Hearthpwn

It got 50 upvotes, that counts.

Yeah crazy long games give you a lot of time to mess up. I lost a game with a really weird priest deck I made because I did not reside I had Lyra in hand and so threw away 2 spells. I then had no spells to combo with Lyra, so I had no chance of winning, but if I had played Lyra first I might have gotten a board clear to remove the last board of my opponent before they went to fatigue. And I had 15 cards left in deck so if I had gotten a board clear I basically just had a win. 

I bet that your game would have ended at the hard cutoff in hearthstone, so nobody would have won.

Quote from Weltkaiser >>

Quote from Toymachine >>

Vicious Syndicate is the only site that resembles my tracker and my win rates, so I'd recommend checking meta there, Razakus Priest is ~0.51 win rate and is tier 2 on all ranks, only on Legend it's tier 1 cos it's more skill dependent deck (no matter what you as an opponent might see), so higher the rank better win rate will be for hard to play decks.

1) afaik tempostorm is supposed to be a legend tier list, that's why your data from below legend ranks doesn't correlate and the reson that VS is more accurate for you.

2) As pointed out in the last VS meta report, the main reason why priest only has a 51% win rate amongst non-legend ranks is, that people tend to play the lists optimized for high legend play, instead of running a list suitable for the ladder. Therefore priest will easily become tier 1 in all the lists, once the ladder decks are better optimized.

So at all levels of hearthstone the average winrate is 50%. This is not an indicator of game health this is an indicator that when one person wins a game the other person loses it. By the mere fact that the game is competitive the average winrate is 50%. But pros on ladder have a higher winrate than that when they play decks that are half decent. This shows that pros have skill that the average person does not have. The game rewards skill because it is a strategy game. And the simpler the rules of a strategy game the better. Games like othello and chess are incredibly old and still played in large numbers (you may call othello something else it has like 5 different names, including reversi as the other most common one). Hearthstone took card games and simplified them in an attempt to create lasting appeal. And it worked, millions of people, a number of which constantly rage about how bad the game is, play it regularly and have for almost four years.

and what cards were synergy picks and what weren't made no sense and was really dumb. Which was the main problem.

if fewer people play fewer people get 12 wins, and actually 12 wins right now is very much luck based, do you have a deathknight, then you have a significantly greater chance of getting 12 wins. And that is what is happening and the point of the person's statement. Good players are getting 12 wins less often because arena is more luck based. Of course math is weird here anyway the number of wins that can be allotted to n people equals 3n minus 1. you can in a system of n people have no people reach twelve wins, but it is very difficult with the matchmaking hearthstone uses for arena. If arena matchmaking was based on historical skill in the mode then it would be quite probable that nobody would reach 12 wins within any given hour. But with the way things currently work, you basically need to have a pretty small number of players before 12 wins becomes non-existent in the hundreds. but decreasing the number of 12 wins players in a system that has them is relatively easy. Make the game more luck based and also make games take longer. That means that 11 win players will on average have worse chances of getting that last win, and it also means matchmaking more often will pair 11 and 10 win players, so if the 10 win players win it slows down the rate at which 12 wins happens, and it forces an extra game that adds an extra loss to the 11 win player pool and removes one from the 10 win player pool, since 11 win players are more likely to get 12 wins than ten win players the percent based change that adding that moving that loss has applies greater to 11 win players than ten win players, which slightly decreases the number of 12 win players. It is absolutely a small change, but the more games between 11 and 10 win players the fewer people reach twelve wins. 

Actually I just created an f2p acount and was able to make this deck pretty easily

### Priest
# Class: Priest
# Format: Standard
# Year of the Mammoth
#
# 2x (1) Holy Smite
# 2x (1) Inner Fire
# 1x (1) Mind Vision
# 2x (1) Northshire Cleric
# 2x (1) Power Word: Shield
# 2x (2) Divine Spirit
# 2x (2) Mind Blast
# 2x (2) Novice Engineer
# 2x (2) Shadow Ascendant
# 2x (2) Shadow Word: Pain
# 2x (3) Kabal Talonpriest
# 2x (3) Shadow Word: Death
# 2x (4) Oasis Snapjaw
# 2x (5) Gurubashi Berserker
# 2x (5) Holy Nova
# 1x (8) Shadowreaper Anduin
#
AAECAa0GAssIkNMCDpcCnAL4AqEE5QSABskG0QrTCtcK2gryDPC7As7MAgA=
#
# To use this deck, copy it to your clipboard and create a new deck in Hearthstone

It basically uses two commons and shadowreaper, and seemed decent to me at low ranks. As you get more stuff shifting this to a minion based midrange deck with some big burst from spells and shadowreaper is probably a good idea if all you want to do is reach rank fifteen. Then you can go on to try and build a more traditional raza kazakus shadowreaper deck. Suggestions I might have for general cards to try and make for the game in general are Bonemare Skelemancer and Acolyte of Pain. They all go well in midrange decks will probably be easiest for you to make and do well with until you get a decent collection of legendaries and epics.

Quote from murlocleader >>

Quote from HypoPotassio >>

My opinion: No. Even though it has the potential to shut down Razakus Priest which surely will see a rise in popularity. There are too many drawbacks for your own game.

Or am I seeing this too one-dimensional?

 

 in that way mindbreaker will be like Skulking Geist. 

this is also an innovative and interesting list, so why should people complain about a interesting different take on something that basically changes the gameplan from tempo out giant jade cards to a more traditional control deck, with a jade idol infinite combo as a finisher. 

Personally I make a new deck every day, Often times just a twist on a concept I have tried before, or smashing two concepts together, but it is still a unique challenge each time. I play a fair amount of wild when standard sucks, like right now. I have never actually gotten legend, the closest I have gotten is rank 3 from 21 in 6 hours the day karazhan was released with secret hunter. I suggest just trying stuff. Like make yourself a wild mill rogue, it is actually cheaper than the standard version because the wild cards you would craft are all common or rare, and the deck actually wins against a lot of stuff. Or play a whirlwind warrior, or try out a buff paladin. Basically just choose a card you like the look of, find other cards that synergize with it, and turns those into the base of your deck, then add in some good cards from the class you chose and a few tech cards that make sense, then play games and adjust after every 3 games until you get bored or the deck feels really fun.

Here's a wild version I created, more cycle to get the combo faster.

It's a Wild deck tho...

Quote from mike_kr >>

And what is wrong or strange about that? Having strong competition is always good for the customer.

Quote from Fabman650 >>

You get a free arena run every week, you numbnut.

You get a free arena run every week, you numbnut.

Just to keep Justicar non-confusing and in synergy with other cards, the simple solution is to do both powers. So you get a 1/2 mech with stealth every time you use it.

I think doing much more is just complicating Justicar more than it was ever intended, no?