I have a new, slightly evil hobby these days.
After a match, I will send a friend request. If the person responds and says something nice like GG or well played or thanks etc, I’ll happily chat to them.
If they choose to be a d**k and start straight off with insults (even tho they won, which is comedy gold), I now proceed to write messages and omit some of the words by just writing random symbols.
For example: “Good job with the *{^{*+* deck you %]*%] there. I *^+% you could *[%{+ ** the deck +*]^”!
Translated: Good job with the awesome deck you made there. i wish you could send me the deck list!
That is most nicest evil thing I've read on this forum.
1
This thread has already been posted in the Streams and Videos section. It doesn't need another post here.
Locked.
1
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.
Not according to the images on the cards.
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.
1
This ^^
There is a difference between a Boar and a Quillboar.
1
I'm not sure the statistics quite bear that out. Looking at Diamond through Legend:
https://hsreplay.net/cards/#text=alex&rankRange=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.
1
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.
1
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.
1
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...
2
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.
2
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!
1
There's a meme in the making right here... :-)