Hearthpwn

if you are argumenting with synergies here is one for you. fire elemental is a elemental and synergises with them.

your glaivebound changes would probably kill the card. it would be worse then fire elemental and that card hasn't seen play in a long time.

I'm so happy that there are people who undertstand th issue at hand.

Quote from RushingMonkey >>

 

Quote from user-19679157 >>

 

But talking about the good old days is not the main point im trying to make, yet there are some good comparisons to make, to deepen the understanding about the issue being present, and that is that aggressive demon hunter lists are running rampant and the only counter to it is a removal spell that seems to be way to effective against it.

You have it backwards, the initial DH lists weren't completely aggro/face, they were more midrange-ish. Sure they had the possible Battlefiend opening because you'd be stupid not to include it in your deck, but you can't compare a Hunter deck that used to ran Leper Gnomes to one that had two 7-drops, an 8-mana spell and Antaen which was an empty turn 5 and only came online at turn 7.

There was also a pure combo/OTK variant that ran a lot of draws and no big demons.

But right now DH is turning more and more aggro (a lot of lists are removing Priestesses and Antaens for example) in response to 1) the nerfs 2) sac pact and 3) spell Druid. Basically what you predicted here:

The problem is that it practically hinders demon hunter to maybe be a control deck in the future, because all big minions are expensive demons. 

is already happening / has already happened.

 yeah you brought more depth into the issue with mentioning that demon hunter was a midrange deck initially. I chose to disregard Inner demon now because on paper it is a blanced card, and is only run in more "balanced" lists like combo/kaelthas dh and highlander.

Ok it has been a long time since i have written something in here, and i only came back to Hearthstone recently after years of not playing the game (last time i actively played was old gods) to check out the new class: Demon Hunters.

And i am positively suprised about how much potential and how high the potential skill ceiling with the class can be, given the new mechanic outcast. Sadly it has fallen into the same role face hunter had back in the days. I will make the comparison between face hunter and demon hunter more times. 

But talking about the good old days is not the main point im trying to make, yet there are some good comparisons to make, to deepen the understanding about the issue being present, and that is that aggressive demon hunter lists are running rampant and the only counter to it is a removal spell that seems to be way to effective against it.

Back to the days when face hunter was loaded with similar opinions demon hunter is expiriencing now. The first meta that settled in Hearth Stone was a heavily control favored meta, where your main goal was to outvalue your oponents to win the game. For a month or so that was the meta and after rank 7 those were the only decks you would face. After some months the first hearthstone adventure was released in the game: Naxxramas. And everyone was hyped and  spammed Naxx is Out. With the naxx the meta changed drastically and a new dominant deck took the game over almost over night. It was the birth of the first dominant, face prioritising "no brain" aggro deck also known as deathrattle facehunter. 

The main reason why this version of face was so dominant the addition of mad scientist, web spinner and the strongest 1 mana card that will probably ever be designed, the infamous undertaker.

For those who don't know what undertaker did: It was a 1 mana 1 attack 2 hp minion that gained +1 on each stat, everytime a friendly deathrattle minion was played. It could snowball out of control really fast, given it synergized with the rest of your deck. Deathrattle minions that were commonly played as a follow up on the following turns were Mad scientist, (A neutral 2 2 deathrattle: put a secret out of your deck on the battlefield.) Web spinner, (a 1 mana hunter beast with 1 1 as stats with the deathrattle: add a random beast into your hand), and the pre-nerf  2 1 leper gnome. 

With those cards your little undertaker on turn one could turn into a 5 6 minion on turn 3. I am explaining the card in so high detail because it fills the exact same niche as the newly released 1 mana 2 2 battlefiend in demon hunter. 

So now that deathrattle face hunter obliterated the meta, and undertaker also boosting the winrate of zoolock, blizzard stepped in and changed it effect to: gain +1 health, everytime you play a deathrattle. After those changes the card was basically dead.

But even with the burial of undertaker, deathrattle facehunter was still a dominant deck in the meta. And to fix issues in the current meta the first hearthstone expansion was added: Goblins vs Gnomes. With the release of the first expansion and the arival of new decks, archetypes and cards, alot of possible counter measures were added against aggro decks for slower decks.

The card im talking about is the neutral 5 mana 3 3 mech Battlecry: restore 8 health to your hero, Ancient Healbot. It was the first card that provided major healing to all classes to make the playing field against the aggressive meta more even. Most of the classes also received class specific anti aggro cards like the 6 mana 5 5 Battlecry: gain 5 mana Shieldmaiden for warriors.

But a new threat arrived with the expansion: Secret paladin.

The new meta consisted of Secret paladin, facehunter, Handlock and control warrior. While Ancient Healbot gave control decks a real fighting chance vs the everlasting "menace" in aggro decks.

More time passed and the second adventure in Hearthstone was realeased. And with it my favourite deck in Hearth stone: Grim patron warrior.

Grim Patron warrior was and probably is the strongest deck in hearthstone that will exist in hearthstone. It was able to clear the board, gain 30 armor, and otk your oponent ALL IN A SINGLE TURN. And the interesting thing is that this ridiculous deck was heavily benefical to the meta. It was the best answer vs aggro and also the deck with the highest skill cealing, with its combo-deck-like style. (Grim Patron warrior would completely demolish demon hunter and other decks in the current meta would not have a answer against it). But how was such a deck beneficial to the meta? As i mentioned before the deck was difficult to play giving control decks a opening to beat it, when the player made a mistake. The meta flourished and was more diverse then ever before. You even saw freeze mage back in the meta trying to beat control decks.

Ok so now i will close the circle and connect the dots between  and now. In the past a we had a aggro deck similar in style to the current versions of the seemingly "OP" demon hunter in face hunter, control decks that were trying to keep it in check but don't really succeeded in Handlock and Control warrior, now represented with galalock. And a  OP deck, that required a good understanding in Patron warrior (to have a reference of what a truly OP deck is).

The main issue with the current situation is that only Warlock has effective answer against demon hunter (and even then it is most of the times not enough). In the past there was a good heal and other good anti-aggro cards available for all classes in Antique Healbot. Those are non-existent in the current meta, resulting in demon hunter being way to dominant. 

But why is Sacrifical Pact a problem when it is the only really effective counter to demon hunter? The problem is that it practically hinders demon hunter to maybe be a control deck in the future, because all big minions are expensive demons. 

So my take to fix the situation is nerf battlefiend, nerf the 7 mana 6 7, make healing available for all classes (maybe another zilliax, or antique healbot). Change sacrificial pact to give control demon hunter a chance.

Note: The way the game is designed right now control demon hunter will never be viable, reason being demon hunter cant produce cards, unlike mage, priest, druid, warrior, warlock, paladin, rogue and shaman. So it has to stick to its strength in drawing cards and outpacing the oponent.

I hope i could and make my thoughts clear and you enjoyed the history lesson in hearthstone.

TL;DR: Demon hunter is not op. There aren't good cards to counter it available to all classes. Sacrifical pact might be to restrictive for demon hunter in the future.

AQuote from ShadowsOfSense >>

Quote from desasterking >>

Quote from ShadowsOfSense >>

Just because you haven't heard of a pity timer, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There's thousands of packs worth of data supporting the fact that you'll receive an Epic card at most every 10 packs (ave. 5), and a Legendary at most every 40 packs (ave. 20), provided you're opening packs within the same expansion.

 

did i ever mention a pitty timer doesnt exist? can you quote me where i did say "a pitty timer doesnt exist". It would suprise me that there would be one because if there would be one it should have been fixed way earlier like 1 year ago where i had my 80 packs without any legendary. Im just talking about statistics here and the drop CHANCE for legendarys in packs. If you are offended by me talking about STATISTICS and dropCHANCES of cards i am sorry for that.

If you have the time and ONLY if you have it, could you pls link me a mathematically prove about the exisence of a pitty timer?

Thank you in advance.

 You saying you had 80 packs in a row with no legendary is you saying you don't believe the pity timer exists.

This page has a bunch of stats on the percentage chances, and a bunch of raw data as well. It also gives these reddit threads here and here as citation for its section on the pity timer. I haven't had a chance to look through them, but I do vaguely recall seeing them when they were first posted. Have a look yourself.

g

Undertaker was the most op card in hearthstone history. This shit was not funny. The game was litteraly decided who had the better curve after dropping the card. 

The most boring meta was in the last weeks of open beta, the ladder was 80% miracoli rank 10 upwards.

The best meta was patron warrior pre warsong nerf, because it was the deck with highest skill cap until now and it held the cancer like christmastree paladin, face hunter and otheer decks at check. With this control decks like handlock, priest and control warrior could be played again. It was the best meta Hearthstone had until now IMO

yeah i run double war axe, shield slam, execute, brawl, ancient shield bearer just because im netdecking and not because they are the best option for a certain archetype. same with rogue and sap, auctioneer, coldblood, tomb pillager and si:7 agent, i just run them cause i am netdecking not because they are the best and most consistent option for a certain archetype...

yeah all people are certainly netdecking and not just playing good cards... 

and i do not see a problem with people net decking when they are so braindead and brainwashed as you said why are you not beating  them if they do not know how to play their netdecked lists, this way you would have not to "blow of steam" in this kind of thread. Or is it rather that your "own unique created decks" just suck and you do not realize it...

 you were saying that tens of thousands of control warriors started to simultaneously started to play with the same deck list?                                                                                                                                                                    First of all ten of thousands is not that much compared to the amount of players that are playing hearthstone, second of all warrior is the most popular class at the moment. So it is not too odd that players are running the same list unless you are so paranoid to believe in some kind of Illuminati revolution that all players are brainwashed and braindead netdeckers. 

You are certainly the only sane player out there that missed his math classes in school, that is not netdecking....

Are you kidding me? Are you seriously questioning why all warriors are playing the same cards? Thats basically the same to ask why all paladins run consec, or all priests entomb, rogue sap etc.

Its just because they are the best cards to play and to win, that does have nothing to do with netdecking just with math and statistics. When you are changing your deck or rather develope/improve your deck right you will realize which cards are better and which one not or how many copies of a certain card you should run. Thats just a matter of efficent deckbuilding and not netdecking.

And when you are speaking about netdecking,  i bet when i am looking at decks from you and see cards other peoples are also using according to your logic that could be considered netdecking.

I for my part love wotk, it has a good skillcap like any deck should have and it rewards you for good piloting. (Though the skillcap is not as high as good old patron warrior R.I.P will be forever in my heart). 

I think otk combo decks are healthy for the game because  most of them have a high skill cap that are reasonable enough for the deck power. For example there was no player who could perfectly play the old patron warrior due to its high skill cap and it was also the strongest deck ever created till now.

Another point that alot of you mentioned before is that it has it counters like mass taunts, mass health and aggro. Well it is true that they are the counters but yet agaij they are not unbeatable for wotk, it just depends on how skillfull the player is (like  in any other combo orientated deck).

(I for my part defeated a druid with 2 wars and cenarius when i didnt even had execute but i gues i was kinda lucky there and my oponent not that good of a player). I still have to practice a lot with it.

People.who are saying that otk dectks are not interactive must be braindead or something similar because a otk deck tries everything to survive and is interacting in this kind of with big boardclears like for example pyromancer+spells or doomsayer+frostnova.

In the end i have to say it is a fun deck to play with its high learn curve and it really is a deck worth to master.

Quote from firekindle >>

The game is in a good place. Go to the Blizzard forums if you want hundreds of pages filled with babble from whiny scrubs.