• 0

    posted a message on New Legendary Card Reveal - Hakkar, the Soulflayer

    it is actually very clear. The keyword "casts when drawn" that was introduced in the last patch makes it draw a card. They made that keyword to avoid having that text on every single "casts when drawn" card.

    Posted in: News
  • 0

    posted a message on "The Caverns Below" is getting nerfed
    Quote from laadeedaa >>

    @calli1982, I would love to see this card continue to be viable (maybe Wild has a shot), but for any slower type of this deck, it just doesn't work. I've tried quite a bit. Because the bounce cards are sooooo bad aggro is even more devastating against the deck. You are basically using mana to REMOVE a minion from your board which you need to kill the aggro minions... Any aggro or midrange decks slaughter a slower Quest Rogue. Plus the fact that Rogue has zero heal, gg....

     I think you are right. Nonetheless most people didnt expect quest rogue to be a thing at all when it was revealed. Maybe we are wrong this time too :). Time will tell.
    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on "The Caverns Below" is getting nerfed

    Im kinda curious if someone will make it work after the nerf with a more traditional rogue approach. I dont think a deck that isnt going all in on the low mana high value minion build (like quest rogue is right now) is going to be competitive but i will be more than happy if someone proves me wrong in the upcoming weeks.

    Also why are so many people just throwing shit at each other in this thread? Be it competitive or casual players everyone will kinda benefit from the change as the meta will unevitably change. Isnt that good for both kinds of players? For the hardcore crowd because now they can prove that they are superior players by approaching the altered meta succesfully first and making the right meta calls. For the casual crowd cause one of the decks that sucked the fun out of the game for them is gone. 

    I for one welcome our new jade druid overlords o/

     

     

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Devolve Should Cost More. Nerf!
    Quote from hillandder >>
    Quote from gabugga >>

    It's always funny when you see someone complaining about a card 6 months after it came out. But that's what this guy posts about. Every single card that beats him.

     Well, even IF devolve is undercosted the card is not OP enough for get the slot in GODLY tier 0 shaman era. :P
     Jeah and what does devolving a 2 zero mana 5/5 taunts do for you as opposed to devolving a buffed to oblivion priest/aggro druid/murloc paladin board? You guessed it right. Nothing. Thats the reason it didnt see as much play. The meta didnt call for it - not because it was bad. 
     
    Quote from hillandder>>

    Ok, I am convinced, the card is ok, but why some people hate so much discussion about cards and maybe necessary nerfs? If we don't talk about HS and your cards in this foruns we talk about what? Candy recipes?

     Because your thread didnt propose discussion but sounded more like a "babyrage my opponent has cards" thread. Make constructive threads and you wont face that much anger. For the most of ungoro until the last two weeks shaman was borderline unplayable until people figured that token shamans may fit into the meta when priest, paladins and aggro druids are dominant. Nerfs would make shamans t4
    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Devolve Should Cost More. Nerf!
    Quote from hillandder >>

    Ok, 4 or 5 maybe is too much, but 2 is not too cheap? 3 manas looks the right spot...

     Lets see. 3 Mana.
    Since we already mentioned its not good against battlecry minions and against 4+ mana unbuffed minions its a risk. Also it doesnt strip your opponent of all of his tempo since it leaves minions behind. Compare it to fan of knifes - it costs 3 mana draws a card and most of the time only clears small minions or doesnt strip your opponent of all of his tempo once there are bigger minions on the board. It helps you get value trades just like devolve does so its much better when you have a board of your own. Its never a risk to play FOK but it also doesnt have the upside of dealing with deathrattles and buffed minions but it draws a card.
    I think in this (whacky) comparison i think devolve is totally fine at 2 mana. At 3 mana it wouldnt see any play outside of being a tech card if quest pally or silence priest ever go nuts.
    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Devolve Should Cost More. Nerf!
    Quote from hillandder >>
    Quote from calli1982 >>

    So you lost a game to devolve didnt you? Should we nerf all cards you ever lost to?

    Quote from hillandder >>
    Quote from tsudecimo >>

    Well it does destroy priest strong openings with northshire cleric and elemental + power of shield.

     I have 2 minions 2/3 and a Vancleef 16/16, devolve turn all in useless 1/1, it is just too powerful for only 2 manas...
     Devolve is not okay but a 16/16 3 mana minion is in your eyes? Jeah lets nerf all counters to the decks you play. Sorry but this thread here is just whining cause you got all in with a van cleef against a shaman and got rekt. I dont sympathise.
     The 16/16 need the combo with several cards, if he target by a Hex is ok, a card of same cost, but my entire board turn is dust for a single card costing only 2 manas is not ok.
    But forget this case, how to evaluate the right cost for a card? Unleash the Hounds have other costs until find the right at 3 and blade flurry is overcosted for the most unfair nerf in the game history...
     Jeah the 16/16 needs the combo and is therefore balanced . You know why van cleef isnt running rampant every game? Cause counters exist.
    Devolve is most of the time at least a risk against minions with battlecries and a cost higher as 3. Since battlecry minions are quite common this means it is a risk to play it in the late game to "clear" a board most of the time. It shines against deathrattles and buffed minions so its situational. To really get value from it you need to combo it with an aoe. Since it doesnt even clear the board but replaces with random minions in my opinion its very balanced at 2 mana. At 4 or 5 mana as you suggest it would compete with lightning storm and volcano which is a competition it cant win as far as removal options in your deck go. 
    So for the future try to play around it and please notify us when you lose to magma rager so we can nerf it to 5/0 for you :)
     
    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 12

    posted a message on Devolve Should Cost More. Nerf!

    So you lost a game to devolve didnt you? Should we nerf all cards you ever lost to?

    Quote from hillandder >>
    Quote from tsudecimo >>

    Well it does destroy priest strong openings with northshire cleric and elemental + power of shield.

     I have 2 minions 2/3 and a Vancleef 16/16, devolve turn all in useless 1/1, it is just too powerful for only 2 manas...
     Devolve is not okay but a 16/16 3 mana minion is in your eyes? Jeah lets nerf all counters to the decks you play. Sorry but this thread here is just whining cause you got all in with a van cleef against a shaman and got rekt. I dont sympathise.
    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Jade Druid Is Really Bad?
    Quote from hillandder >>
    Quote from calli1982 >>

    It was pretty good when more freeze mage was around. Nowadays mages have switched to more board oriented builds (secret and burn mage) to beat the jade, priest and taunt warrior matchup. 

    As someone else said ... when you see a bunch of  priests (except for the silencers), nzoth shamans and to an extent midrange pallies its an okay deck to switch to. On ranks 5-1 theres just too much aggro going on in my experience to play jade druid effectively and the burn mages are a real problem.

     But you agree is not fair say the deck is Tier 4? Tier 3 a least.
     What does that even mean? People are under the misconception that the tiers tell you anything about a deck. They dont. A deck that is rated t3 or t4 from Vicious Syndicate may have its winrate skewed cause of the fact that its harder to make mistakes in the deck as opposed to our beloved pirate warrior. Where not making mistakes is easier and they are less often punished. 
    More often than not a t3 deck is the sole counter to a t1 deck. We experience this a lot at the moment. People are still constantly adjusting their decks. The meta is not figured out at all and theres not a single dominant decks. There are some that are very good but they are always counterable. I love this meta.
    Always just look at the meta YOU are playing in by tracking your games via hs decktracker or trackobot or whatever program suits you and then decide which deck to play or switch to based on that information. Use vicious syndicate and tempostorm as a resource on matchups ... not tiers and you are doing it right.
    Posted in: Druid
  • 1

    posted a message on Jade Druid Is Really Bad?

    It was pretty good when more freeze mage was around. Nowadays mages have switched to more board oriented builds (secret and burn mage) to beat the jade, priest and taunt warrior matchup. 

    As someone else said ... when you see a bunch of  priests (except for the silencers), nzoth shamans and to an extent midrange pallies its an okay deck to switch to. On ranks 5-1 theres just too much aggro going on in my experience to play jade druid effectively and the burn mages are a real problem.

    Posted in: Druid
  • 1

    posted a message on New Rogue Quest - The Caverns Below (Crystal Core)

    Reading the posts sub page 30 in this thread is so entertaining. I admit i also thought its not good. Its still entertaining to read posts like these with todays knowledge.

    Now that we saw every rogue card this card is very very very very bad.

     

    Yes fuck blizzard. They ruined the rogue

     
    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Biggest difference between Legend and rank 15

    Of course time is a factor. But its not as big as some people here might think.

    The more skill (or how i call it "experience") you have with a deck the higher your winrate will be. For me that is a fact. There are of course decks that require more experience to be good with (eg. Freeze Mage) and decks that require less experience to be good with (eg. pirate warrior).  

    Lets hypothetically say a deck like freeze mage is on 55% winrate over all players (just in theory). That means there are more and less experienced players playing the deck. So some players are really experienced with the deck and constantly get 60% winrate. You'd say their experience makes around 5% winrate more than the average player.

    Lets assume two players reached rank 5 and are going for legend one with 55% and one with 60% winrate. You need 6 stars to climb a rank so 30 in total. With 55% winrate that means you are getting somewhere around 2 stars (winning 11 games losing 9 games) in 20 games which means you should need somewhere around 300 games to get from rank 5 to legend. Now lets look at the player with 60% winrate. He gets around 4 stars per 20 games (winning 12 losing 8). This player therefor needs 150 Games to rech legend from rank 5. 

    Lets say the games for both players take an average of 8 minutes. So the 55% player needs 40 Hours to reach legend from rank 5 while the 60% player only needs 20 Hours.

    To sum this up. Time is of course an important factor but experience saves you a LOT of time on the grind. So the more experienced you are with a deck the less time you need to reach legend. 

    And here we are at rank 15. People dont know their matchups people make mistakes and missplays and im not even talking about the obvious ones like forgetting a heropower or something like that.  Thats why they are rank 15 until they get more experienced with a certain deck. 

    So some people arent reaching legend because their experience isnt big enough which would result in a tedious grind with more than double the amount of games (and time invested ofc) to reach legend than the more experienced player.

    Normally the 55% player from this example is the one that says "if i had more time on hand i'd reach legend easily" - which is probably true but doesnt say that having time on hand is the only reason some people rech legend constantly while others never gonna get there regardless if they reach rank5 every season. They both may have exactly the same time for playing but one is rank3 while the other already reached legend

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Alternatives to Fandral?
    Quote from atheistpriest >>

    Sadly, also missing leeroy lol

    Right now, I'm saving up for Harrison for when yhat Medivh card gets released.

    My advice would be to substitute harrison with ooze and craft fandral.
    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Wisp zoo paladin (78,4% win rate)

    Thanks for this deck. Paladin was the class i never really played. This deck is fun and good for climbing.

    Posted in: Wisp zoo paladin (78,4% win rate)
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.