-
- StoTheX
- Registered User
-
Member for 10 years, 2 months, and 5 days
Last active Tue, Aug, 4 2015 12:49:00 -
- 1
- 3
- 6
- 0 Followers
- 20 Total Posts
- 11 Thanks
⚙
Learn More
Cosmetics
Related Cards
Card Pools
✕
×
PopCard Settings
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Elements settings
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
1
They did not pick up Alchemixt, at least not officially yet. They just expanded the amount of people that add content to their site and they did announce exactly that some time ago. So just because some nonmembers add content doesn't mean they are suddenly part of the team. Tempostorm wants to expand into a community and content site with their own team, so we will see a lot of non TS member add content to their site in the future.
Also i admit it's not unlikely Alchemixt and Alesh may get picked up, both are free agents atm. But still, adding content to the TS site =/= new team member.
I love Kitkatz, Gaara and Hyped, but Kolento and Strifecro are the more successful players. It's extremely hard to compare skill in card games, since RNG is always a factor, so even though someone plays perfectly they can still lose miserably. That's why it does not really make much sense to compare skill levels, the difference between most notable players is extremely small anyways. Makes more sense to compare success in the game.
Not that i'm too fond of Ek0p, but he is a better player than most people give him credit for. Weakest of those 8 names is pretty much Hafu.
0
Kolento is well known with partly over 10.000 viewers on twitch, had some extremely good tournament results (and tournament wins) and is considered one of the best if not the best player in the game right now by many pro players (and even more non pro players). He also was the Top Spot for the Blizzcon qualifier, placing high enough every season to get a direct invite to the Phase 2, while others had to play the phase 1 swiss tournament.
I doubt you can compare yourself to him. Same goes for other successful players. Kolento is actually pretty cheap if you take a look at the prices of others, some even overprice imho.
It's like in business, if you are well known and have the results you can demand higher prices. Supply and demand.
My advice for you, start getting to legend every season and start streaming and coach people for free, get yourself known in the community and if you are doing well you can demand money. Maybe make like a webpage and have your coachees write about their experience with your coaching, that could help greatly.
Also being good at the game doesn't mean you are a good coach. These are 2 different kind of skillsets and not everyone is good at both, so keep that in mind.
3
1. Control Paladin
2. Control Priest
3. Shaman
I personally don't mind Shaman much, it's not easy, but i see it more as a balanced matchup than favorable for either one. Most people say it favors the Shaman, but for example Kitkatz always says that the matchup heavily favors Warrior.
Control Priest became rather difficult since Naxx, before it was just annoyingly long games you won in over 90% of the time, now it's also a matchup than can go either way.
Control Paladin is extremely hard to win imho. They have a lot of ways to deal with your threats and play a lot high value stuff themselves. Only matchup i see strongly in the favor of the nonwarrior.
Mirror is always a coinflip, decks are all super similar and it's just super depending on the draws. Also the playing style can be a deciding factor too, some styles are better suited for mirrorgames than others.
0
No offense, but if you can't reach legend rank with 4-5 hours per day playing hearthstone you are probably just not good enough yet. Also being able to play 4-5 hours a day with a regular job is a lot, i don't think that many people can spend that much time on the game after their jobs.
If you play 5 hours a day and we average the length of a game to 15 min (average is probably closer to 10 min), you play 20 games a day, making it 600 games a month. (480 with 4h per day)
With a 54 % win percentage you would need 520 games from rank 20 to legend, so the conclusion is your overall win percentage is below that.
53 % winrate already requires you to play 625 games and the lower the winrate the more time you have to spend (obviously).
The reason pro players and other regular legend player reach legend ranks so quickly is because their winrate is high enough, so they don't need to invest that much time for the grind.
I took the information about the winrate out of this thread, which is a good read on the subject: http://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveHS/comments/2gkzf4/data_on_how_many_games_it_should_take_to_get_to/
0
Now explain to me, what exactly does that extra card for player 2 do against the fact that player one gets to spend his mana first? Player 1 on turn 10, assuming neither he or player 2 had wildgrowth, had the chance to spend 55 Mana, while his player 2 just had the option to spend 45 mana. That is the advantage of going first. To counterbalance that they put the coin into the second players hand.
Getting one card extra to choose from does shit for player 2 in regards to the advantage of mana spending i just mentioned above. If both draw 6, mulligan 3 and then both draw player 2 still has card advantage and i'm not counting the coin. Then his turn starts and he draws another card.
This is not about screwing player 2 even more, but about reducing variance. Getting more cards to choose for mulligan means the players have to make more decisions, meaning the skills required is higher. Also you don't get screwed over by bad draws that often anymore. It's a win/win for competitive hearthstone. I seriously doubt that it would influence the balance between starting and going second in a way people would need to complain about. But prove me wrong, get out your game data that would prove otherwise Mr. Statistics...
0
I dislike the current mulligan system too. Both draw 6, mulligan 3 then draw 1 card would be perfect. That's what Nyhx proposed on an old Turn 2 episode in the Beta and i always thought that it would be the better system. The current system kind of favors low mana curve decks, as they are more likely to get a decent starting hand, while higher mana curve decks can easily get stuck with crappy starting hands. Changing the system to initially draw 6 card would still allow for bad starts, but reduce the likeliness.
Also i never understood why the second player gets to mulligan 4 cards, while player 1 gets 3. I mean player 1 draws an extra card anyway, but having 1 less card to choose from initially makes it kind of easier for variance to fuck you over. Isn't the big advantage of player 1 to be able to use his mana first? In Magic both player start mulliganing with the same amount of cards so no one gets an advantage here, but in hearthstone player 2 gets an extra card to choose from and the coin. Seems just silly looking back to magic..
0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativity_bias
3
The same things that makes every deck win: The optimal cards for the chosen strategy and the skills to utilize them to their full potential.
1
Shortening the Season Length does not help with that problem, Nuba. Yes there will be less people in the legend rank, but that does not mean that all those are good players. With enough time and games played a lot of people can reach legend.
i would like to see a more skillbased ladder system too, from what i know Sc2 seems to have a pretty neat system for that.
I also would like to see Season to be 3 month long. This way Blizzard could still offer new cardbacks (it's pretty unrealistic if the season is only a month long, i mean how many do they want to make over the lifetime of hearthstone? oO). Also the ladder seasons would be in line with the actual season (spring, summer, fall and winter) so they could do like seasonal championships, who qualify for the world championships etc.
And making the seasons 3 month long would allow really good player that are just too busy to be legend to play on a league with players of their skill level.
Blizzard has years of experience with competitive games, be it Starcraft 1 or 2, Wc3 and WoW, so i don't get why they dont split their Playmode into a serious competitive mode and an actual casual mode. Hearhtstone just got out of beta and is already quite the big esport title and i guess it will grow a lot too, so blizzard needs to meet the needs of the competitive scene.
Take a look at Magic, not only does it have a way better skill/luck ratio (if you ask me it's about 80/20 unlike hearthstone) but it's balanced for competitive play. Does that mean that it's not fun to play casual? fuck no, it's awesome, be it competitive or casual.
Blizzard really need to take a more competitive stance to the game. New cards on a regular basis, balance changes when they are needed, not month later, bugfixes, maybe better server too? (europe had a lot of problems the past month and it was annoying as fuck) and a ladder system where you compete with people on your skill level.
Also they should stop fucking with the community like announcing an announcement and then saying: sorry cant do, derp. I mean how retarded is it to announce an announcement? And then they dont go through with it. What does implementing stuff and bugfixing change? It shouldn't change the prices, which is what they wanted to announce. So stupid.
0
I totally know what you mean and i would like some sort of response to things like leeroy & uth etc too (secrets for every class anyone?), but in mtg playing something in "response" means that your spell will resolve first, so lightning storm would resolve before uth, resulting in a wasted storm and a board of doges. (except with counterspells etc.)
I think mtg is the better game and most likely will always be, but i enjoy hearthstone a lot more. I can play it in my free time whenever i want, no need to set up a gathering with friends to play, or time consuming games in the online games of mtg, where you get asked every time if you want to respond.
It's also way simpler, so even if you didn't play for some time (like strifecro did), you don't lose much of your "skills" and just get up2date with the meta to compete again. I find it a lot harder in Magic, because of the constant introduction of new keywords and mechanics, something i assume won't happen in hearthstone because blizzard wants to keep it simple and casual. (they sure will introduce new stuff, but i doubt they do it in such a constant stream like magic does)
Having played Magic for around 12 years i find hearthstone refreshing, but since i played hearthstone since november it already starts to get a bit boring, so i hope to see a real addon with hundreds of card soon after Naxx, because 30 new cards get old really fast..
1
As far as i know there will be a rulebook for hearthstone, so i guess it will all be explained in detail in there. That's what blizzard hired that Level 5 Magic the Gathering judge for (those guys are the people who make and change the rules in Magic).
If you ever played blizzard games before you should know: They are slow as fuck. I remember how they changed all (or most) of the things progamers asked them to change in wc3 AFTER nobody cared anymore. They are slow with releases, with patches etc. I don't know what kind of time-space they live in, but it seems different than ours. More often than not i just can't understand their slow handling of things, but what can we do~
Hope the rulebook comes soon, atleast with the Naxx release...
0
Why not just remove Mage? I mean with your changes Mage don't stand a chance against even the crappiest decks you will meet in ladder or casual. Just because you are too stupid to win against Mage doesn't make Mage overpowered lol. Or maybe stop playing Hunter? Because the Mage decks at the moment are designed to counter Hunter. Whining because you don't have an 80 % win chance like with all the other matchups ist just retarted. Grow up.
0
First off, that is kind of a strong generalization. Both are situational cards, ergo they are only really good when you hit a weapon with them. Secondly we are talking about warrior control, so Ooze doesn't even fit in the general idea of a few early game threats, that all do something and bigger lategame threats.
Also while Ooze is ok if played in turn 2-3, even without a weapon in game to destroy, it is a terrible topdeck later in the game, while a 5/4 is atleast decent later on. Then Harrison does a lot more than just destroy a weapon, it draws you card(s) AND gives a nice 5/4 body on the field. And especially in warrior control card draw is really important, so that gives Harrison another edge over Ooze.
Ooze fits more into mid range and aggro decks that want to have something against weapons imho, but i find it extremely weak in warrior control.
0
I understand that some people just don't want to spend money on Hearthstone, but that is your personal choice. That's why i can't understand all the whining about legendarys. It was your f*cking decision, so why do people whine and hate in the forums? That is a special kind of stupid in my opinion. You are basically whining and bitching about your very own decision and blame it on the game and the players that did invest money in hearthstone. That is freaking retarded.
A lot of people want to play competitive, so of course they will spend some money on the game, because to get to the top you will need the cardpool for it, just like in any other TCG/CCG. There are 3 important factors in every TCG/CCG: Skill, luck and your cardpool. While you can't do anything about your luck, your can train to improve your skills and you can get all the cards, so you can play optimized decks instead of improvised decks.
Also if you don't want to invest money, why not invest time? Not only will you get quite good at this game if you play a lot, you will also amass gold. If you win 30 games you get 100 gold + your daily. So 30 days would give you 3000 gold + gold from dailys. Average value of dailys should be around 50 gold i assume, so it would be more like 4500 gold a month. That's 45 packs a month.
So in the end there are 3 options: Invest money, invest time or stfu.
0
Kick the Kor'kron Elite and 1 Cleave and add an Armorsmith and a Frothing Berserker. The Elite is an Aggro Card and doesn't do much in a Control Deck, 1 Cleave is enough, because opponent needs to have atleast 2 minions or it's just a dead card.
Rest of the Deck is ok, Alex would be great if you have it, if not you should craft it next if you plan to play warrior control. With the deck you should easily get into single digits, it's not that different from a lot of legendary lists, so it's most likely that you are just to inexperienced with the deck and make a lot of bad decisions that add up over the game.
You should watch streamers playing warrior control, most of them will tell why they did something etc. that should you help get better.