I took alliance only because at the time there was only combo or aggro decks and I was like 'hey maybe a big minion deck can be made with this vanndar dude'
I knew it had little chance to work but taking the other card to try yet another face deck was not even an option.
I wonder if other people made the same reasoning and if the outcome of the battle was more about the meta we wanted than some horde vs alliance pride stuff.
Solitaire play won't be fixed with this patch, simply cause we don't have cards that counter your opponent hand, and thus very few lines of play other than just "make the best turn every turn"
A lot of the cards we had to play around were removed from the game (mind control tech, spell breaker, Harrison Jones, vanish, Leeroy, ...) and we got very little to replace them. Until this is not fixed the game will always be solitaire.
So what this patch will achieve is remove fun and high skill solitaire play (alignement druid, warlock, garrot, ...) and replace it by boring and dumb solitaire play, and we'll have quest pirate, libram pally and aggro decks reign supreme once again, just like previous patches did.
That stance toward a so called more board centric game has been a bad choice in terms of interactivy, I whish we could at least be allowed to play fun stuff.
But yeah let's keep playing libram pally and aggro druid, that's soooo exciting
Ok trogg was crap, good riddance, but other than this we may loose some fun decks in what was a rather healthy meta.
The last weeks before expansion were awful in terms of fun and interactivity and that was a result of bad thought nerfs, I hope it turns out better this time but I'm not super confident.
some of these decks were very fun and tricky to play, and I enjoyed them, but they had little to no interaction with the opponent, each player racing to get their combo first. It's not something you want for the game in the long run.
I wish the game can come back to a state where guessing your opponent's hand and playing around their potential cards actually matters.
Heard Gaby talking about his choice and why he made them, interesting points were :
It's too risky to target Priest because the decks that beat priest are not very stable in other match-ups
Therefore, priest ban was the most sensible way to go
In recent tournament, nobody made top 8 with original decks, at the end of the day the Priest/rush warrior/miracle rogue/lifesteal DH was the safest choice by far
Going the safe way and rely on your skill is a better choice than trying to find a surprise line-up that nobody thought of
I think it sums up what all pro players feel and why, whatever the meta, all tournaments are stacked with the same 4, sometimes 5 and very rarely 6 decks.
It's probably not balanced and it will infuriate people for sure, but I love both the concept and the fact that the developers still add some crazy stuff to the game.
- Also, Viper encountering some connection problems at a critical juncture during his match against AyRoK, prompting a redo of the final game.
Yeah, that was really rough. Apparently he got screwed over by Windows update, tried to switch to his laptop then discovered its battery was empty... poor guy. Glad that he still managed to get the win.
Poor AyRok too, the situation was just as hard for him and loosing such a close series with so many technical issues must have infuriating.
If people actually follow this, it will be incredible, so I will be doing my part and include Nozdormu in my decks on every 15th of the month. I just hope I won't be alone, so please do the same ;)
Lol the author is pissed. But it would be nice to have a smarter analysis here.
Tickatus warlock is fun and is not that good cause it still looses to very aggro decks or face damage decks (it's still obliterated by mage spell)
The main point though is IT BEATS PALLY. That's why there is this play rate surge in the first place as everybody is looking for a counter to pally. Unless you want a 90% pally meta, nerfing warlock is not the best idea right now.
As for "non sense", I would point out that your ought to follow the very statistics your using for your analyse. You can't say in one hand that the rise of warlock is stupidly high and totally ignore its bad win-rate in the other hand.
With all due respect, if you choose to follow HSreplays dumb not filtered statistics over the pan of 1 day of meta, you should at least be consistent with it and analyse them properly. The rise of a deck with a 48% win-rate doesn't mean it's broken, it means people are trying stuff.
Last, in my very humble opinion, we should take the fact that some decks are harder to play into account when analysing a 1 day meta, else you can make mistakes like not seeing how strong rogue is when people take the time to learn how to play it.
Seriously, giving credit to a stat that says priest is worst class in win-rate is kind of weird, to say the least.
It's 100% sure that Deck of Lunacy will get nerfed cause not only it does define the meta but also it makes the dumbest games making any strategy and skill irrelevant. It's supposed to be tier 3 or 2.5 not tier 1.
Problem is that whatever their cost, most spells currently available are good. So I see no other option than (granted they don't decide to add a bunch a stupid/situational spells out of the blue) raising the cost drastically.
From my experience, the win rate becomes reasonable if it's played at tunr 5 or later. So I'd make it cost 5 mana to be sure :)
A good step into getting rid of the deco/reco mechanic which is utterly stupid but that (almost) all top players are using because "oThEr PlAyErS dO iT".
Cool I got my free Tavish+Tarkecgosa top 1 yesterday :)
This change was much needed, I do hope it will nerf Illidan too although I'm not sure it'll be enough.
I took alliance only because at the time there was only combo or aggro decks and I was like 'hey maybe a big minion deck can be made with this vanndar dude'
I knew it had little chance to work but taking the other card to try yet another face deck was not even an option.
I wonder if other people made the same reasoning and if the outcome of the battle was more about the meta we wanted than some horde vs alliance pride stuff.
You get a golden copy of the opposing leader when you get to the highest rank.
Solitaire play won't be fixed with this patch, simply cause we don't have cards that counter your opponent hand, and thus very few lines of play other than just "make the best turn every turn"
A lot of the cards we had to play around were removed from the game (mind control tech, spell breaker, Harrison Jones, vanish, Leeroy, ...) and we got very little to replace them. Until this is not fixed the game will always be solitaire.
So what this patch will achieve is remove fun and high skill solitaire play (alignement druid, warlock, garrot, ...) and replace it by boring and dumb solitaire play, and we'll have quest pirate, libram pally and aggro decks reign supreme once again, just like previous patches did.
That stance toward a so called more board centric game has been a bad choice in terms of interactivy, I whish we could at least be allowed to play fun stuff.
But yeah let's keep playing libram pally and aggro druid, that's soooo exciting
Ok trogg was crap, good riddance, but other than this we may loose some fun decks in what was a rather healthy meta.
The last weeks before expansion were awful in terms of fun and interactivity and that was a result of bad thought nerfs, I hope it turns out better this time but I'm not super confident.
Oh well at least we had 15 days of cool HS...
Sorry, what is the issue with Korrak the Bloodrager? why should it be refunded with full dust?
Ok nvm I get it (just to mention : this was the first alterac legendary I got from packs both on EU and NA)
Woah, these decks would make you think that is the shittiest meta ever. Libram pally are a thing again? Deathrattle DH? Face hunter? What year is it?
If balanced game is this boring, I want OP quests back please.
Jambre grew a lot of hair since this shot was taken ;)
some of these decks were very fun and tricky to play, and I enjoyed them, but they had little to no interaction with the opponent, each player racing to get their combo first. It's not something you want for the game in the long run.
I wish the game can come back to a state where guessing your opponent's hand and playing around their potential cards actually matters.
Battletag : Gwavanoob#2311
Region : EU
Trade only? : Yes, you go first
Heard Gaby talking about his choice and why he made them, interesting points were :
I think it sums up what all pro players feel and why, whatever the meta, all tournaments are stacked with the same 4, sometimes 5 and very rarely 6 decks.
It's probably not balanced and it will infuriate people for sure, but I love both the concept and the fact that the developers still add some crazy stuff to the game.
5 stars.
Poor AyRok too, the situation was just as hard for him and loosing such a close series with so many technical issues must have infuriating.
If people actually follow this, it will be incredible, so I will be doing my part and include Nozdormu in my decks on every 15th of the month. I just hope I won't be alone, so please do the same ;)
Lol the author is pissed. But it would be nice to have a smarter analysis here.
Tickatus warlock is fun and is not that good cause it still looses to very aggro decks or face damage decks (it's still obliterated by mage spell)
The main point though is IT BEATS PALLY. That's why there is this play rate surge in the first place as everybody is looking for a counter to pally. Unless you want a 90% pally meta, nerfing warlock is not the best idea right now.
As for "non sense", I would point out that your ought to follow the very statistics your using for your analyse. You can't say in one hand that the rise of warlock is stupidly high and totally ignore its bad win-rate in the other hand.
With all due respect, if you choose to follow HSreplays dumb not filtered statistics over the pan of 1 day of meta, you should at least be consistent with it and analyse them properly. The rise of a deck with a 48% win-rate doesn't mean it's broken, it means people are trying stuff.
Last, in my very humble opinion, we should take the fact that some decks are harder to play into account when analysing a 1 day meta, else you can make mistakes like not seeing how strong rogue is when people take the time to learn how to play it.
Seriously, giving credit to a stat that says priest is worst class in win-rate is kind of weird, to say the least.
Really depends cause if it's just mage getting out of the way, warlock will be on par with pally cause the match up is favorable...
It's 100% sure that Deck of Lunacy will get nerfed cause not only it does define the meta but also it makes the dumbest games making any strategy and skill irrelevant. It's supposed to be tier 3 or 2.5 not tier 1.
Problem is that whatever their cost, most spells currently available are good. So I see no other option than (granted they don't decide to add a bunch a stupid/situational spells out of the blue) raising the cost drastically.
From my experience, the win rate becomes reasonable if it's played at tunr 5 or later. So I'd make it cost 5 mana to be sure :)
The druid's quest introduced a really fun deck and even if it's no longer in the meta, I will miss it.
A good step into getting rid of the deco/reco mechanic which is utterly stupid but that (almost) all top players are using because "oThEr PlAyErS dO iT".
Wow they're incredible!