• 0

    posted a message on Priest and mage nerfs when

    I am okay with priest and mage even tho decks I usually play has 10-20% winrate against reno priest, they are just so powerful as tier 1 decks should be in wild...

    but mechathun warlock or just mechathun itself has to go man

    they just dont care what is happening in game, they just draw, that's it....

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on 9 of 10 classes currently have decks with a 60%+ winrate.
    Quote from TheEvilAce >>
    Quote from elnur0000 >>
    Quote from Teuuun >>
    Quote from Kurgo >>
    Quote from Artimex723 >>

    This post is what I've wanted to see for the last two weeks. It's so annoying that people don't understand, that Hearthstone, as a competetive game, requires some skill. It's not different than Fifa, LoL, DoTa or any other online game. The only difference is that instead of refelxes you have to train your brain and logical thinking. 

     Hearthstone is nothing like actual competitive games, good grief. Tell me which part of your brain and logical thinking you need in order to have a babbling book giving you a polymorph, I'll be waiting for a while here. Hearthstone is a card game and as such, luck is already one of the most important things and with hearthstone itself, it's even more fundamental than other online ccgs because of the way it works.

    Hearthstone is a children's card game, and I find it just fine for what it is. Let's not try to throw "train your brain and logical thinking" in the mix please, it really sounds absurd, to put it mildly. 

     Hearthstone is actually a game that requires some skill if you're playing at the higher ranks. You will have a 50%+ winrate if you play better than your opponents.

    Yes, you can queue into your bad matchups a couple of times. And yes, you can win or lose games because of stupid RNG. But this counts for every single player in the game. So why do some people have 60%+ winrate with a deck, while other people barely manage a 40% with exactly the same deck? Pure luck? I don't think so. Winstreaks and losing streaks because if RNG exist for sure. And maybe the RNG in hearthstone determines more wins or losses than actual skill does. But in the end, the better player will always be the better player.

    To react to OP: Just because a deck has 60% winrate in 200 games at bronze rank doesn't make it a good deck. The data you're looking at is very flawed. HSreplay is a fun place to look at certain decks and their winrates, but you can't just go and look for the highest winrate decks and expect them to be viable.

     because they mostly faced good matchups, having good winrate doesn't necessarily mean you are super skilled or so smart 

    ofc hearthstone requires skill and there are better players out there but skill doesn't play main role, since it's a card game and there are ton of rng cards on top of that 

    calculating if you have lethal, trading and playing around opponent's cards ain't that complicated as people paint here, sure it might be complicated if you have 80 IQ or smth 

    there are ton of meta decks which require very little thinking, like face hunter, which is almost same as playing a chess...

     

     

     Then why aren't you a top player, earning money while playing?

    You know that there are OFTEN the exact same players in every tornament? Are these just the luckiest? I doubt it...

     I am usually playing couple hours in each weak

    I made it to rank 50 legend from deamond 3 with a meta deck in just one day this season(I played ton of hours in that day, since the quarantine), but does that mean I am smart, nope, I just faced favorable matchups and I had mostly decent draw

    why would I wanna play fulltime hearthstone, it's just so dumb, I wouldn't do it for amount of money they make 

    they are not luckiest, they are the players who play hearthstone all the time so they have better idea which decks/cards work in current meta and which not, on top of that most of them has big audience on twitch

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on 9 of 10 classes currently have decks with a 60%+ winrate.
    Quote from Teuuun >>
    Quote from Kurgo >>
    Quote from Artimex723 >>

    This post is what I've wanted to see for the last two weeks. It's so annoying that people don't understand, that Hearthstone, as a competetive game, requires some skill. It's not different than Fifa, LoL, DoTa or any other online game. The only difference is that instead of refelxes you have to train your brain and logical thinking. 

     Hearthstone is nothing like actual competitive games, good grief. Tell me which part of your brain and logical thinking you need in order to have a babbling book giving you a polymorph, I'll be waiting for a while here. Hearthstone is a card game and as such, luck is already one of the most important things and with hearthstone itself, it's even more fundamental than other online ccgs because of the way it works.

    Hearthstone is a children's card game, and I find it just fine for what it is. Let's not try to throw "train your brain and logical thinking" in the mix please, it really sounds absurd, to put it mildly. 

     Hearthstone is actually a game that requires some skill if you're playing at the higher ranks. You will have a 50%+ winrate if you play better than your opponents.

    Yes, you can queue into your bad matchups a couple of times. And yes, you can win or lose games because of stupid RNG. But this counts for every single player in the game. So why do some people have 60%+ winrate with a deck, while other people barely manage a 40% with exactly the same deck? Pure luck? I don't think so. Winstreaks and losing streaks because if RNG exist for sure. And maybe the RNG in hearthstone determines more wins or losses than actual skill does. But in the end, the better player will always be the better player.

    To react to OP: Just because a deck has 60% winrate in 200 games at bronze rank doesn't make it a good deck. The data you're looking at is very flawed. HSreplay is a fun place to look at certain decks and their winrates, but you can't just go and look for the highest winrate decks and expect them to be viable.

     because they mostly faced good matchups, having good winrate doesn't necessarily mean you are super skilled or so smart 

    ofc hearthstone requires skill and there are better players out there but skill doesn't play main role, since it's a card game and there are ton of rng cards on top of that 

    calculating if you have lethal, trading and playing around opponent's cards ain't that complicated as people paint here, sure it might be complicated if you have 80 IQ or smth 

    there are ton of meta decks which require very little thinking, like face hunter, which is almost same as playing a chess...

     

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Is wild (big) deathrattle hunter still viable?
    Quote from mmmatei >>

    I've seen some pretty nice decks out there, the only problem is that i've also seen people talking about it as not being as good as it was before. I just wanted to ask if I should still craft it, as I'm diamond 5 right now, and want to push forward. Also, weird question, but how do you think it would do vs a standard deck (diamond 10 and below)?

    Here is an example of the deck i am talking about : 

    https://www.hearthpwn.com/decks/1285461-wild-88-winrate-to-legend-deathrattle-hunter

    Do you think the second one is better?

    https://hearthstone-decks.net/egg-hunter-436-legend-liquicitizens/

    Last 2 questions don't matter as much as the first.

     what does "viable" mean, you mean if you can make it to legend with it ? 

    decks you will face in your path :

    secret mage - auto lose

    quest mage - auto lose in most cases 

    reno priest - auto lose

    cube lock - auto lose 

    mech pally - auto lose 

    even shaman - devolve fucks it up else you might beat it 

    jade druid - you might have a some chance 

    odd demon hunter -  really hard to keep up with amount of face damage they deal, but dunno about this matchup

     

    here you go

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Are Priest and DH auto-concedes in Wild?

    depends on which deck you play

    Posted in: Wild Format
  • 2

    posted a message on Darkest Hour Warlock | Diamond 5 to Legend

    jade druid - keep poison seeds

    secret mage 

    priest is pretty good if darkest hour doesn't summon nerubian at turn 4-5, which is pretty likely, since there are so many minions in this deck, you can always shuffle albatross too...

     

     

     

    Posted in: Darkest Hour Warlock | Diamond 5 to Legend
  • 0

    posted a message on Redesign Lord Jaraxxus

    immune when attacking with weapon ?

    or reduce it to 8 mana

    or gain 5 armor 

    that won't gonna happen tho

     

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Will Blizz change Sacrifical Pact?
    Quote from Filipter33 >>
    Quote from elnur0000 >>
    Quote from Filipter33 >>
    Quote from elnur0000 >>
    Quote from Filipter33 >>
    Quote from thebignuts >>
    Quote from Pandafarian >>

    I think they shouldn’t nerf or change it. Its a popular tech card for the current meta, and if the ladder was not full of Demon Hunters, i wouldn’t keep them in my decklist. 

    You can think of it if there was a murloc expansion and everybody was running murloc shamans, you could add a pair of Hungry Crab to your decklist right? 

     So the ability to kill any demon, any stats for 0 mana while also healing is balanced?? HELLO!!

    Warlocks in Wild play it for Voidcaller.

     So you  see more balanced a 1 mana 3/4 that kills a enemy murloc? Cause I never seen any thread complaining about Hungry Crab

     if there were two classes entirely based on murlocs 

    and one of them had 1 mana 3/4 that kills a murloc 

     More reasons to my point. They only release support for murlocs to shaman and paladin. Warlock does no play murlocs since vanilla. At least, if you play demon hunter, you know only warlock have this hard tech for you. If paladin murlocs become meta, you know all classes can screw you up with this card.

     dude I am not talking about murloc support  

    I am talking about a class entirely based on murlocs 

    you do realize that most DH minions are demons right? 

     And Warlocks too, and no one complained before DH appeared that in mirror matches they could have this counter. DH plays other minions that are not demons, and the demons they play clearly deserve nerfs, so for now Sacrificial Pact it's okay as it is.

    not many people complained back then, because both players in mirror match could use that card right? 

    now one class can use it and other can't, so it creates massive disadvantage 

    that's what we are talking about 

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Will Blizz change Sacrifical Pact?
    Quote from Filipter33 >>
    Quote from elnur0000 >>
    Quote from Filipter33 >>
    Quote from thebignuts >>
    Quote from Pandafarian >>

    I think they shouldn’t nerf or change it. Its a popular tech card for the current meta, and if the ladder was not full of Demon Hunters, i wouldn’t keep them in my decklist. 

    You can think of it if there was a murloc expansion and everybody was running murloc shamans, you could add a pair of Hungry Crab to your decklist right? 

     So the ability to kill any demon, any stats for 0 mana while also healing is balanced?? HELLO!!

    Warlocks in Wild play it for Voidcaller.

     So you  see more balanced a 1 mana 3/4 that kills a enemy murloc? Cause I never seen any thread complaining about Hungry Crab

     if there were two classes entirely based on murlocs 

    and one of them had 1 mana 3/4 that kills a murloc 

     More reasons to my point. They only release support for murlocs to shaman and paladin. Warlock does no play murlocs since vanilla. At least, if you play demon hunter, you know only warlock have this hard tech for you. If paladin murlocs become meta, you know all classes can screw you up with this card.

     dude I am not talking about murloc support  

    I am talking about a class entirely based on murlocs 

    you do realize that most DH minions are demons right? 

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Will Blizz change Sacrifical Pact?
    Quote from Filipter33 >>
    Quote from thebignuts >>
    Quote from Pandafarian >>

    I think they shouldn’t nerf or change it. Its a popular tech card for the current meta, and if the ladder was not full of Demon Hunters, i wouldn’t keep them in my decklist. 

    You can think of it if there was a murloc expansion and everybody was running murloc shamans, you could add a pair of Hungry Crab to your decklist right? 

     So the ability to kill any demon, any stats for 0 mana while also healing is balanced?? HELLO!!

    Warlocks in Wild play it for Voidcaller.

     So you  see more balanced a 1 mana 3/4 that kills a enemy murloc? Cause I never seen any thread complaining about Hungry Crab

     if there were two classes entirely based on murlocs 

    and one of them had 1 mana 3/4 that kills a murloc 

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Will Blizz change Sacrifical Pact?

    well I am playing only warlock and I have to agree

    0 mana counter specific class is a really bad card design, hope they fix it soon enough

    jaraxxus still won't see a play tho, set your health to 15 and skip your turn is almost never a good idea 

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Baku Sometimes doesn't activate on Odd Demon Hunter

    do you shuffle Eye Beam back into your deck at the start of the game or keep in your hand?

    Posted in: Wild Format
  • 1

    posted a message on DH's winrate is a trap!
    Quote from Natsu0Nii >>

    this is mathematically nonsense isnt it? i mean look u have 100 games between dh's resulting in 100 wins and 100 loses in total?! am i missing something?

     nah, you are not missing anything

    some retard opened up a topic with wrong assumption now he is acting like he was trolling in the first place 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Demon Hunter 73% Winrate....WTF
    aQuote from zmauls >>
    Quote from tripzplash >>
    Quote from zmauls >>

    Do you guys not understand how statistics work? It's a new class. Tons of people are playing it because it's exciting. 70% win rate is meaningless.

    If everyone on ladder was playing Demon Hunter, it would have 100% win rate. It's not complicated.

     wrong it will have 50%:..

     Incorrect. It has won 100% of games if everyone plays it. It cannot win both 50% and 100% of games.

    we have two clones of bruce lee 

    they fight 

    first one loses 

    what is the overall win rate of bruce lee? 

    500% 

    Posted in: Demon Hunter
  • 0

    posted a message on Darkest Hour Warlock | Diamond 5 to Legend

    It's hard to replace but Lich king or Colossus of the moon can do the work, i would probably replace one Scrapyard Colossus with one of them if i had enough dust 

    Posted in: Darkest Hour Warlock | Diamond 5 to Legend
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.