Hearthpwn

Quote from konawolv »

i voted warlock just based off of the simply fact that it can take so many viable forms:

- handlock

- demonlock

-demon handlock

-dragonlock

-zoolock

-demon zoolock

 

etc. it has way more forms than any other class because it has very good class cards/ good hero power/ is very neutral friendly. If there were any class to invest in in this game, warlock would be the most sound choice.

If we were going based on how versatile a class is, Mage would win outright. Mech Mage, Aggro Mage, Tempo Mage, Giant Mage, Freeze Mage, Fatigue Mage, Secret Mage, Value Mage, Flamewaker (Spell?) Mage... there are a lot.

But versatility doesn't necessarily equate to OPness. The current leader (apart from 'No', obviously) is Hunter, who has only one deck type that is run - Face Hunter. Sure, Midrange, Beast, Mech and Control Hunter exist, but hardly anyone runs them, unlike Mage and Warlock where they are extremely viable no matter what you run.

But then again, that is your interpretation of what OP means, and this was just made to see what the Hearthpwn community's thoughts were. It's interesting to see how people interpret a question differently.

The 'silly' rules weren't to keep it competitive. They were to challenge people to create interesting decks, using cards you might not normally see. There are still plenty of competitive tournaments without these additional rules.

Quote from AscendedStarcraft »

The nice part about 9 classes is they all have different counters.  There are so many variables with in classes that it would be very difficult to determine a real OP advantage.   That's one thing I like about Hearthstone over Starcraft.  3 classes vs 9 classes.  More variable.  :)

This is true. I suppose a good measure of a class being OP might be that most of the classes can't defeat whatever deck they are running? For example, if someone discovered a Mage deck that consistently beat every class except Rogues and Warriors, to which it lost horribly, that would be OP, because even though it loses terribly against certain classes, it can't be considered fair to make everyone play those classes to counter it.

This is why I feel people are overreacting to Hunter, because the cards that help counter it - taunts, especially Sludge Belcher, and Antique Healbot - are neutral cards, and so any class can theoretically be built to counter them.

Mate, people have been saying this for the past few months. There was a news post about Kripp and Noxious's separate videos about different reward ideas. The first comment on this thread was by me talking about this exact thing. You are by no means some martyr speaking up for the minority.

Also, giving away card packs as rewards for ranking high is a terrible idea. Ever heard of 'the rich get richer'? By giving away card packs, people with larger collections can rank higher, and get more cards, helping them to rank higher. Meanwhile, people with limited collections are stuck getting beaten back by these constant winners. Cosmetic rewards or achievements collectible at any rank are a much better way to go.

Quote from CharlesRPolk »

I would love to see new stuff too. New rewards for pvp would be great.  I am fine with paying for something I want though. People should always be paid for their work. 

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't mind having to pay for some cosmetic things if Blizzard wanted to do that - god knows I've done it before with other games - but if the only 'free' rewards we ever get are cardbacks... Well, I'd be a bit disappointed, to say the least.

As I said, there've been so many cool ideas floating around - different Heroes, alternate card art, different game boards, different animations and sound effects - that it just seems a bit disappointing when every month and every event without fail we get, 'Oh hey, here's another card back to add to the 20 you already don't use!'

Again, I wouldn't mind paying, I'd just prefer if we got them some other way - achievements or something.

Quote from DropDeadCynical »

Quote from Timeiscandy »

Clearly anything that wins at a higher rate than it loses is OP. Any deck that achieves more than 50% win rate is OP. Any less is underpowered and needs a buff. All classes and all decks must be 50% win rate, only then can we all be equally disappointed. 

Not really.  Most people define OP (OVERpowered) as being too powerful.  It is generally accepted that at any given time, some classes/decks/cards will be more powerful than others and this is unavoidable or even healthy.  OP is usually used to mean "in need of fixing due to it's power being out of proportion with everything else". 

I think he may have been being sarcastic :P Of course, you still give a great description of what it means for something to be OP - I think that a lot of people equate being quite strong with being broken, which just isn't true.

Generally to counter a Zoolock/Demonlock you have several options. Handlock works pretty well, as does Freeze Mage. Most control decks should work, but those two are the most reliable.

Zoolock/Demolock isn't even that prevalent in the current Meta. I don't know what Rank you play at, but most people aren't really playing decks like that right now.

Quote from MrQwerty64 »

Thank you, I definitely agree with you. On a side-note, what deck/cards beat out Control Warrior consistently?

From my own experiences against Control Warrior (which are limited) the most important cards to have against them are Harrison Jones (though other weapon removal could still work) and Big Game Hunter so that you can answer any huge minions.

I tend not to play very competitive decks, but most midrange decks tend to do well, I think. Combo Druid or Dragon/Control/Midrange Paladin, perhaps?

Quote from Morv »

what is the esports logo supposed to be? is it a frog or a calendar or???

also the senior mod/mod colours are way too close! 

I believe it is a gaming mouse, with multiple buttons. And I agree, for colourblind people those colours may be a tad too similar.

Quote from MrQwerty64 »

Yeah, this was exactly what I was thinking; with the right tech cards, you can beat any specific class/deck. But what if a deck requires too much tech to counter? Would that then make it OP?

Assuming that the tech is only useful against that specific deck/class, then yes. But currently, the standard tech cards against Face Hunter (Antique Healbot and some sort of early taunt) can be very useful in other match-ups as well. So yes, if too much tech is required, or if the tech is only useful against that deck, then that would be a sign of OPness.

But currently, no deck requires ludicrous amounts of tech to be defeated.

Quote from Timeiscandy »

Quote from ShadowsOfSense »

Quote from MrQwerty64 »

Do you mean OP as in imbalanced or OP as in they, statistically, tend to have a higher win-rate/advantage over most, if not, all of the other classes and decks?

The first - are there any classes that are imbalanced, for whatever reason? Statistically, for example, Face Hunter will win more than 50% of their games. Does this make them OP? Not really - just that currently not enough people tech against Face Hunter, so Face Hunter decks tend to win more. Nothing they have is particularly OP, just not played against.

Just out of curiosity, is this actually true? Face Hunter seems like a terrible choice at the moment , but I don't have any actual numbers on its success rate. 

This is based on what I've seen from others. Personally, I actually had a horrendous time trying to win games with Face Hunter for a Daily Quest yesterday - I ended up just making a Druid deck to finish it. It seems to me that currently, people are just complaining about Hunter for no reason.

Obviously my own experiences aren't definitive research by any means, and streamers have said before that Face Hunter is a good laddering deck - that's why I said what I did. Perhaps I'm just really bad at Face Hunter.

Gah. I really like this card back, and I do have Heroes, so I can get it, but... I still feel like we need to get some new rewards already. Card backs are becoming so... uninteresting.

There are so many cool ideas floating around. I just hope we get something cosmetic soon (preferably that we don't have to pay for).

Quote from MrQwerty64 »

Do you mean OP as in imbalanced or OP as in they, statistically, tend to have a higher win-rate/advantage over most, if not, all of the other classes and decks?

The first - are there any classes that are imbalanced, for whatever reason? Statistically, for example, Face Hunter will win more than 50% of their games. Does this make them OP? Not really - just that currently not enough people tech against Face Hunter, so Face Hunter decks tend to win more. Nothing they have is particularly OP, just not played against.

Quote from Frozen_Inferno_1 »

I think the question should be rather which class is underpowered. Blizzard has stated in the past they would much rather buff the underpowered than nerf the overpowered.  We saw this with Shaman when they introduced the Fireguard Destroyer. It's a very powerful card that they gave to one of the weaker classes. My bet is that they'll buff Priest next.

Regardless, all the classes are pretty balanced. After all, perfect balance would mean class homogenization, which no one wants.

Yeah, I just wanted to see what the general consensus was, given that I'd seen a lot of 'OMG so OP' posts recently. I do agree that Blizzard much prefers 'Buff the weak' to 'Nerf the strong'. Before Fireguard Destroyer for Shaman we had Dark Cultist for Priest.

Quote from ForecastWeatherMan »

Mage is a particularly OP class just from the class cards alone. Particularly the freeze mage archetype. A deck that has little to no interaction in terms of minions and merely needs to cycle through their deck to guarantee a victory is broken. *cough* Pyroblast. *Cough* Frost Nova Doomsayer *Cough* Skillstrike *cough* Alex.

Well, to be fair, Doomsayer and Alexstrasza aren't class cards. Flamestrike is probably the most powerful of the cards you, ahem, mentioned, but it isn't actually run as often in constructed play, I've found, due to the prevalent Mage archetype being Mech Mage.

I've found one of Freeze Mage's biggest threats is any midrange or aggro deck that can put enough early pressure on that they can't 'waste' a turn playing Alexstrasza. This means that they usually have to use it to heal themselves, as there isn't much damage they can do with just 1 mana crystal left.