• 1

    posted a message on Turn 1 10/10 godhand
    Quote from kwikill >>

    sooo.. anything I could've done here?

    I think playing Dirty Rat was the right play, which pulled the Expired Merchant which was a good result, but next turn they just had another Expired Merchant and Hand of Gul'dan in hand, which rapidly snowballed to me taking 40 face by turn 4.

     I am a little confused. How did the board state in your image rapidly snowball into 40 damage on turn 4?
    They have 1 card in hand. They need to trade off at least two or more minions into your Rat to get past it (assuming they didn't have a God-draw minion removal as their last card. 
    Your turn on turn 3 would have removed another minion with your hero power. 

    Alternatively, you play Wildfire and ping. And then you play the minion that deals your HP to all enemies (I believe it is 4-cost so should work out fine here).

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Priest Is The Best Class. 64% WR Over 64 Games To Legend

    This thread has already been posted in the Streams and Videos section. It doesn't need another post here.


    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Quilboars
    Quote from Sukinatal>>

    Razorboar has spiky things sticking out of his back, and they both have razor in their name which implies that they have something spiky or sharp about them

    An adjective is not a species definition. A Dire Scorpion and a Dire Wolf both have the term "Dire" meaning they are especially large/terrifying (however you wish to understand the term), but they are nothing alike in any species-defining way. 

    Even with that said, one of them has the name "Razorfen", which is in reference to the place in the Barrens where they are usually found. Razorfen is the name of an area, and not a description of the Quillboar itself.

    They look exactly the same 

    Not according to the images on the cards.

    They are both quilboars though

     They are demonstrably not if you look at the cards. Aside from the fact that they are given different species/tribe names, they are also visibly very different. It is the same difference you would have between say a hyena and a Gnoll. 
    One is quite obviously a beast, the other is an intelligent (ish) humanoid with similar traits. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Quilboars
    Quote from JustACheetah >>

    Because Razorboar is a Boar, hence a Beast. And Razorfen Beastmaster is a Quillboar who also happens to be a beast master, and therefore has several Razorboars beside him in his picture.

     This ^^

    There is a difference between a Boar and a Quillboar.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Please, we need this card to be dead
    Quote from Tommykoppo >>

    Ladder is still unplayable just because of this card, no excuses

    I'm not sure the statistics quite bear that out. Looking at Diamond through Legend:

    (For those without an HSR premium account):
    It is only played in 34% of decks.
    And of those decks, when it is played it only provides a 54% win rate, barely above rank-average. 

    I don't see that Ladder could be considered unplayable based on this card. Even if it was played in every single deck, at that win rate, it is slightly above break-even. 

    What is more likely is that you are facing against decks that are powerful and this is the finisher card. But since it is the last card you see that effectively "breaks the camel's back", it is likely to be the card you remember and thus blame for the loss. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Wrath of Air..!
    Quote from schnitzel >>

    Goddamnit Blizzard, bring my golden boy back, I miss him so much. :((((((((((

    Strength Totem just doesn't compare.


     I agree on this one (quite a lot actually). Losing the Spell Damage totem seems like a swing and a miss to me. 
    The new totem is vaguely useful (mostly for totem-based decks I suppose) but the air totem was possibly the strongest HP totem. It's loss heavily damages the class's presence in the game as a whole since it inadvertently affects every Shaman deck to some degree. 
    I would like to see it make a comeback as well.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on New feature idea - auto "skip" (lose) matchup

    However - aside from the fact that suggestion has been brought up and shot down in a blaze of flames (pun intended)  - this then becomes detrimental to the game as a whole. It may not be "desirable", but you are denying decks that are good against yours from playing you. Which might sound good at first, but then consider the fact that decks you are good against will also ban / skip matches against your deck. Suddenly you will find yourself without any games to play whatsoever, because no opposing decks will want to play each other and will skip matches against them.

    I believe you made absolutely wrong assumption here. What you described would be a problem if it happened on a massive scale. Yet even now, the vast majority of players don't instantly give up any matchups, even the most hopeless ones (like 70/30), right? So why introduction of this feature would increase the scale of insta conceding? In my opinion, for most players nothing would change, and for a few percent, it would be an improvement of their game experience, that's all.

    Let's assume for the moment that what you are saying is correct and that it wouldn't have the detrimental effect that I outlined. 
    What possible use would a feature such as this provide to a player that doesn't already exist?

    Also, there are a big number of other huge problems that this generates (now I consider it) :
    If you had a system that auto-conceded whenever facing against a particular class -

    Firstly, it ruins your own gameplay in terms of rank progression - you would likely be matched up by similar numbers of the chosen class as normal, but the system would force-concede; therefore it would basically tank your rank uncontrollably, so you would plummet down the ladder. 

    Secondly, it ruins the game for the opponent. After they have waited for X amount of time to find a match, it automatically wins, thus depriving them of playing the game and enjoying it.

    Thirdly, and this one is a HUGE no-no - it ruins the game for other people in that rank bracket - if players continually get "free wins" from those who are auto-conceding every match against them, they will start to learn which classes get the most auto-wins, and begin to farm them for free climbing.

    Fourthly, it ruins the game community at large, by effectively increasing the load on the server for people searching for games (because their games are ending much much faster, so the demand is exponentially increased).

    And lastly, it would also ruin/ break the community websites that run statistical analysis on the game and decks in general; any deck that auto-concedes against another deck will cause big changes to the "win rate" and "lose rate" of those decks. So you would never get a true representation of how good / bad a deck is, because the numbers end up meaning nothing.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on How are Paladins still being left in their current state?
    Quote from FortyDust >>
    Quote from Scorpyon >>

    Regarding decks that have a 75% win rate, (assuming you are talking about results on HSReplay), this more often than not is based only upon a few thousand or so games, which is nowhere near enough to get a proper representation of the deck strength. I've seen decks that have showcased an 80+% win rate for the first couple of thousand games, and have then plummeted as other people pick up the deck and realise it's not as good as it looked.
    Of course, if there are decks performing to that standard (75%+) with 50,000+ games played, then it's likely to grab Blizzard's attention more.

     The top deck on HSReplay has 81,000 games under its belt. The win rate is 69.2%. That is still way too high.

    Mm-hmm. Vastly different to 75% though. When you're at that sort of region, every percentage point counts for a huge amount. 
    Whether 69% is "too high" or not is another matter. I've seen plenty of decks that have had rates similar to that without needing or receiving nerfs. 

    What is an "acceptable" win rate? And to make that happen, you would have to "fix" a deck to perform within certain parameters. So you would also need to remove as much of the aspect of skill from a deck to replace with something you can control such as RnG. 
    And I doubt anyone would want to remove the player input from a deck (judging by all the normal complaints we get about decks being "autopilot" as it is).
    It's a slippery slope...

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 3

    posted a message on Mage is fun, right?

    Rogues and Druids (and to a lesser extent Warlocks) have been doing the deck cycling thing for a long time in previous expansions - Gadgetzan Auctioneer has been a central figure in that regard for a long time.

    That said, the OP Post probably belongs in the Salt thread, but I'll let it be for the moment and see how this progresses.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Scorpyon's Rank #1 Natural Shaman

    Ok, have watched this match through. 
    Unfortunately this looks like one of those matches where he drew the nuts and you didn't. Annoyingly, it happens.

    In terms of what you could have done differently - the in-game choices you made were mostly what I think I would have done.
    I think I would have possibly considered throwing out the Coin + Notetaker on turn 3 to then get a second Chain Lightning ready. It would also have given him a board presence to think about too.

    I also might have reconsidered the mulligan. Landslide is little use if you don't have the Overload kicker - you want to see Novice Zapper in your hand to keep it. 
    With 20-20 hindsight, I probably would have chucked back the Notetaker as you're not looking to play him on the first couple of turns, so he is a fairly dead card unless you throw him out for tempo (which might have evened things up for you after you played the Dagger and took the shield off the Righteous Protector).

    Aside from that though, looks like a difficult one there. Hope you get some better matches going forward! 

    Posted in: Scorpyon's Rank #1 Natural Shaman
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.