-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Hearthstone |OT| Why tap cards when you can roll need [Naxx final wing out now]
- Thread starter Minsc
- Start date
- Status
sudoku in style
Druid does fine against them. Handlock and Shaman are disadvantaged but can bring it at least pretty close to a coin-flip. Paladin needs to not auto-lose to them to stand a chance but that's not so bad with all the small tweaks Hunter has gone through to improve their vs Warrior chances which has slowed their deck down.
The things that are massively disadvantaged are stuff like Miracle Rogue that are designed around completely disrespecting the early game. Or decks that have a lot of minions with little raw burn plans. Mage is probably the worst vs Hunter as far as classes go and then Shaman tend to do pretty bad due to their Hero Power / lack of healing.
To be fair, we're sort of still there with Control Warrior.
Druid does fine against them. Handlock and Shaman are disadvantaged but can bring it at least pretty close to a coin-flip. Paladin needs to not auto-lose to them to stand a chance but that's not so bad with all the small tweaks Hunter has gone through to improve their vs Warrior chances which has slowed their deck down.
The things that are massively disadvantaged are stuff like Miracle Rogue that are designed around completely disrespecting the early game. Or decks that have a lot of minions with little raw burn plans. Mage is probably the worst vs Hunter as far as classes go and then Shaman tend to do pretty bad due to their Hero Power / lack of healing.
To be fair, we're sort of still there with Control Warrior.
But... they're both control?
????
I'm looking at these Swiss results and I see there are a lot of Hunters, so that might merit a nerf. But they aren't nearly as dominant in the Opens, where sideboarding exists. This says to me that Hunters are easily countered but hard to prepare for in an environment like Ranked Matchmaking. They could use a nerf here or there to make them less miserable to play against.
OR
Blizzard could introduce a new format for Ranked Matchmaking since it's already the "tryhard" mode. The game proper is missing one of the most important aspects of card games which is the ability to fine tune your deck in a single match (and hell, there aren't even matches). What we need is sideboard support for this game and for Ranked to exclusively use decks with sideboards in a best out of 3. This will alleviate a lot of the complaints I feel.
Obviously they're not going to do what I suggest anytime soon so I foresee Warrior and Hunter nerfs on the horizon.
In order to accommodate third party tournaments, they should include the ability for decks to generate a unique id number so that tournament organizers can be sure that X player isn't making illegal sideboards in between games.
(Or just do the Managrind thing where you can sideboard limitlessly, which is dumb.)
????
jk
I'm looking at these Swiss results and I see there are a lot of Hunters, so that might merit a nerf. But they aren't nearly as dominant in the Opens, where sideboarding exists. This says to me that Hunters are easily countered but hard to prepare for in an environment like Ranked Matchmaking. They could use a nerf here or there to make them less miserable to play against.
OR
Blizzard could introduce a new format for Ranked Matchmaking since it's already the "tryhard" mode. The game proper is missing one of the most important aspects of card games which is the ability to fine tune your deck in a single match (and hell, there aren't even matches). What we need is sideboard support for this game and for Ranked to exclusively use decks with sideboards in a best out of 3. This will alleviate a lot of the complaints I feel.
Obviously they're not going to do what I suggest anytime soon so I foresee Warrior and Hunter nerfs on the horizon.
In order to accommodate third party tournaments, they should include the ability for decks to generate a unique id number so that tournament organizers can be sure that X player isn't making illegal sideboards in between games.
(Or just do the Managrind thing where you can sideboard limitlessly, which is dumb.)
Out of the last 8 games I have played 6 Hunter face rush decks and 2 warriors. It's super cool that we want a deck to be viable for people without legendaries.
It is short sighted and lazy to make a deck so strong that you face nothing else but that deck. The fact that people are cool with design perspective like this is so crazy to me.
It is short sighted and lazy to make a deck so strong that you face nothing else but that deck. The fact that people are cool with design perspective like this is so crazy to me.
hypersheep
Member
I actually managed to beat a Handlock! Taunted twilight drake and a mountain giant are no match for the fury of fireball fireball frostbolt! Thankfully he did not have siphon soul on turn 6.
A side board would make their heads explode whilst trying to figure out how to balance the variables. I do think a sideboard would benefit everyone in the long run though, should they manage it.
__ lol ___
I like your solutions, but agree with you in Blizzard not implementing anything like that soon.
I still think you're too stuck on the idea that it's a broken deck. It's a good deck but not a wildly overpowered one. I agree that it's sloppy design to have something excessively good. I just don't think there's a deck that currently fits that.
Today was a bad day for ranked.
That's fine. I can get those arguments. Just not really one about it being grossly overpowered. Honestly, I think the balance for the most part is pretty good at the moment with aggro being a bit better than you'd expect for a TCG/CCG (though this is inherent to Hearthstone's mechanics).
25% of the way there for Warrior ;__;
That's fine. I can get those arguments. Just not really one about it being grossly overpowered. Honestly, I think the balance for the most part is pretty good at the moment with aggro being a bit better than you'd expect for a TCG/CCG (though this is inherent to Hearthstone's mechanics).
25% of the way there for Warrior ;__;
I usually do this as a way of conceeding. It's funnier.
What would a suitable recplacement be for a lack of Grommash and Alexstraza in a warrior deck? I like the class but I dont have 3200 dust around for those 2 cards.
My current deck is
No Leeroy or Sylvanas
My current deck is
No Leeroy or Sylvanas
The meta is the game, I hate it at times to but thats just how it is, you can also play priest control, healadin and control warlock to counter aggression.
GoofsterStud
Member
They really need to separate deck rank.
I like to mess around with a lot of decks, build my own. I want to see how all my decks rank on their own merits. Not how I fluctuate to unlock the Golden Hero or Golden Backs.
I like to mess around with a lot of decks, build my own. I want to see how all my decks rank on their own merits. Not how I fluctuate to unlock the Golden Hero or Golden Backs.
ShinNL
Member
When I can't play Shaman AT ALL because UTH = lol totems, the game is bad.
I hate aggro decks with a passion, I feel your pain I really do but this is how it is with games that of this sort, there isnt enough cards to be truly diverse, most heroes can only be played 2 ways and therefore you are always a slave to the current popular builds. You cant expect anything else in a game where there is no mechanical skill involved, its a thinking game, you have to out think your opponent and a large part of that is taking into account what is currently being used.
I mean, as a former Magic player, this is basically what I expected / wanted: A "competitive" scene out of Ranked that is basically a question of knowing the metagame. It's like prepping for a tournament, except with Bo1 matches so there's a higher chance of getting cheesed out.
Also, as far as Shaman vs Hunter is concerned, you just don't Hero Power with leftover mana. It's a pretty frustrating match-up at times since it's basically how fast you can get into Unbound + Feral Spirit and can you live long enough to Windfury + Leeroy / Al'Akir + Rockbiter. But Shaman does have a lot of burst possible with Flametongue use and so-on so it's not the worst thing ever. There's a good reason Shaman is one of the really popular Legend classes.
Also, as far as Shaman vs Hunter is concerned, you just don't Hero Power with leftover mana. It's a pretty frustrating match-up at times since it's basically how fast you can get into Unbound + Feral Spirit and can you live long enough to Windfury + Leeroy / Al'Akir + Rockbiter. But Shaman does have a lot of burst possible with Flametongue use and so-on so it's not the worst thing ever. There's a good reason Shaman is one of the really popular Legend classes.
Trump is currently doing a free to play Shaman to legendary, worth a watch because he plays Hunter and wins against them, you dont have to use his build you may learn how to better deal with hunter as shaman from watching.
ShinNL
Member
lol, I'm watching it while playing, he's losing against most Hunters actually...
KojiKnight
Member
I honestly do not fear Paladin's who don't run Avenging Wrath. 2 Lay on Hands seems a bit too much & greedy. Even against nuke decks, 1 Lay on Hands and 2 Guardian of Kings should provide sufficient healing. I think replacing at least 1 Lay on Hands with 1 Avenging Wrath would make the deck a lot more efficient.
Though it says Mage Buster, I think your deck is exactly the type of deck my Mage countersonly 2 sheep worthy targets and the rest being in Flamestrike + Blizzard range
2 lay may be too greedy, but avenging wrath isn't that great of a card IMO. 8 Damage for 6 mana on random targets leaves waaaaay too much to chance. It's most useful when paired with equality, but if I'm going to use equality, it pairs much better with my other cards.
Not sure if I'll replace the lay or not, it has made the difference in a couple matches, but there have been a few matches where it wasn't as helpful. I could probably use another late game card... As for mage match ups in general? I still do really great against them. I can usually get a mage to blow a polly on something I've kings'ed (a 2 for 1 trade against me, but since Tirion often ends 3+ for 1, it's usually a trade worth making)
As for the subject of dealing with hunter, if it's a weapon/secret hunter ooze's ruin their days so much. If it's an UtH/Rush hunter.... shaman have it rough. Shaman generally relies on lots of little minions and buffs to get by, and hunters eat that play style for lunch. Buff classes do great against that style of hunter since you can have 2 brawny minions and maybe a third with taunt and there is very little they can do about it.
It's a great way to potentially clear the board of small stuff, however, and it's really not that chance-y when used properly. If nothing else, an empty board means Avenging Wrath + Truesilver is burst 12, for instance.
Edit: To clarify, a great way to clear a bunch of 1-3 or so HP stragglers so you don't need to use Equality for or to kill things that Consecrate would miss. That and the reach it provides for damage gives it a lot of pretty good uses in general.
Shaman vs Hunter is one of the few cases of "welp, try to win before losing" for the game plan. It's actually not as hard as it sounds since there's so much possible damage in the kit: 12 damage in Lightning Bolts and Rockbiters, Doomhammer is potentially 16 damage on it's own if you run it, Fire Elementals are on-demand 6, Flametongue is up-to 8 with pseudo-Charge, etc.
I'll do all sorts of crazy things as a fun way to concede. Nothing wrong with it.
Played a mage today who had me at a 30 to 1 advantage. On any turn she could have ended the game with a hero power fireball. But she didn't, and we played on, and I got her down to 5hp. Just one more Fireball (the spell version) and I could have won. It's a game, it's supposed to be fun. I don't mind at all when others fuck about.
Mengy
wishes it were bannable to say mean things about Marvel
Did they make arena winnings worse for bad players?
I didn't play for a few months, and I've never gotten more than four wins in an arena run, but I used to always get some gold and/or dust plus one pack, I mean even when I only got one or two wins I would still get some gold and dust.
But after coming back, it seems like my arena winnings are far worse than they used to be. Sometimes I don't get any gold or dust, just a pack and one common card. I'm starting to think I should just play constructed for dailies and buy 100g packs straight up instead.
I didn't play for a few months, and I've never gotten more than four wins in an arena run, but I used to always get some gold and/or dust plus one pack, I mean even when I only got one or two wins I would still get some gold and dust.
But after coming back, it seems like my arena winnings are far worse than they used to be. Sometimes I don't get any gold or dust, just a pack and one common card. I'm starting to think I should just play constructed for dailies and buy 100g packs straight up instead.
Minsc
Gold Member
For me, Shaman vs Hunter is 50/50 actually. I have altered my shaman deck slightly, 2 earth-seers that heal 3, and I aim to lead with either knife juggler > feral spirit, or unbound > feral spirit. I will summon one totem period if I have no turn 2 play, and that works fine (usually just so I can turn a 0/2 in to a 3/2 if need be). If I only play 2 minions on the board (exception feral spirit), by turn 6+ they all all high attack threats that will end the game (fire elemental, rag, etc). I'd probably throw in an earth elemental too if I had one, but the RNG hates me and I still haven't gotten one.
As an aside, watching Trump's free Shaman dismantle a Control Warrior makes me a little sad.
The problem with Shaman compared to other classes for the vs Hunter match-up is that it takes more face damage than them due to Rockbiter and Axe but lacks the healing to make up for it. The fact that Hunter always has a good clock on them kind of haunts them throughout the match.
But, they do have an obscene amount of burst potential that many other classes end up lacking so Shaman tends to have the ability to suddenly end the match out of nowhere.
The problem with Shaman compared to other classes for the vs Hunter match-up is that it takes more face damage than them due to Rockbiter and Axe but lacks the healing to make up for it. The fact that Hunter always has a good clock on them kind of haunts them throughout the match.
But, they do have an obscene amount of burst potential that many other classes end up lacking so Shaman tends to have the ability to suddenly end the match out of nowhere.
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
dat rng
Minsc
Gold Member
Oozing a Gorehowl really puts a thorn (or maybe more a pole) in a Control Warrior's side.
Feels nice to obliterate one 30-0, after getting my butt handed to me by another (I think they were showing off too because they drew their whole deck before killing me - just to show they could... had 20+ armor too, made amazing use out of Gorehowl, traded a good 6 times, and had the typical 4-5 legends finishing me with the 10/6 charge guy).
Interesting how much better you play when you know what a deck consists of and what its gameplan is. A nice selection of useful cards goes a long way too, but correctly anticipating a deck's plays makes a world of difference.
Feels nice to obliterate one 30-0, after getting my butt handed to me by another (I think they were showing off too because they drew their whole deck before killing me - just to show they could... had 20+ armor too, made amazing use out of Gorehowl, traded a good 6 times, and had the typical 4-5 legends finishing me with the 10/6 charge guy).
Interesting how much better you play when you know what a deck consists of and what its gameplan is. A nice selection of useful cards goes a long way too, but correctly anticipating a deck's plays makes a world of difference.
For anyone else having problems playing the game since it released, try disabling forced triple buffering if that's what you're using.
I was getting a blank window with sound playing since the release patch and couldn't figure it out. Someone on the tech support forums solved the mystery for a few of us and that was the secret.
I was getting a blank window with sound playing since the release patch and couldn't figure it out. Someone on the tech support forums solved the mystery for a few of us and that was the secret.
hypersheep
Member
Would you accept a friend invite from a person you just beat by topdecking pyroblast? Don't think so.
I'm loving this game but a bit concerned for newcomers. Does anyone else feel like the rate for legendaries is a bit too low? After putting ~$25 in, plus a month of daily playing, I got one (Nat Pagle), who I DE for the full 1600. Granted, I could probably DE a bunch of cards and get one or two more. I'd estimate I've opened about 60 packs (15 purchased outright, ~45 from daily play) so given the 1/40 rate, 1 legendary seems about right.
That being said I'm around rank 10 (and rising) with my hunter deck and 100% get the argument that there are lots of ways to play. But I worry about newcomers and the culture of this game, especially as the lower ranks start getting cluttered with legendaries. I can't see many newcomers in a few months actually enjoying the game. More ranks might help in the short run, but I feel there needs to be an alternate solution -- maybe increased legendary rate or infinite daily quests?
I kind of wish that the current legendaries were actually epics, and that legendaries were just strange, pseudo-cosmetic cards that usually don't fit that well into low or mid level play.
Am I alone in this? Have the designers addressed these concerns at all in interviews? Going by the WoW model, it seems like Blizzard is well aware how over time the process needs to get easier (e.g. easier to level to 60 now than it was at launch).
That being said I'm around rank 10 (and rising) with my hunter deck and 100% get the argument that there are lots of ways to play. But I worry about newcomers and the culture of this game, especially as the lower ranks start getting cluttered with legendaries. I can't see many newcomers in a few months actually enjoying the game. More ranks might help in the short run, but I feel there needs to be an alternate solution -- maybe increased legendary rate or infinite daily quests?
I kind of wish that the current legendaries were actually epics, and that legendaries were just strange, pseudo-cosmetic cards that usually don't fit that well into low or mid level play.
Am I alone in this? Have the designers addressed these concerns at all in interviews? Going by the WoW model, it seems like Blizzard is well aware how over time the process needs to get easier (e.g. easier to level to 60 now than it was at launch).
Oozing a Gorehowl really puts a thorn (or maybe more a pole) in a Control Warrior's side.
Ooze is so good right now with so many Warriors, Hunters and Shamans with weapons that I'm surprised more people don't run it.
The rate is 1% per card per pack so it's closer to 1/20 pack rate, not 1/40.
Adventure Mode is a way to add a PvE element for cards. We'll see how good those cards are as it's a good way to just ... force a grind to unlock stuff that isn't gold-limited. And perhaps even a way to get more packs in circulation if they want to.
But, no, I don't believe they've said anything about the whole card collection process being made easier for the future. They might do things like other limited queues just so there's options besides just Casual or Ranked but who knows.
I've been Harrison'd something like 3 or 4 times a day
- Status