Fine. SOME of the Rager cards!
I'm still HERE FOR THE RAGER META.
Maybe Markmckz figures out something to do with them.
-
- TallStranger
- Registered User
-
Member for 7 years, 10 months, and 22 days
Last active Wed, Apr, 17 2024 19:50:53 -
- 2
- 23
- 48
- 0 Followers
- 389 Total Posts
- 546 Thanks
-
Feb 23, 202413
Czhorat posted a message on New Neutral Legendary Card Revealed - Joymancer JepettoPosted in: News -
Aug 24, 20231
Darksun20 posted a message on Caverns of Time - Card Changes & New CardsPosted in: NewsYour opinions are complete dogshit and you sound like a whiny child.
-
Jun 13, 20232
Baldassar posted a message on Patch 26.4.3 Balance Changes Preview - Constructed and BGPosted in: NewsHound Hunter is strong across the board, but is unpopular because of the terrible Pure Paladin matchup. Perhaps they are afraid it will dominate after the Paladin nerfs.
-
May 29, 20234
TheArcanist236 posted a message on New Warlock Legendary Card Revealed - Fanottem, Lord of the OperaPosted in: NewsAlso yet another case of misused 'amount' (should be 'number')
-
May 16, 2023
-4
TheReturner posted a message on Balance Changes to Constructed and BGs - Delayed to Friday 19th!Posted in: NewsBlood DK is slightly above 50% winrate.
Go cry in a corner, dumb agro player.
-
May 10, 20232
Suikiele posted a message on It's just brokenPosted in: General DiscussionWild is just fun mode anyways, Thats Why devs dont balance it. Its for casuals ;)
Stated after cards were changed barely 2 weeks ago purely for Wild. Look, I get if you want to stick witch Standard and BGs, but a lot of folks play Wild 50%+ of the time. Any changes being requested from this community has zero overlap with what you apparently like, so I've never understood people making statements like this.
-
Apr 25, 20231
Scorpyon posted a message on The Death Knight ExperiencePosted in: General DiscussionWell sure, but you said people are complaining about too much diversity, which was just silly and ignoring context of meta.
Well, no, what I actually said was:
I will admit this is the first time I have seen someone complaining that there is too MUCH diversity in a class and that a class can play any of the three archetypes.
I was very specifically talking about a single class and complaints about it, not about complaints about the meta as a whole or whether the meta was diverse. I don't believe it was ignoring anything since it related to exactly what was said by the original poster, (as I later pointed out).
But was there a specific point you were actually trying to make, or is this simply arguing for argument's sake? (Which I get, but it's not very productive). I only ask since I'd prefer not to engage in simple quibbling personally.
-
Apr 25, 2023
2
Scorpyon posted a message on The Death Knight ExperiencePosted in: General DiscussionYou talk about that as though it's somehow a bad thing?
It's the opposite, though. You shouldn't normally be able to know exactly what deck you are going to face just by the opponent's class. It requires players to actually develop and use the skill of adapting to the deck they are playing.
Unfortunately for a long time, we never really had that optimum goal of having to learn what deck the opponent is playing until recently. There have been brief glimpses of it now and then, like say with Druid, where you weren't sure if was Aggro Druid or a long term Control deck. And those make for greater gameplay.Otherwise we are back to the stale metas of Classic Hearthstone where classes like Huner (for example) were only ever to play Face decks, etc). Deathknight is hopefully the start of multiple classes that can really diversify their viable deck options and make the game much more enjoyable overall.
Out of the respect of you moderating this forum I wont go further than saying this... That you think for a second the meta is healthy is actually moronic or you just don't play hearthstone. I'd like to assume its the ladder but lets be honest, the meta is always shit, but this time its shit with an extra bit of whip cream on it. This game is already dying like a brick, it has no where near the participation or ingenuity it did half a decade ago, its just kind of sad to watch now. you'd think getting to legend would be fun, but throwing fun decks at 30 death knight matches because they're all chasing their legend rank for the month is beyond the stupidest crap ever, it forces you to intentionally pick against them or pick something that has half a chance against them. yes there are other decks that "work" but there are no other decks that flat out win. This is literally secret pally levels of stupidity from grand tournament, turn 6 drop christmas tree and win game.
Aside from the fact I didn't talk about the state or health of this current meta once, since we've degraded to insulting language, that's where I leave this conversation.
Thanks. -
Apr 24, 2023
2
Anarchy1 posted a message on The Death Knight ExperiencePosted in: General DiscussionWhich conclusion can we draw from the 10 most played cards at the moment:
Mainly that dk draw sucks hard
-
Apr 20, 2023
2
Sableflame posted a message on A couple DK fix ideas.. this is ridiculousPosted in: General DiscussionDon’t worry about it, you’re doing me a favour. Whenever I feel a temptation to play the game again, I’ll read something along the lines of: « I knowingly abused something I knew was broken and I found it hilarious » and it’ll kill any urge I might’ve had to get involved with the userbase in any way shape or form. So I end using my time doing more productive and fun things.
... and yet, for some reason, you're here... replying to a forum about a game you allegedly don't play. Certainly not "productive", and if this is what passes as "fun" in your world...
Methinks the... person... doth protest too much.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
3
I've said it in other threads and I'll say it again here: I miss the old days of Dragon Priest. Minion-based. Powerful, but beatable. Didn't turn the game into a 45 minute snoozefest. People complained about it, but it was nowhere near as annoying as the current idiocy.
5
"Funny and interesting," unless you're the one who loses because of these scuzzballs. I hope they're banned for life. No respect for cheaters.
1
My apologies. Just surprised there are people who do that!
7
Ignore him. The dude's always on here, saying stuff that makes no sense. This one is no different. I can't imagine any sane person crafting a card just for use in Duels.
1
You're still around? I swear you keep saying you've quit the game, but you hang around here spewing your typical conspiracy theory nonsense. And, dude, I'll take my reputation around here over yours every time. You're the equivalent of everyone's drunk uncle at Thanksgiving: he stumbles around talking nonsense, while everyone else ignores him and laugh at him behind his back.
My entire point to that dude (who claims to have ignored me but everyone knows is still reading this) is that expecting each class to have multiple, viable archetypes to reach legend is absurd. And I explained why. Not once in that explanation did I say something nice about Blizzard. The only time it came up was when I said that, if you want Blizzard to create enough cards to make all these archetypes, you better be ready to pay for it (and accept that FTP's will get screwed by this change). Again, just a fact: Blizzard's not going to put all that work in without charging us more. I didn't judge whether or not that was "good" or "fair."
You'll notice I never once said I liked the current meta: I don't have an opinion of it, because it hasn't settled yet. There are some decks that look interesting, some that look stupid, and some that I haven't played or played against enough to form an opinion. So, basically, I haven't said anything nice about Blizzard nor defended it in any way. Guess I'm not much of a shill.
1
And? Not trying to be snarky here, but what is it you actually expect? I raised this question in a discussion thread I started several months ago, but I think people have an odd definition of a balanced meta. If you expect every single class to have at least two viable deck archtypes, I'm sorry but you're smoking something. That has never been the case, nor will it ever be the case.
Second, focusing on deck viability at the Legend level is a mistake. The vast, vast majority of HS players cannot reach (or do not wish to reach) legend. The legend meta is different from that at lower levels. It would, quite frankly, be a huge mistake for Blizzard to target its balance efforts on the highest level.
Third, I do not get this whining about "netdecks." What you call netdecking is really nothing more than the process of refining a given deck archetype to maximize its winrate. Believe it or not, most people would rather WIN a game than play some wacky deck that goes off once in a while but has a 40% winrate. Especially when you're trying to ladder.
1
I wonder, if you stole/ copied this from your opponent, would you get a copy of their cards? I assume so, but HS mechanics don't always make sense....
2
Nice that they're addressing the signature card issue, but does anyone have any idea how much we'll get for dusting them?
10
Yes, because we all know just how perfectly balanced Standard is. There's never, in the history of Standard, been idiotic, broken, unfun decks to play against. It's a frickin paradise.
Once again, the anti-Wild crowd spews out its petty nonsense.
1
I enjoy stomping on obnoxious mill rogues who kindly draw cards for me so that I can run them down really quickly. I enjoy watching their health go bye-bye. Have a nice day.