• 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 |OT8| Elise's Extremely Irresponsible Field Trip To Un'Goro

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BenjaminBirdie

Banned
Tacitus_ said:
Lifecoach roping and then messing up his plays
1.0
Click to expand...

i love that shit
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Delibes said:
So I got this in back to back packs I got with gold from dailies:



Should I dust Goya?
Click to expand...

I would want to at least try it out first, maybe in a Reno or ramp deck.

And then dust it.
 
B

Brawndo Addict

Banned
Mobius and pet octopus said:
I don't think so. It's an unrealistic dream to have all 9 classes capable of building a deck that has no hard counters available to it. And it's not even necessarily a good thing to have a meta with no hard counters. That's not really a meta game, it's stale. There would be a few decks at the top with better winrates then the rest of the pack, and you are rewarded less for discerning where the meta game is heading.

I think lopsided match ups are just a part of a healthy meta. The meta adjusts. It's when it cannot adjust that things are a problem.
Click to expand...

This discussion ties back into my previous post where I wondered what the answer to this question would be based on Blizzard's internal statistics: Is the average game of hearthstone more likely to be a competitive match or a predetermined blowout? If your average game is a blowout I don't think that's particularly interesting game design because it makes execution irrelevant.

Extreme Made Up Hypothetical: I pick pirate warrior and based on the matchmaking pool I win 65% of my matches in an overwhelming fashion but lose 30% in an overwhelming fashion. That leaves only a small subset of games (5%) where my choices actually matter and determine the outcome.

Is the "game" in this scenario just picking the deck that gives you the highest win-rate based on the statistics of the matchmaking pool? Without meaningful choices there's no difference between me playing and a bot playing; it's just manual labor to see if choosing A gives a bigger number than choosing B.

I would hazard a guess that most CCGs tend to struggle with this problem one way or another. And for all I know the average game is skill-based. The problem is that Hearthstone is so simplified it can't do extra things to try to make execution/skill more important such as banning cards/classes, sideboards, having more complex mechanics for mana/attack, etc.
 
F

Familienoberhauptvogel

Banned
Delibes said:
I have neither reno nor arya FeelsBadMan
Click to expand...
Then dust her, don't feel too bad about a regular legendary of your choice, if you don't have patches craft it. Worst case he gets nerfed and you get your dust back.
fertygo said:
Aggro shaman is favored because they had "defense" mechanic such as feral spirit n maelstrom portal tho
Click to expand...
True but you're also just regularly racing them since you have burn that buffs your 1-drop and your hero power is actually relevant.
 
M

Mobius and pet octopus

Member
Brawndo Addict said:
This discussion ties back into my previous post where I wondered what the answer to this question would be based on Blizzard's internal statistics:

Is the average game of hearthstone more likely to be a competitive match whose winner is determined by individual player choices or is it more likely to be a predetermined blowout caused by deck choices or draw order of cards?

If your average game is just a blowout one way or the other I don't think that's particularly interesting game design because it makes execution irrelevant. You could skip the actual gameplay part and just tell me the results based on the matchmaker; optimizing a statistical formula isn't fun to me.

Made Up Hypothetical: Let's say I pick pirate warrior and based on the current matchmaking pool I win 65% of my matches in an overwhelming fashion but lose 30% in an overwhelming fashion because of the deck matchups. That leaves a small subset of games (5%) where my choices actually matter and determine the outcome.

What exactly is the game that I would be playing in that scenario? Is the "game" just picking the deck that outputs the highest default win-rate based on the statistics of the matchmaking pool, e.g., an Excel Formula game? Or is the real game in those small subset of matches where I actually get to make meaningful choices that dictate the outcome?

If you never make meaningful choices when you're playing a match, then there's no difference between you playing and a bot playing. You're just doing manual labor to see if your choice of A will output a higher number than if you had chosen B. Again, I don't know if that's true or not, maybe the average game does come down to skill as opposed to the dice roll. But I would hazard a guess that most CCGs tend to struggle with this problem one way or another.

The problem is that Hearthstone has to be so simplified that it can't use a lot of the other solutions that other CCGs can implement in an attempt to make execution/skill more important: banning cards/classes, sideboards, more complex mechanics, etc.
Click to expand...

I think this is a different discussion. And I think there is a ton more skill in the game. But I think this discussion has been beaten to death tbh. In short, I think the game's where your decisions matter weigh far more than 5%. Far more than 50% when you count deck building and deck selection. Before you even get into a game you've already made several choices that impact the result.
 
F

Finalow

Member
fertygo said:
Aggro shaman is favored because they had "defense" mechanic such as feral spirit n maelstrom portal tho
Click to expand...
aggro Shaman is favored because it's the better aggro deck, some people here still haven't realized it.

Hero said:
Pirate Warrior is fucking garbage. You literally can't mount a defense against it.
Click to expand...
I must be really bad with the deck because I lost to some Druids playing taunts on curve, and some Priests who weren't dead by turn 6 and had a full board. /s
here is how it works and why you're simply wrong: you can be really lucky and have an insane opening, followed by all the cards you need to kill the opponent before turn 6 even if he plays taunts and heals. or, you can also not draw perfectly and lose some games to taunts, heals, Renolocks, Shamans and to every other counter this deck has, and it has many. surprisingly enough, you don't draw perfectly every match.
 
Z

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
Put together this wild demon dreadsteedlock for the 15 demons quest. it's probably not that great but it's fun and it got the quest done easily enough.

iQt5xLt.png
 
Y

Yaboosh

Super Sleuth
Pirate warrior is a garbage deck because you never have any real decisions.

Even aggro shaman requires more thought.
 
Z

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
QFNS said:
No Dark Bomb? whyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

But yeah I'ma save this for the next time I need to do that demon quest.
Click to expand...

I kind of slapped it together based on previous experience with dreadsteed decks and I don't play wild much. Sometimes I forget about those cards that rotate out, lol.

I guess you could cut the Dark Peddlers? Or maybe the doomguards? Or the flame imps, I dunno, lol. But the Flame Imps get you extra ticks on the quest.

fertygo said:
CrystalWeaver is pretty underrated btw too bad renolock with demon is bad

but Crystalweaver itself is pretty good
Click to expand...

Definitely powerful in a deck like this, especially since the sticky dreadsteeds always give you targets in the late game.
 
B

Brawndo Addict

Banned
Mobius and pet octopus said:
I think this is a different discussion. And I think there is a ton more skill in the game. But I think this discussion has been beaten to death tbh. In short, I think the game's where your decisions matter weigh far more than 5%. Far more than 50% when you count deck building and deck selection. Before you even get into a game you've already made several choices that impact the result.
Click to expand...

I just want to clarify that I didn't mean the hypothetical as a prediction of the actual numbers. It was an intentionally extreme example to illustrate a point. I wouldn't be happy with a 50/50 split either but as I said I have no idea what the numbers are. Far as I know it's 90/10 in favor of skill. I don't think deck selection counts as a meaningful choice though, and I'd wager the average player does no original deck building either.

What I do know is that I don't play hearthstone because I feel particularly challenged in my decision making against other players in ranked, I play to satisfy broader archetype desires (I want to win with a weird thematic deck, I want to figure out how to beat the heroic bosses in funny ways, I want to play the tavern brawl or arena, etc).
 
F

Finalow

Member
Familienoberhauptvogel said:
You say that but I just keep losing with secret paladin. I'm stuck at 13.
Click to expand...
are you running the N'Zoth list? That's the best and most disgusting one.

also I believe running Patches + Small-Time Buccaneer is not an improvement at all. a) it's a very optimized and old deck, with broken cards everywhere, it's hard to make space for 3 new ones b) Patches sucks if you don't draw one of your two pirates first, and Small-Time Buccaneer isn't that good because you don't have any weapon until turn 3.
 
F

Familienoberhauptvogel

Banned
Finalow said:
are you running the N'Zoth list? That's the best and most disgusting one.

also I believe running Patches + Small-Time Buccaneer is not an improvement at all. a) it's a very optimized and old deck, with broken cards everywhere, it's hard to make space for 3 new ones b) Patches sucks if you don't draw one of your two pirates first, and Small-Time Buccaneer isn't that good because you don't have any weapon until turn 3.
Click to expand...

I actually went back to a stock list because I couldn't even get lower than 18 with NZoth, maybe the meta has settled in but I just regularly died with multiple 6+ drops in hand because that version is much more top heavy. Was doing better with the stock list but w/o Lightlord it's missing reach. Because of warrior everyone is running ooze now as well. Now there's a ton of Highlander decks so I'll probably go back to a more value oriented NZoth version.
 
M

Mobius and pet octopus

Member
Brawndo Addict said:
I just want to clarify that I didn't mean the hypothetical as a prediction of the actual numbers. It was an intentionally extreme example to illustrate a point. I wouldn't be happy with a 50/50 split either but as I said I have no idea what the numbers are. Far as I know it's 90/10 in favor of skill.

What I do know is that I don't play hearthstone because I feel challenged in decision making against other players in ranked, I play to satisfy broader archetype desires (I want to win with a weird thematic deck, I want to figure out how to beat the heroic bosses in funny ways, I want to play the tavern brawl or arena, etc).
Click to expand...

I think a lot of people approach the game the way you do. I do some of the time as well. Nothing wrong with that. But there is a whole huge skill gap between even me and pro players. I've hit legend multiple times and I know I can't hit top 100 legend even if I tried (well, I don't know for fact cause I've never tried but I believe for me to do it I would have to significantly up my game).

I remember strifecro stating he thinks the game actually is 90/10 in favor of skill over luck.

I think it's great if there are a lot of match ups closer to 50/50. But that doesn't mean if you win 55% of those match ups, only 5% of your matches were decided by skill. That's a misconception to begin with, I think because it assumes both players have played perfectly each game.

I think the biggest sign of skill over luck has to do with consistency in results. And we've had high consistency with a lot of players over time.

This all said, I really do think the whole skill vs luck discussion is tired so I'll likely leave this as my last post on the topic.
 
Q

QFNS

Unconfirmed Member
ZealousD said:
I kind of slapped it together based on previous experience with dreadsteed decks and I don't play wild much. Sometimes I forget about those cards that rotate out, lol.

I guess you could cut the Dark Peddlers? Or maybe the doomguards? Or the flame imps, I dunno, lol. But the Flame Imps get you extra ticks on the quest.
Click to expand...

Keep the demons for the quest obviously. I'd cut Kel'Thuzad, who while awesome isn't helping your curve with all the Enforcers, Boom and Mal'Ganis/Jaraxxus. THen maybe a Void Terror or Sac Pac? I dunno. Dark Bomb is so good though, it's hard to say if its better than the synergy there. In terms of just being a silly quest deck, I'm sure its fine, but I think just running 1x Dark Bomb over KT is prolly going to help some.
 
Z

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
lol

This druid was punished pretty hard for his misplays.

https://hsreplay.net/replay/J7w8P4Bnf95UYz3gC6AewU

QFNS said:
Keep the demons for the quest obviously. I'd cut Kel'Thuzad, who while awesome isn't helping your curve with all the Enforcers, Boom and Mal'Ganis/Jaraxxus. THen maybe a Void Terror or Sac Pac? I dunno. Dark Bomb is so good though, it's hard to say if its better than the synergy there. In terms of just being a silly quest deck, I'm sure its fine, but I think just running 1x Dark Bomb over KT is prolly going to help some.
Click to expand...

You're sort of ignoring a big point of the deck, which is to summon a bunch of dreadsteeds. Kel'Thuzad, Void Terror, and Sac Pac are big parts of that. This isn't just some midrange Demonlock.
 
B

Brawndo Addict

Banned
Mobius and pet octopus said:
I think a lot of people approach the game the way you do. I do some of the time as well. Nothing wrong with that. But there is a whole huge skill gap between even me and pro players. I've hit legend multiple times and I know I can't hit top 100 legend even if I tried (well, I don't know for fact cause I've never tried but I believe for me to do it I would have to significantly up my game).

I remember strifecro stating he thinks the game actually is 90/10 in favor of skill over luck.

I think it's great if there are a lot of match ups closer to 50/50. But that doesn't mean if you win 55% of those match ups, only 5% of your matches were decided by skill. That's a misconception to begin with, I think because it assumes both players have played perfectly each game.

I think the biggest sign of skill over luck has to do with consistency in results. And we've had high consistency with a lot of players over time.

This all said, I really do think the whole skill vs luck discussion is tired so I'll likely leave this as my last post on the topic.
Click to expand...

I very rarely post in this thread so I understand that it's beyond well-treaded ground for the regulars and its far more tiring than anything else to see it since you've discussed it a billion times already. I'd like to see more transparency and statistics from Blizzard in part because I think it helps to educate players like myself who can only go off what they experience which is going to be biased and non-representative.

For example, having them reveal that their official deck suggestions all have about 50% win rates was really interesting because the community assumed they sucked. I bet there are other things like that where players assume one thing and it makes for a negative narrative but Blizzard could show stats showing the opposite is true. I understand why they don't divulge that stuff from a business/design perspective though.
 
M

Mulgrok

Member
people are sleeping on friendly bartender against aggro matchups. It trades well with early pirate crap and if it isn't removed will continually heal you.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Mulgrok said:
people are sleeping on friendly bartender against aggro matchups. It trades well with early pirate crap and if it isn't removed will continually heal you.
Click to expand...

I tried it out very early on but it seemed like 1 heal per turn really isn't meaningful enough.

Even if warrior let it live all game, that's like 4 points of healing, and more likely it's going to be war axed to death only healing 1 health.
 
M

Mulgrok

Member
thepotatoman said:
I tried it out very early on but it seemed like 1 heal per turn really isn't meaningful enough.

Even if warrior let it live all game, that's like 4 points of healing, and more likely it's going to be war axed to death only healing 1 health.
Click to expand...

that is 3 damage not going face, so 2/3 heal you for 4
 
M

Mobius and pet octopus

Member
Brawndo Addict said:
I very rarely post in this thread so I understand that it's beyond well-treaded ground for the regulars and its far more tiring than anything else to see it since you've discussed it a billion times already. I'd like to see more transparency and statistics from Blizzard in part because I think it helps to educate players like myself who can only go off what they experience which is going to be biased and non-representative.

For example, having them reveal that their official deck suggestions all have about 50% win rates was really interesting because the community assumed they sucked. I bet there are other things like that where players assume one thing and it makes for a negative narrative but Blizzard could show stats showing the opposite is true. I understand why they don't divulge that stuff from a business/design perspective though.
Click to expand...

The "official" reason why they don't share stats is because they don't want to influence the meta directly themselves. Sort of an off hands approach I think is smart.

I don't want to sound dismissive and I apologize if I have, it's just that I am more interested in the discussion regarding what a healthy meta is and less about whether the game has enough skill or not. I don't think you've done anything wrong in bringing up the topic and the two discussions are somewhat related.
 
molnizzle

molnizzle

Member
Why is 60% win rate supposedly the target anyway? My current Pirate deck is a little over 60% and I just went from rank 8 to rank 12. Still never made legend. =/
 
Z

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
For anybody that watched this Chansey Priest video that Kripp made, where he says he "breaks the meta"...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKD-qVNBDSk

Well, he didn't. I tried it out. It's basically just Reno Dragon Priest except it has a possible win condition against control and jade golem decks through the combo. It's still very reliant on you getting Reno before you pull off the combo because you can't do the combo if you are too low. So a midrange or aggressive deck can still easily rush you down if you don't draw Reno, and you have to make sure the board is clear around the time you drop him. The combo is going to do 18-22 damage to your own face. So the deck isn't going to be great against everything. I think a Midrange deck can still put enough pressure on you after Reno if you don't have the answers to their board. It's probably not better than just regular Renolock with the Leeroy+PO+Faceless combo.
 
P

Papercuts

fired zero bullets in the orphanage.
Oh my god damn near every game I play is just dumb pirate shit. Rogue, Warrior, Shaman and Paladin are all just dumb as hell right now.

Patches was a goddamn mistake. I keep dying with reno in hand before turn 6 even with taunts and mistress of mixtures.
 
G

gutshot

Member
Has anyone experimented with Savage Roar in their Jade Druid decks? I feel like I have some pretty wide boards sometimes with Bran plus the Jade battlecry cards. Savage Roar could make for some surprise lethals.
 
Y

Yaboosh

Super Sleuth
People keep blaming patches but without the 1 mana 3/2 i feel like most of these decks are a lot weaker as well.

It's the ludicrous combination of the two.
 
M

Mobius and pet octopus

Member
I got ripped off in my arena run. One match I clicked start game too early. I clicked cancel immediately. Then the game crashed. I come back in and it's all good. No notification that I lost a match. I checked the score I don't have an extra loss. Several matches later I am suddenly at 2 losses when I should be at 1. I even checked the deck tracker to double make sure... what a fuck up.

I think I just lost like 3 wins cause this draft was quite good. Now I won't be able to do another run tonight, unless I grind like 20 gold :(

e: at least I earned enough dust to craft dirty rat
 
Y

Yaboosh

Super Sleuth
Mobius and pet octopus said:
I got ripped off in my arena run. One match I clicked start game too early. I clicked cancel immediately. Then the game crashed. I come back in and it's all good. No notification that I lost a match. I checked the score I don't have an extra loss. Several matches later I am suddenly at 2 losses when I should be at 1. I even checked the deck tracker to double make sure... what a fuck up.
Click to expand...


Any time your game crashes when you back out of matchmaking it is because it matched you up at that exact moment.


Definitely a terrible bug likely due to terrible design that should have been fixed immediately.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Gizmodo: ‘Path of Exile 2’ Players Call Bullshit on Elon Musk’s Video Game Stream
Community 2 3 4
151
7K
nowhat replied
52 Games. 1 Year. 2025. [BacklogBeat]
2
59
1K
Kacho replied
"We observed Nvidia and decided to wait" (Chief Architect of Gaming at AMD)
2
64
4K
Kataploom replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
52K
Topher replied
Get well soon, @Ultrazilla
37
2K
EviLore replied
Top Bottom