• 0

    posted a message on Lightbomb
    Quote from frosthearth >>

    How does Mass Hysteria compare to this? I think it could often be better than this.

     Not really compareable. Mass Hysteria often works like lightbomb and sometimes even better, but then there are times when the effect does not hit everything and you are screwed. Lightbomb however does deal with nearly every board, except with low health/high life-boards. This is more reliable, but not necessarily stronger. However not stronger does not mean weak: this is probably one of the best board clears that exist in the game and most importantly there is no real limit to it. While Flamestrike only deals 4 damage, this damage here scales always with attack and spell power.

    I still think that this is better than mass hysteria, since it can deal with the 4 mana 7/7 LUL, 0 mana 5/5 MEGALUL and 0 mana 8/8 OMEGALUL.

    Posted in: Lightbomb
  • 0

    posted a message on Could Hunter not be the Meta?
    Quote from iWatchUSleep >>

    Secret hunter is also a viable archetype in wild. You will need to craft a few cards but that shouldn't cost over 5k dust.

     Viable yes, but far from overpowered as in Standard. The big difference is that standard has a viable secret-destroying card. Wild does not have it, and no, the Inspector is 2 mana too expensive for it to include it in any deck. But even without it, there are other decks that outpace or outvalue Hunter in wild.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on So where are the rants of Even Shaman and Odd Rogue?
    Quote from TORCH_y >>

    Even Shaman is a really good deck, has an extremely high win-rate, and is played a lot in ranked. I hate playing against it with almost all of my wild decks.

    However, I don't think anything in hearthstone needs to be nerfed right now- especially in wild. #letwildbewild

     Oh please don't use this silly phrase: wild is not here for nostalgika, it's supposed to be a competitive mode for players who simply want to play ALL CARDS that exist in hearthstone and don't want to play the game: throw all your cards away after 2 years so that we can make more money-game blizzard plays.

    Posted in: Wild Format
  • 0

    posted a message on BUDGET Tavern Brawl - Mech Hunter EASY PACK
    Quote from Deck_Fiend >>

    Just used this deck and won first try. I changed out 1 Jeeves for a Nightmare amalgam as I didn't have it, didn't matter though. 

    Is mech hunter any good in wild then, or is this an anomaly because of the restrictions of the brawl? 

     It's actually good in wild, but it does not have the fancy winrates of other decks: But all in all it's the fastest aggro deck that exist.

    Posted in: BUDGET Tavern Brawl - Mech Hunter EASY PACK
  • 1

    posted a message on Thing from Below and Even Shaman

    The issue of Shaman in Wild is not Thing from Below, it's that theres first: no counter to Baku/Genn and second Flametongue Totem. While yes, Thing from Below is probably the strongest card in the deck (since a 0 mana card is always insane, see Corridor Creeper); nerfing Flametongue Totem would probably be the card to fix the game. Still: Since Shaman is not so strong in Standard, and a nerf here would nerf Shaman in Standard too, the next card to be considered to be nerfed is Thing from Below, yes. But since the TE said where the issue of Even shaman lies, then i said no, since Flametongue Totem is the first card that needs to be nerfed.

    Quote from B0n3d4ddy >>

    Even Shaman is neither oppressive enough nor suffers from having very polarized matchups (such as old Quest Rogue) to be considered worthy of the ban-- err, nerf hammer. Sure, it's stronger than its Standard counterpart but being a board-centric deck without very powerful comeback mechanisms it's just as likely to get countered by Control as any comparable archetype. Also, Shaman as a class is already just a one-trick pony - do we really want it to become totally obsolete?

     Sorry, but that's BS. Even Shaman has around a 70-72% winrate on hsreplay. It's not as polarizing, but it's oppressive, because it is simply all around good. And it's too good.

    Posted in: Wild Format
  • 1

    posted a message on Devolve is a big problem

    Sorry, but no. While i thinkt that devolve is for it's worth totally overpowered (no, it don't clear any board, but removing a taunt is often game-deciding), i don't think that it's the reason of even shaman being so overpowered in wild: the REAL issue is following:

    Flametongue Totem
    This little card is the main offender of even Shaman: the burst and the ability to destroy nearly every minion makes this ability too strong. Together with Totem Golem and Jade Claws does this card clear absolute everything that the enemy can put on board.

    Genn Greymane (and Baku the Mooneater)
    This is a general issue of Odd and Even in Wild. What we need is either more support of non-odd/even decks OR a counter to odd-even decks.

    Totem Golem
    2 Mana 3/4. This is far more overpowered that the 4 mana 7/7. This together with Flametongue Totem destroys nearly the whole board.

    Thing from Below
    0 mana 5/5 with taunt. Every minion that can cost 0 mana is overpowered.

    What i think we need really nerfed is Flametongue-Totem. It's simply too strong and was already an issue in Old Gods when Aggro Shaman was totally destroying the ladder. But in the end if we should only target wild, then a nerf to Thing from below and Totem Golem should be enough.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Is wild bundle worth it for dust??

    It's simple: dust them when the legendaries are CRAP, don't if they are GOOD. If you get from GvG for example Hemet Nesingwary = DUST, if you get Mal'Ganis then you won the Jackpot and no, NEVER DUST.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Move Mind Blast to the Hall of Fame

    Can somebody please close this troll-post. First it's simply a troll if you read the text and second Mind Blast is a CRAP CARD! There's only one card that makes it hyperstrong and it's rotating out, it's Shadow Visions. Without it it's simply crap.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Thoughts on the Upcoming Hall Of Fame Roation?

    I don't think that any cards right now requires a move into the Hall of Fame. Not even Leeroy or Malygos. Bloodmage is strong yes, but not strong enough and played enough to require a move into the Hall of Fame; and definitively not strong enough.

    So no, i don't expect any cards moving into the Hall of Fame this Rotation. But if they would, then i think that malygos would be the first choice.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Wild Growth and Fiery War Axe nerfs - when cards are class features
    Quote from TardisGreen >>
    Quote from ZisiLeeGit >>

    ...

    FWA--> it was a good card sure but never oppressing until pirates came in to the picture in a big way. So they nerfed smalltime buccaneer. Realizing that piratewarrior is still to powerfull they nerfed FWA and then after they realized oh wow that little shit "i'm in charge now" is to strong they nerfed that. Yes cards like FWA and WG were added in almost all of they decks BUT we see those cards all the time and not oblz.

    NO.

    Fiery "Win" Axe was played in EVERY Warrior deck since the game's inception, and was one of the most BROKEN cards in the history of the game.  It was nerfed because the Evergreen set cannot include auto include cards.

    There will be more strong cards in the Basic/Classic set that will either be nerfed or HOF'ed at some point.  At least one of the Rogue spells is gonna go.  This patch hit Druid, the last one hit Mage, etc.  No class (even Hunter) is exempt.

    Stop with this nonsense that FWA was nerfed because of Pirate Warrior.

     Here you are not right: yes, it was probably one of the strongest cards of the game; BUT Warrior was build around it. And it was NOT an issue until Pirate Warrior; since Warrior rarely used it to go face. But later it was so strong that Warrior simply used it to deal more face damage: until then it was no problem, only after Pirate Warrior and other Aggro-Warrior-Decks were created and Fiery War Axe was only used to deal 6 face damage for 2 mana, it became a problem. This and Arcanite reaper alone dealed 16 damage.

    So as said before: best solution what everybody wanted was that you can't go face with Fiery War Axe. But since it's an basic-card (not even classic, but basic) and they don't want to make things too complicated they nerfed it to 3 mana. (althrough they should then simply reduced the attack by 1, then it would at least be viable for beginners).

    Because of this we need a new evergreen-set for beginners and to make it not too expensive. Will never happen, because $$$; still would be an ideal solution, adding a new fiery war axe that simply can't go face.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Wild Growth and Fiery War Axe nerfs - when cards are class features

    Nerfs were right, just the overnerfs aren't. For example Fiery War Axe. Wrong: increase the mana cost by 50%. Right: Can't attack the opponents Hero.
    But since it's a base card, blizzard don't like to make things more complicated. Understandable; still what we need are adjustments to the classic-set and add card to the evergreen-set too. One could be a weapon that is pre-nerfed Fiery War Axe without the ability to go face. Just do it!

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on GJ Team 5.
    Quote from 1xbenx1 >>
    Quote from Pullaa >>

    That's for standard, and that format is anyways dying, wild however, is in great position

     BIG PRIEST WAAA

    KINGSBANE WAAA

    EVEN SHAMAN WAAA

    ODD ROGUE WAAA

     So where is Kingsbane a problem? Yes, we have now an pirate-kingsbane-deck, but it's still only an aggro-game. Kingsbane was pre-nerf an issue, post nerf no longer. And yes, the other 3 are quite an issue, beginning from Even Shaman, Odd rogue and down to Big Priest. (and no, big priest is compared to the other 2 a minor issue; even shaman has around 72% winrate in wild; odd rogue around 68%, while big priest is only around 60% and the deck that can be countered far easier than the other 2)

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Current Meta is too slow
    Quote from Wurstfett >>

    Switch over to Wild, log in one of the viable aggro decks there (for example Pirate Warrior) and have fun! :)

    At least there real aggro decks still exist. In Standard the best we can get are tempo decks.

     As said before: Wild is your destination: yes, there exist some really slow decks, but we also have some very strong aggro: Odd Rogue, Pirate Warrior and Mech Hunter: quite fast decks; winrate is for me at least positive; not as high as other decks, but it is fast. You know on turn 6 if you lose or not, and if you lose, give up, next game.

    If you want real aggro or faster meta, Wild is your destination. Just be careful of really slow decks; but if there are too many of them, switch to Mill-Rogue and destroy them.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 5

    posted a message on Should I dust priest?

    Or play wild. If you have neccessary standard-cards like Psychic scream and Shadow Madness, then you can definitively play wild too. In wild, priest is much much stronger, and you don't even need many wild-cards to play it; at least not priest-specific ones. (it's different in the range of neutrals). Heck, it's even possible there to play without many expensive cards, except board clears. Shadow Vision ftw.

    I would wait, simply because the wind can still change and you can still always disenchant it. But don't forget that disenchanting any card is always a bad decision, especially disenchanting legendaries, since you then might get them back from packs you open. Also if you ever want later to play wild, you will definitively regret your decision.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 3

    posted a message on Why do people still tap last

    Because most of the time Hearthstone is an RNG-Fiesta: For example you tab last when:

    You have 1 doomguard in hand and don't want to draw the second one
    You don't want to discard your key-card because you still didn't draw it
    You discarded your opponent's key card through Gnomeferatu (would always tap later because if you do it, your whole gameplan changes; instead of playing tempo when you discard your opponent's shudderwock/Malygos for example, you then play simply for value and maybe don't want to tap at all)
    You play Stonehill Defender or something similar (sometimes you simply need the mana and you want to see what the card gives you, and maybe instantly play the card you got)
    and last but not least:
    You are sure what you play, and no other card in your deck will change it. Why tap first when you are 100% sure that you play this card next?

    And one reason it also happens, but it's wrong:
    You are not sure if you want to tap at all, and because of this you play your cards first and then think if you want to risk your health or not. Happens for me more often than i can count.

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