Hearthpwn

I've been spending most of my time recently in Standard Casual with a Priest deck focused around card copying. Unless I'm facing a balls to the wall aggro deck, I have a reasonably good chance of winning. There is no win condition in the deck itself, I must copy my opponent's.

What I've been noticing is that when I do win with my op's win condition, I hardly ever get to actually finish the game. More often than not, I get a rage quit. From my perspective, I got really lucky and had some fun and just happened to win with a stupid deck, but my ops obviously have a different view.

It's been happening so much recently that I thought I would get the community's sense of things. What is so rage inducing about losing to a copy deck that they can't just concede, they must close the client?

Quote from KingCarnage >>

The secret quest deck looks like a decent blend of 2 decks thought hunter is too cheesy to be interesting in most cases. 

Cheesy or not, it's a very fun deck to play and so very satisfying to get that quest done twice. As your signature line says, Fun > Meta ;)

Are you actually getting wins with the dragon deck? Dire Frenzy on only 3 possible targets looks rough. Bloodscalp is new but surely I havent seen it used anywhere. A few weeks ago i made a couple zooish hunter deck just to see if it could be interesting. I became confused on what 2-3 types i wanted to use out of beast/pirate/murloc(could have gone mech).

I am getting wins! The Dire Frenzy might seem a bit much with only five beasts in the deck, but that's because it's mainly there for the Scaleworms. Using Stitched Tracker can get you two more beasts and if you've frenzied, then those beats will be supercharged. Also, with Deathstalker Rexxar giving you even more target, Dire Frenzy sees good play. The goal of the deck is control, so taking it slow, being flexible, and responding to the board is the game plan.

The reality is that the current set of dragons are so, so good at controlling board, they can almost fit in any deck. Because Hunter has Carrion Drake as well, they work even better here and the opponent never suspects a 3/7 Poisonous, which I think is the strongest Poisonous minion in terms of raw stats in the game.

The key to the deck working so well is that it's unexpected: they don't know what extra spells I have and they never suspect dragons, so they'll play right into a Dragonmaw Scorcher or Crowd Roaster.

I have two Hunter decks that use fairly unused cards. The first is a Dragon Control deck that focuses on creating spells and minions to stay flexible and dragons for their fantastic ability to control the board. Unused cards would be Bloodscalp Strategist and Stitched Tracker (though more the former than the latter):

The other deck is a Quest Hunter deck. The quest is handled by the Springpaws and Halazzi, the Lynx (he can finish the quest by himself if you can get seven lynxes out of him). The rest of the deck is delay and control for that. Once Zul'jin is played, he will recast the Quest and you can finish it a second time with the raptors from the first quest. The Snipes and Dred are there to stop the Mecha'thun, Archmage Antonidas, and DK Paladin OTKs as you can play both cards on 9 mana and it will outright kill Mecha'thun, two Sorcerer's Apprentices or multiple Horsemen.

Almost forgot to add, the idea for this deck is not mine. I happened to have this played against me in a random Casual match and was so impressed by the uniqueness of it that I built a version of it right after badly losing to it. I don't remember the screen name of my opponent, but maybe they are somewhere on Hearthpwn and will see this? If so, thank you for beating me with such a creative deck!

Quote from iandakar >>

Quote from whythemy >>

The idea of a class does not necessarily change when a Classic or Basic representative of that classes' identity is altered. A Fireball is still a direct damage spell, whether it's 4 mana or 5 or 6. At the same time, these cards have not been nerfed as they are not problem cards that limit design space.

The concept of a required card is a not so certain one. The goal, as I understand it to be, is determining whether a class identity card present in the majority of that classes' archetypes limits the design and creative spaces for the other classes as well as the class itself. To take an example from your list, Fireball does not limit the design/creative space for the other eight classes. Likewise Swipe, etc; they are not problems. Equality at 2 mana does limit the D&C space of the other classes, at least where the game stands right now.

I believe the difficulty might be one of perception: this class needs X card to remain viable and keep the flavor of that class. For example, the broader themes of Paladin does not suffer at the nerfing of Equality. The ability to field a small army and then empower them as a leader through the blessing of the light while leading from the front with weapons. That could be as good an understanding of Paladin identity as any other. Class identity should not swing on the hinge of one or two Classic/Basic cards. Instead, the entirely of the C&B sets should be taken into consideration. This allows future expansions to explore the boundaries of that base identity. In Boomsday, Paladin got the ability to field a small army of mechs and empower them with magnetics. Same identity, different execution of it.

 A question if I may:  Why does a class need an identity that requires certain cards and mechanics?  That is, why does Mage need fireball?

Let's say that we completely eliminated ALL of mages' cards, including fireball, today, and were tasked with making a new set of cards?  Would we REALLY need to give mage a new fireball, or could we create a new style of gameplay into the class ?  Instead of fireballs, the class focuses on transmuting matter:  spells that turn minions into different minions, or the ability to take a minion and turn it into a weapon or the other way around?  That would still feel like a 'mage', but wouldn't have anyhthing to do with big board clearing spells and burn. 

Same goes for other classes.  We could make Paladin have Ramp by having minions that Led other mininos, making them cheaper to play or flat out giving you mana. 

The point is, if we removed all of the 'identifying' cards from a class, could we not then use the open plain to give them new cards with different mechanics but keep the same theme?

That is, is a druid a druid because their cards involve nature, or because they Ramp?  And if the latter, how do we avoid the game being stale when Hunter Must Face and Paladin Must Buff and Druid Must Ramp?

Class identity is necessary to create boundaries between classes so they don't overlap. These boundaries, first set by the Classic and Basic sets, provide the design space structure in which to work. So long as class cards fit within those boundaries (whatever they might be) and do not overly infringe upon other classes' boundaries, they fit with the class identity.

As this point in Hearthstone's life-cycle, I agree with you. Mage does not need Fireball because it has a class identity outlined by the recent expansions. If Blizzard really wants to make each "Year of" cycle feel energized, they should do the Kibler plan and get rid of or severely limit the available Classic and Basic cards available. Frankly, they should also give consideration to the plausibility of changing the base hero powers each cycle as well. Does Hunter really have to just shoot face? Why can't Rexxar do something different that embodies the spirit of hunters?

I further agree with you that class identity can and should shift each cycle. I have been enjoying the hand mage archetype that 2018 gave us, for example. When I think about class identity and such, my mind always goes back to the recent Ixalan sets for Magic. They had white mana vampires that represent the noble, religious knighthood of that plane. It was a completely different expression of what could have easily been the same ol', same ol'. It would be very exciting to see Hearthstone do something similar in such a large way.

Quote from PinkGhost

 

>This is the first good counter point I've seen on this thread. I guess I don't think we should worry about cards making it into a lot of decks as much as we should worry about how fair/unfair they are. Like I said earlier Undertaker definitely deserved it and for the same reason I think cards like Mana Wyrm did as well, because if those cards were drawn early they could just win you the game. Hence, unfair. But while I agree that game designers completely have the right to make any design changes they desire, I don't think that means they always should. Rather I think sometimes they can't without them betraying the player-base. Imagine if Blizz decided to nerf Fireball or Swipe, Northshire Cleric or Flame Imp or even Frothing Berserker, these nerfs wouldn't just change decks, they would change our very idea of the classes themselves, because each of these cards represents something a class has always been able to do. Maybe nerf them if they become too strong or their mechanics become too easy to abuse, but not just because they're being used a lot. You might just ruin the entire theme of the class.

The idea of a class does not necessarily change when a Classic or Basic representative of that classes' identity is altered. A Fireball is still a direct damage spell, whether it's 4 mana or 5 or 6. At the same time, these cards have not been nerfed as they are not problem cards that limit design space.

The concept of a required card is a not so certain one. The goal, as I understand it to be, is determining whether a class identity card present in the majority of that classes' archetypes limits the design and creative spaces for the other classes as well as the class itself. To take an example from your list, Fireball does not limit the design/creative space for the other eight classes. Likewise Swipe, etc; they are not problems. Equality at 2 mana does limit the D&C space of the other classes, at least where the game stands right now.

I believe the difficulty might be one of perception: this class needs X card to remain viable and keep the flavor of that class. For example, the broader themes of Paladin does not suffer at the nerfing of Equality. The ability to field a small army and then empower them as a leader through the blessing of the light while leading from the front with weapons. That could be as good an understanding of Paladin identity as any other. Class identity should not swing on the hinge of one or two Classic/Basic cards. Instead, the entirely of the C&B sets should be taken into consideration. This allows future expansions to explore the boundaries of that base identity. In Boomsday, Paladin got the ability to field a small army of mechs and empower them with magnetics. Same identity, different execution of it.

Blizzard is being more active in their stewardship of their card balancing. If they were actually trigger happy (which denotes a violent, reflexive response), the game would be changed more frequently and in more brutal ways. It has not been.

Their reasoning for these nerfs is consistent with how they've presented nerfs in the past: an inordinate number of decks containing the same cards, making them a requirement for playing that class. Any time a card is a requirement, it restricts the creative environment, both for the players and for the designers.

As much as Hearthstone is game to be played, it is a game to be designed. Should the designers see trends that would restrict their future design space, they should act. It is their role. Likewise, when the players see the creative space being changed to suit this design space, they should act and change their strategies and adopt new deck archetypes. That is their role as players who choose to participate in the designer's game.

So, Hearthstone was being kept alive by two class specific cards? Yikes indeed! To think, the almost five years of the game's launched existence depending solely on Equality and Hunter's Mark! I guess the other seven classes were just to give Paladin and Hunter opponents. Makes sense!

I agree. They should have a yearly rotating selection from Classic (some in, some out) and the last three/four expansions. Keeping the card pool somewhat free from the static class identities set by Classic would give them so much breathing room to do really interesting things.

Between Un'goro and Witchwood, Blizzard has decided I needed at least one Warrior legendary and three of them were golden! It was like a big, shiny sign pointing to a class that I find boring to play, but I can't bring myself to DE any leg that aren't in Wild.

Recently, though, it's been all over the place, so hopefully they've calmed their roll.

D'awww, look how adorable she is! She's so happy to go see trolls rip each other to pieces! And she's a fan of everybody, too! She's how I used to be when HS got new expansions and adventures before I got all cynical and stuff.

My vote for cutest card of the expansion for sure.

Quote from Fithgar >>

I tried this deck (whythemy), and I want to love it, but I found in the first 8 turns I kept getting some of my biggest and best deathrattle minions in-hand. It's just the nature of RNG unfortunately. I also kept NOT getting the Flark's Boom-Zooka card until late in the game, when even the practice AI had me nearly dead.

It sure is fun when it lands though. I wish there was some way to fish out the key card early, kind of like a Cavern Shinyfinder for 8+ cost cards.

Yeah, I hear you. It is definitely RNG focused. It is definitely closer to the fun side of things than the competitive side.

Why not give NightCrawl3r's deck a try? I haven't played it yet, but maybe it's more consistent than my deck.

Quote from NightCrawl3r >>

Boom-Zooka is no meme Big Beast Hunter Deck by NightCrawl3r - Aug 28, 2018 View Deck String Export to BBCode Export to Cockatrice Export to MarkDown Export to Html Clone this deck
Minion (8) 1x Kathrena Winterwisp 1x King Krush 2x Abominable Bowman 2x Charged Devilsaur 2x Savannah Highmane	Ability (19) 1x Flark's Boom-Zooka 2x Lesser Emerald Spellstone 2x Wandering Monster 2x Animal Companion 1x Deadly Shot 1x Dire Frenzy 2x Explosive Trap 2x Flanking Strike 2x Freezing Trap 2x Secret Plan 2x Hunter's Mark	Weapon (2) 2x Candleshot	Playable Hero (1) 1x Deathstalker Rexxar
Loading Collection

I reached legend last season with this list. It's a bit slow now that the meta has sped up but my winrate with it is still decent. By the way, I highly recommend Kathrena and DK Rexxar in Boom-zooka lists. Kathrena is a great pull from boom-zooka and she synergizes with the same beasts you need to run for Boom-zooka anyway. Pulling zombeasts from bowman is always fun

My first iteration of the deck had only eight minions: two bowman, two charging devilsaur, two mechnical whelp, one krush, and one kathrena. I eventually took her out because more often than not she did nothing when pulled, either with boom-zooka or playing normally. Perhaps, though, with so many other minions in this new version, she'll have more value. I'll try her out.

I sort of agree with you on DK rexxar. The original spirit of the deck was to face the opp with all these charging beasts. Adding in non-charging beasts to the pool messes with that. Granted, wander monster sometimes does as well, but far less often. Though maybe a slower deck might work better with the boom-zooka? I will give it a try.

I created a deck around Flark's Boom-Zooka for fun and then was surprised by how effective it is with the right pulls. I was curious what else the community might come up with to make the card even more viable and fun to use, so I thought I would post my experiments here and see what you all think:

• If Abominable Bowman and a beast are pulled, regardless of the order, when everything dies you are guaranteed to get that beast back if it's your only dead beast.
• If Necromechanic and any deathrattles are pulled, each one will trigger twice upon death.
• If Spiritsinger Umbra is pulled, she will trigger all deathrattles before anything attacks.
• If Spiritsinger Umbra and Necromechanic are pulled, or one or both of them are on the board already, the deathrattles pulled trigger twice before attacking.

These interactions make for some truly memorable Boom-Zookas. One game, I had King Krush die the turn before a Boom-Zooka. I played it, got two Bowman and one Necromechanic. They cleared my opponent's board and left me with four Krushes.

I have found it to work well with Krush, Charged Devilsaur, and Mechanical Whelp. Usually clears board and leaves you with one or two 7/7, sometimes with charge.

I'll leave a link to the deck I created around the Boom-Zooka below. I'm curious what you all think about the card and what you've tried that's worked in the past.

I did a little experimenting with your suggestions. Here is what I can confirm:

If Necromechanic is pulled, any other Deathrattles will double trigger. I pulled a King Krush, a Necromechanic and an Abominable Bowman. Received two Krushes after the Boom Cannon.

If Spiritsinger Umbra is pulled, all Deathrattles trigger as they are summoned. I pulled an Umbra, Krush, and Mechanical Whelp with a Necromechanic on board. Had four Mechanical Dragons after the Boom Cannon. 

Those additional cards really go a long way toward improving the impact of the Boom Cannon! Certainly makes it more impressive.

I'm glad you're enjoying it! Yeah, Wandering Monster can screw up your resurrects sometimes, but it's too good to not include.