2
"Came Copernicus around and said: hey guys the earth is round. No said the church, we have centuries of experience to show that the earth is flat. You might get the point."
Frankly I'm amazed that anyone thinks that's what Copernicus did, lol. If only there was some way to look up information using a computer in this day and age.
1
Quote from evertonbelmontt >>What data do you need?
5 mana is worth 11 stats if you take the vanilla 5 mana.Then you have Mind vision and Thoughsteal combined in one single card without downside (usually higher cost) that would be worth 1,5 mana alone: discover a card in your oponents deck. On top of that, it has a dragon tag.
If you consider a tag worth anything, it's plus 0,5 mana.
By the same standards that Dr. Seven was OP, so is Drakonid.
The bonus thing is that usually an oponent's class card is a key card. If it gives any credibility, I added a screenshot to my current rank this season, I know what i'm talking about.
1
I don't know why you are talking about mind Vision. That card doesn't have anything to do with DO. And I don't know who told you that Thoughtsteal is a net gain of two Cards. I at least didn't. I compared the effect of thoughtsteal with discover (like if DO had Thoughtsteal instead of discover which I would consider stronger).
And Thoughtsteal gives you two random Cards, but so works discover. You can discover between three random Cards. So you could see it as getting two random Cards out of the three from discover (whether three are randomly pre-selected and you randomly choose two or you choose randomly two out of all of them doesn't make a difference). But of course discover lets you look at one additional card in comparison to thoughtsteal.
And no, DO doesn't give you more insight than mind Vision and thoughtsteal combined. In both cases you get to know three Cards of your Opponent. But more important, mind Vision gives you insight in what he has in Hand instead of what still is in his deck. Mind Vision giving you PO means he has it in hand. It's a similar information as having it as an discover Option (he doesn't have this copy). And you also always forget to Price the condition of DO.
3
Quote from yabadabadoh >>Quote from yabadabadoh >>in your case, accepting ignorance. learn to read. i didnt blame, i dont even agree with the OP. i stated that they can and are able to push different ingame algorithms, thats all. you seem not to understand the difference between a technical analyze and "blaming the boogyman" whatever that means. you dont have any credible source either, neither the actual formula to counter anything we say.Maybe you should learn to read, at the very least the comments you make yourself. Here, try again:its not programmed to favor the opponent, it just increases the success rate of some variables ingame for you. its actually quite simple to achieve this through an algorithm. they do this with all their games..This is not discussing a technical possibility (without evidence to back up), this is assertion.
Feel free to distance yourself from your own comment, but don't pretend like I misread you.I don't need a credible source to disprove something you can't even substantiate yourself. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim, not the one questioning your claim.
more nonsense. are you seriously gonna use my own words against me while what i said is perfectly valid? talking about assertion wtf ..(...)
they have bad luck protection algorithm in HS as well as their other games. they can increase (or decrease) chances for legendary items to drop in D3 etc. they do it in wow, in overwatch with lootboxes.
3
Since i care more of deckbuilding than anything else, Wild gives me more power and choice. It is now my main mode.
If blizz keeps an eye over it, Wild is going to outshine standard sooner or later.
5
So, I just finished getting to legend in standard with quest rogue, and I thought I'd post my stats to show just how bad this deck is.
As you can see, I finished with a horrible 56% winrate, the lowest winrate I've ever had with a deck I climbed to legend with (highest was post-nerf S36 aggro shaman @ 65%, last season was aggro murlocdin @ 62%). The deck also lost to both hunter AND mage (not really counting warlock since that's a sample size of 3), usually I don't have < .500 matchups against a class, let alone 2 classes that I'm under .500 against.
Matchups are very polarized, unfortunately I don't have a breakdown of the archetypes so the #s are a bit deceiving. My druid matchup is 45-41, but token druid was a very hard matchup, whereas I beat jade druid 9 times out of 10. Warrior was interesting, taunt warrior was slightly favored, and pirate warrior wasn't as big of a disadvantage as you would think if you play correctly.
Interestingly enough, this deck destroyed shaman, as most people are playing the evolve version of token shaman, which is slow and susceptible to vanish.
Some side notes:
v1.6 of the deck is the main version, list here: http://www.hearthpwn.com/decks/852204-s38-quest-rogue
v1.7 swapped igneous elemental for hungry crabs, this version does NOT work, don't bother
v1.8 swapped bilefin for hungry crabs, this version is also inferior (though bouncing a hungry crab against a murlocdin 4 times is probably some of the most fun I've ever had in a quest rogue game)
With coin: 58% win, without coin: 54% win (The extra card + the coin to pop counterspell is a huge edge for this deck).
Times won without finishing quest (and by beating their ass with 1/1s, not by someone conceding randomly): 1 time: https://hsreplay.net/replay/VKCnFuYpepeBf5SrjENjxb
TL;DR Quest Rogue is a bad bottom tier deck, quit whining about it.
6
I used to play a lot of MtG, and I have to say ... I lost at least as many games to being mana-screwed as I've ever lost due to random effects in Hearthstone. Talk about your "bad RNG"!
But no one ever really does talk about this because A) it's boring, and B) they can't exactly see what would have happened on a better draw. So they shrug and say, "Well, that's just part of the game!"
But it's a part of the game that happens all the time, and to me it's a million times more frustrating than any random effect in Hearthstone.
(This is all compounded by the fact that a lot of Hearthstone players like to blame RNG when they won't admit or don't even realize that their losses had a lot more to do with their own incompetent plays leading up to the random event.)
3
Quote from Cogito_Ergo_Sum >>I think there is one argument here that no one is addressing: Isn't it a problem that a card game and its random elements have more control over the players' emotions then their own minds?
I personally don't think it's a problem, because it's essentially the case in any game where random chance is involved. The human brain tries to find patterns in random events and make correlations between them (look at the people who think matchmaking is legitimately rigged based on their deck choice, as an example), which is why most players argue to look at averages over slices of games. Paveling Book gets thrown around a bunch, but there was a giant breakdown of things that basically illuminated that the RNG really didn't favor either him or Amnesiac more than the other; meanwhile people focus in on a clip they can absorb in less than 30 seconds, and determine that's why he won the match. So maybe it is a problem, but it's a problem with how we as people function if we don't take a step back and approach something logically. The human brain is amazing but easily one of the biggest reasons we tend to sabotage ourselves.I'll genuinely be curious to see what the Gwent community looks like in about 2 years, because they're clearly very focused on a low-RNG game. Not even in the sense that there are no random effects, but they're taking on draw RNG by making games a very similar length and having you play most of the cards in your deck every game; once the novelty has worn off, what will people decide to hate? What will the pain points for competitive players be at that point? I imagine we'll see a vocal burst over something in the game, because that's generally how gaming communities devolve over the years like it did with Hearthstone. People will envision new and better ways to forego logic in favor of what they think is a better way to tell themselves they don't actually need to get better, the game does.
2
Bog Creeper? I mean if you are lacking both the draw and the taunt it is almost imposible to replace, but as a taunt Bog Creeper is good and it will force a response of some kind.
You should have some kind of draw already in the deck coupled with discovered secrets and stone hill defenders it should be enough, but if you are lacking draw and find your self without cards then focus on replacing the draw with Lay of Hands or some early game option you don't already have.
1
Lay on Hands maybe?
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
1
Mildly surprised at a lack of mention of Spikeridged Steed, since it's kind of amazingly nuts. Definitely not an OP card, just one that makes me groan every time I have to figure out how to get through it.
1
For the most part the thing that drives me the most nuts with the community is how often people will make flawed arguments for the sake of not being wrong on a certain topic. I know there's a thread floating around regarding the always-popular theory that Blizzard is skewing ladder games for the sake of keeping people as close to a 50% winrate as possible... and it's kind of just insane to see how people are really coming to that conclusion.
That being said, the community is also full of people who don't generally fall into that trap and I love it. Even if you don't agree with them you can still at least discuss things rationally, and when it comes to stuff where opinions are split pretty heavily I think it helps emphasize both sides of the argument; I'd like to think this also helps when it comes to feedback for Blizzard, but I don't really know if they're perusing Hearthpwn as much as something like Reddit.
1
While I'm inclined to pick Kolento because he's one of my favorite players, I went with Muzzy since he's legitimately just been one of the best NA players for the last year or so and he just destroyed the qualifier to get here. I'd love to see him take 1st!
Unfortunately now that I've voted for him it seems unlikely.
2
2
15
For everyone on the "LOL LIFECOACH CRAWLING BACK TO HEARTHSTONE" train, even when he quit he made it pretty clear that he still really liked and Hearthstone and would be happy to play or host tournaments. I highly doubt this is signaling a switch back, and more that this is the sort of setting he's happy to be a part of.
1
1
1
Not sure this really fit anywhere, but I really feel like tournament breakdowns aren't really an article topic I see a lot of... but we have an ever-increasing amount of tournaments, including Wild. I stumbled on Gloudas' "Hearthstone Happenings" on YouTube from forever ago, and I think more of that would be great.
1
@DiamondDM13; there are many reasons someone can miss lethal like Control did without it meaning they're a poor player, everyone makes mistakes. The fact is that ladder/streaming/tournaments all have their own different pressures and distractions, and in the case of the tournament Control was clearly pretty nervous and had later explained he was pretty tilted.
Spectating is easy, low-pressure, and people tend to forget that you're looking at board state/hand context with nearly perfect information. I'd hesitate before getting on a high-horse about it. I'd also suggest you check out other content Control has made for trying wondering how he even got Legend in the first place, because it's pretty clear in his element (Wild Ladder) he's an extremely solid player.