• -8

    posted a message on Hearthstone Week in Review: Jan 30 - Feb 5

    With regards to Kripp's video on Ranked and why it's in a bad state right now, I think he's right that agro decks are way too good, obviously they are, but I think the real root cause of the current cancer meta is Reno Jackson. Reno completely nullifies any damage done after turn 6, so if its drawn the player not playing reno will just lose without even knowing they lost. If you play around Reno you aren't winning and if you play into him you just lose. There is no reason to play midrange, tempo, combo or anything that requires your opponent to be at less than 30 hp at any point in the game past turn 6 to win. This is why most players would rather attempt to win before Reno can ruin the game for them. This is also why these decks are 50% winrate. They coinflip to each other and they insta-win or insta-lose to reno decks depending on whether the game went past turn 6. 

    But agro decks can be answered. Reno decks dont live to turn 6 without having early agro answers, so these answers work in decks without Reno as well, there's just no reason to run those decks because they DONT HAVE RENO. I personally play a "midrange Hunter secret tempo deck" in standard because I enjoy it. I beat most agro pirates and shamans because I run ooze, explosive trap, etc to answer them. You know what I can't answer at all? Reno. I can beat a warlock or mage or priest's early and midgame. I can handle their decks and be in winning position. Then they play Reno and EVERYTHING I just did becomes meaningless. No one enjoys this feeling. My opponent played greedy, I ouplayed them, but then they drew ONE card and I just lost. This sucks. There is no answer to this. This is why agro decks are so all in- because they have to be to beat Reno.

    I have seen warriors running midrange dragons and shamans running totem heavy decks and n'zoth control decks. These decks always seem to be much stronger and have better options versus agro and other midrange. There's lots of stuff that works in the classes with cancer builds. But why do any of that when Reno ruins it? Just play face and your odds jump to 50%. Why give a fuck about strategy when having no decisions is always better? Reno has forced this meta, agro will always exist. Reno has to go. 

     

    Posted in: News
  • 14

    posted a message on Ben Brode On The Meta, Balance, and Shaman
    Quote from Tiggilytogs >>

    Blizzard's reluctance to nerf AND buff, as well as the slow speed of introducing new content (heroes for example) has finally made my husband throw in the towel. He's fed up of waiting and killing time with the same problems this game has had since inception - a lack of balance and reactiveness. 

    Guess I'll be playing on my own now. 

     So does that mean you're single?
    Posted in: News
  • 3

    posted a message on Top Decks of the Week for January 15

    Even if Beast Hunter is better, which I doubt, Secret Hunter is a more interesting, decision-based deck that I find really entertaining. Playing on curve and hoping you beat a faster deck when they don't get a good opener or a slow deck before they hit Reno is a shitty time in my opinion. 

    The video for the beast hunter shows him at rank 10 in every highlight, so he didn't climb with this and he didn't get to rank 10 with it either he just montaged his few good moments from hours of failure. This is like pushing the rock up the hill over and over just try something else

    Posted in: News
  • 2

    posted a message on Keeping it Fresh, Deck Discussion, Custom Cards - Value Town #103

    "I'd hate to see them remove things from Shaman" - chanman

    They wouldn't have to remove anything if they would print good cards in other classes. More Drakonid Operatives for everyone, including hunter. 

    Posted in: News
  • 9

    posted a message on Ben Brode on Classic, Formats, F2P Legend, and Asks a Community Question
    Quote from KronosIII >>

    THUS MAKING THE GAME MORE PAY TO WIN THAN BEFORE MISSING THE WHOLE POINT. Not to mention Tavern brawls are giving classic packs which is meant to help F2P players and then you decide to nerf the cards you are giving?

    Is the team mental? Fixing these problems only makes free to play harder wtf?!

     Again, there is nothing wrong with a company wanting to make money from its product. The f2p experience is not supposed to offer the entire experience, including competitive advantage. Why would I spend money to make the game, pay to run servers, hire more devs and pay them more to get the product out on schedule and functioning well, and promote the game and run events and whatever other expenses there are, and then ask you to pay me nothing in return for the full experience? 
    If the product isn't good don't buy it, but stop getting angry at a business for wanting to make money. The only way the game exists is if Blizzard makes an INCREASING profit from it. Where did this expectation of game developers to give away free games simply because they didn't demand any money for it upfront?
    Posted in: News
  • 5

    posted a message on Ben Brode on Classic, Formats, F2P Legend, and Asks a Community Question
    Quote from spooderman99 >>

    I wouldn't mind if classic set was below expansions in terms of power frankly speaking, but then there should be some restriction to who can play against whom in the future.

    Don't let someone who has only classic cards in his/her deck to face off more powerful decks, find a way to address that first, then we will talk.

     MTG has been brought up as an example of rotation and how it relates to the player experience. In mtg there is no restriction on which players play whom in open events. If somebody wants to enter an event without good enough cards to compete that's entirely their right, and what makes GUARANTEED LOSING a positive experience is that it makes the losing player see what is available and then want to experience winning with those cards. It makes the losing player want to buy cards to gain a competitive edge like his/her better opponents. 
    So restricting players to only playing against their equals (card value wise) is not only impractical (they'd have to monitor everyone? wtf), it's bad for the game's health. It's popular to say "all blizzard wants is money" but they're a company that makes a game as their product. They HAVE to make money and we need to want them to make money in order for our game to continue existing. So in that light, the new player experience should be given more of a boost, but there should be a skill gap between players in the same rank. You need to lose at the game to enjoy the game, otherwise winning means nothing and everyone loses interest. You need to have moments where you go, "wow holy shit that guy destroyed me, what was his deck, I want those cards". Evening everyone out all the time makes that never happen and kills the new player interest in competitive play. 
    Posted in: News
  • 12

    posted a message on Ben Brode on Classic, Formats, F2P Legend, and Asks a Community Question

    What his comments and this discussion (only read a few pages) doesn't address is the lazy design of new cards. I understand Brode's reasoning for not buffing basic/classic sets. So you don't want to make Frostwolf Grunt better. Ok, fine. But why am I paying for Pompous Thespian when it's equally unplayable? Don't make new iterations of existing bad cards. Just make new bad cards. "We intentionally make bad cards," he says. Ok, but make some new looking ones please. Don't throw away slots in new expansions for garbage. We need every new card we can get, clearly, since old cards are still top tier. You want the meta not to feel "samey"? How about you release some playable content instead of Mayor Noggenfogger, majordomo, all these "FUN" cards that are bad and unplayable. So much fun, yes, except the card only does what its supposed to once out of maybe 20 games and only at rank 23. All the fun. 

    Real simple solution to all of this is print good cards. Wild was warped dramatically with Old Gods. The old sets are not as powerful as the newer ones. Certain cards exist that can't really get any better than they are already without becoming ridiculous (ex: Fiery War Axe). So either print something better than that and get yelled at for power creep or it stays in the game forever and get yelled at for "samey-ness". Can't really win here. 

    Take some risks with new mechanics. Introduce more cards like Guardian and the Kharazan Chess Event that actually encourage technique. Defender of Argus and Dire Wolf Alpha, Flametongue Totem, all cards that require a level of skill, albeit not that much but some. Something other than "get a random thing from somewhere and randomly win or lose" (Barnes).

     

    Posted in: News
  • 1

    posted a message on Wild: the most popular game mode in 2017?

    Pirates beat everything in wild just like standard. Game is dead

    Posted in: Wild Format
  • 5

    posted a message on Jade Lotus Thead, Discuss and Share!

    Only thing blizzard understands is money. Don't buy this set.

     

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on working on a n'zoth druid

    I'm not sure I like the Tinkmaster Overspark over a second Deathlord. Deathlord consistently protects you and gets the res later while Tinkmaster will sometimes nuke your own deathrattles or turn your opponent's Haunted Creeper into a 5/5. I love Tinkmaster personally, but I feel like he's too risky a card to replace a staple in an otherwise RNG-less deck.

    Export to BBCode Export to Cockatrice Export to MarkDown Export to Html Clone this deck
    Minion (14) Ability (16)
    (hopefully this link works)

    This is what I'm going to be playing with whatever tweaks might be needed after expansion drops. I was considering N'Zoth, the Corruptor but cut him because Jade Idol makes my draws too inconsistent the more I play them. In regards to right now I'd say you want more draw and less topheavy stuff. IMO, Sap the Malorne, Ancient of War and Tinkmaster. Play Living Roots, a second Deathlord and Cairne maybe? 

    Main issue I see is that this will get run over by fast decks because you don't have enough taunts. And hunters run Owl.

    Hope that helps.

    Posted in: Wild Format
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.