someone uses their dust to craft the absolutely useless rattlegore since you posted a deck which is completely shit? Can you maybe try to showcase good decks for once? What if you actually showcased rush warrior, which is by far the best deck in the game? Or take a class which isn't doing so well and showcase THE best deck for that class?

Why is everyone complaining about these decks that don't win, and no one is complaining about the deck that is favoured vs literally every deck in the game (ok it's even vs warlock).

I tried playing around with this deck. The trouble is the meta at mid legend is a lot of face hunter, which this deck loses to, and rush warrior. Rush warrior is so extremely strong (if you use the good list by nohandsgamer, rather than the list with scorpid), that I am not sure this deck can compete. It is far too slow.

Looks fun. I usually like your decks. It's not going to be the best deck around, but I do like playing hunter. I am a bit sad tavish beast hunter isn't a bit more viable.

I would consider taking out the carrion studies for more early tempo. I also wonder if we can fit in kolkar somehow. If we take out carrion studies for wound prey, then we can maybe take out the quickshots for kolkar?

There is a deck more powerful that will save you from the hunters. You are not going to like it though, because in turn it will be the only thing on ladder. Rush warrior is favoured vs hunter. It is also favoured vs everything else in the game pretty much. Arguably it's even with control warlock. The stats show it's unfavoured vs control priest but that might not be the full story, because that may be a lack of playing around hysteria.

Look up nohandsgamer's rush warrior. It will beat hunter pretty easily.