Lunacy mage's winrate isn't the deck's biggest problem though? The problem is that it has a Keleseth-esque winrate card, is nothing but RNG and ridiculously overplayed for some reason. So much so that about a third of ladder consists of that deck.
If you want to talk problematic winrates talk paladin. Because Uther's the meta tyrant here, with a near-perfect match-up spread. Close to being on-par with AoO demon-hunter, yet everyone would rather go to the casino with Jaina it seems.
Back to your control warlock claim. Just a quick look at the deck's match-ups on hsreplay shows that it loses to basically anything aggressive with some over the top damage (several demon hunter archetypes, several hunter archetypes, aggro shaman, weapon rogue (these last few are really abysmal) and it looks like it can't handle clown druid's value either).
So no, warlock really isn't all that oppressive when looking at the data. Even after we get our first wave of nerfs. (Assuming they'll mostly target paladin and mage)
Oh and lastly, Iksar has already said control warlocks other, if not actual, win condition Tickatus is still on their mind. Since control warlock hasn't changed much since the rotation and they're not a big fan of those type of archetypes.
I've gotten pretty bored of playing the usual meta suspects by now (miracle rogue, libroom paladin, zoo warlock, warrior...) So I've been giving highlander mage and highlander hunter their last spin. Been going pretty well, honestly.
Ok, the people have spoken. It's the perfect solution to solve imbalanced cards and allow a little more variety into the game, but I guess not such a good idea. Have fun net-decking the same boring decks that involve cards that carry the win for you like the good little robots that you are : D
Reading your replies you guys seem to think I'm saying to make it the card won't show up at all. Not the case. They would show up less often in a series of games, thus taking down the winrate of deck abusing power cards over time.
Way to take criticism like a champ (not).
Clearly it's not the perfect solution if everyone in this thread disagrees with it, eh?
It's just such a convoluted and unfun way to try and solve a problem that literally every card game, could even say every game bar something like chess, has to deal with. I don't even know where to begin honestly.
Heartstone thrives off of its simplicity and how appealing it is for casual players. Do you really think hidden, altered draw rates based on a card's strength are going to help in that? Even more so when you consider that most decks that rely on one card strategies are often Timmy decks, which are preferred by the casual audience (big priest and Tickatus warlock for example). They'd literally be breaking down the formula that has made Hearthstone the juggernaut of digital card games that it is today.
And it's even more ridiculous when you consider that their balancing, and I never thought I'd say this, has actually gotten a lot better recently. With both the current and previous expansion we ended on a very varied and, I'd say, good meta. Blizzard have actually been doing really well in this regard, excluding evolve shaman.
Above meta talk obviously applies to standard. Wild has never received attention so it's no wonder the meta over there is as bad as it is.
Personally, I think the 4 extra cards can give you an advantage in certain decks. For example druids don't have any AOE better than [Hearthstone Card (Heart of Cthuun) Not Found], and in my warlock deck I am drawing so many cards that the 4 extra cards delay fatigue. I can definitely see how in a lot of cases the extra cards aren't great, but in some decks they can be helpful.
I agree that in a lot of competitive decks C'thuun is unnecessary, but for a lot of the odd janky strategies I enjoy, C'thuun helps.
I can sort of understand the sentiment of wanting AoE in a slow druid deck, although I still doubt running an overpriced Hellfire is really worth. Especially if also adds three other mediocre cards.
But your rationale behind adding it to a warlock deck seems odd to me. Slow warlock decks make up being deeper in their deck than their slow opponents by playing double Tickatus, so isn't needed there either. Only reason I can see him being useful in warlock is if he's your primary win condition. In which case, all the power to you.
It's still a fun card, but unfortunately not as strong as many might have hoped (myself included).
It's mostly a matter of perception. As you can see in this thread as well.
People think it's good because it does something different than what other cards do, which makes it harder to evaluate.
Let me just start out by saying there's a reason most slower decks have tried running the card but he hasn't stuck around in any of them. (Highlander mage and control warrior being the main ones he was tested in most.)
Slow decks generally already have a win condition against other slow decks. Warrior has the Silas/ETC otk and mage has Reno and a ton of value cards.
Other big reason is that it clogs your deck. Sure you can think "well those cards are pretty good", but are they better than the 30 cards in your deck? Probably not. There's a reason other card games play with as few cards as possible (i.e. YuGiOh can have 40-80 cards in their deck, but all competitive ones use 40). It's because you want your deck to be consistent, and C'thun only adds inconsistency by clogging your deck with 4 mediocre cards, only to maybe give you a payoff you will rarely use anyway. Especially in a meta as fast as this one.
Don't know why you're downvoted. Especially in Wild, playing a 9 mana 8/8 turn 9 without anything else can be game losing (talking about its current state where Dragons cost 1).
She's really not that powerful. In the current wild meta games never even make it to turn 9.
Renolock has enough big demons to cheat out already, and they're mostly trying to get tickatus out as fast as possible nowadays anyway.
Reno priest only gets slowed by her because it's one more card you'll have to get through after you use Polkelt before you get to the cards you want.
So the only deck I'd imagine that would really want her is reno mage (LPG variant of course).
Other than that I don't see many decks adopting her, even after the buff.
I wouldn't say warlock is the priest of old right now. Unlike priest, warlock has a good non-grindy deck (zoo warlock is the best warlock deck right now). So it's not a one-archetype-pony.
The deck does feel similar to facing priest decks though, I'll give you that. It's a slow, unfun grind where they're just trying to not die. Difference is that warlock has an active win condition in the form of Tickatus, something that priest (still) doesn't have.
Luckily the deck is bad so you don't see it that often currently. Here's to hoping it'll fade away completely come next expansion.
I definitely underestimated Crabrider. Turns out cheese paladin is a deck which this guy slots right into it as both removal and a massive threat if it's paired with two Murloc Warleader.
Overestimate would be Ace Hunter Kreen. Thought that card would go into most demon hunter and hunter decks. But eventually it only saw some play in highlander hunter, I think? Before Rexxar decided that face is the place with his highlander deck too and opted for a much faster build. I guess demon hunters never really needed him since it didn't really fit with their gameplan?
Won't Murloc Warleader buff ALL murlocs on the board (yours and the enemies) like it use to? Also does Secret Keeper currently buff on anyone playing a secret and if so, will that come back too?
Murloc Warleader buffs all murlocs, yes.
Secretkeeper never changed in that regard. She still gets buffed everytime a secret is played, doesn't matter if it's you or your opponent. So she won't change.
Your meta snapshot? Bro, literally all you ever do is link Swim or Mobalytics' snapshot and summarize what everyone can read over there, without giving any noteworthy additional input.
And the best part is you're linking to and talking about a meta snapshot that's not updated for the newest update and therefore outdated and moot.
At least Swim's list is updated and tries to predict the actual current meta, even if he's "transitioned into a more casual player space".
Im talkign abotu allura haivng 93% mulgian winrate; Not nozdormu.
And as far im aware; the data is low for the deck and it even says it may be innacurate due low sample size. So im saying alleura could sitll have have a really higher mulgian winrate BUT STILL BE LOWER THEN 93%
I wasnt talkign About Nozdormu AT ALL.
The Nozdormu portion wasn't aimed at you, hence the multiple line breaks. Calm your pajamas.
Low sample size yes, but at the highest rank (top legend) too. Of course this percentage will drop as it gets played more, but that doesn't mean the number it's currently at isn't bizarre.
And sint also relaly low data to poitn whe reit says it may be innacurate? So ti could still eb high mulgian winrate but aslo still eb far from 93%
I'm sorry, what?
Saying Nozdormu on curve isn't great because the opponent has a 10 mana turn before you do isn't all that black and white. Generally, the opponent mulligans for their early game, which means they're not going to keep expensive cards. More often than not they have trouble even using all those mana crystals on turn 10, since they're not prepared for it. And why would they be, considering they'd have 5 mana in any other situation.
Usually the thread starter kicks off with their own list, but alright. I guess I'll start.
To preface: I don't play wild much anymore currently as the meta's extremely dull with 3-4 decks dominating the format, leaving not much room for anything else. My list is based on the versatility of each class, as I like to have the option to go either control, combo or aggro with each class. I can't really rate them 1-10 either as that's far too nuanced. I'll just make a short tier list instead.
So:
High tier:
Druid, Mage, Warlock & Warrior
All of these classes allow for a plethora of playstyles which is what I appreciate most. They basically all have viable fast, mid-range slow and combo decks.
Mid tier:
Paladin, Priest & Rogue
These decks are mostly one/two deck ponies if you want to be consistent, but they're still decks I enjoy. I like playing reno priest, although it's far too overtuned currently. I've always enjoyed rogue's aggro decks in the forms of Kingsbane and odd. And yes, dare I say it, I even like playing a few games of odd paladin from time to time.
Low tier:
Demon Hunter, Hunter & Shaman
These classes see little to no play competitively currently, and that's partially also why I rated them so low. Demon hunter simply doesn't have the cardpool to have a lot of different decks. It's mostly a one trick pony in the odd variant. Shaman just doesn't really excel at anything currently, even though it can have a lot of different decks, they all just suck. Hunter has always been wild's redheaded stepchild that's never really meta because its cards just aren't good enough compared to the rest of the classes. A one-dimensional hero power doesn't help Rexxar either, to be fair.
Now THAT is a scary statistic. I believe that only Warrior can reasonably contest that board after playing a Brawl, but they’ll be hard pressed to survive the clown onslaught afterwards
Not only that, they have to deal with (at least one) wave of murlocs, two waves of clowns, followed by two more, a N'zoth board and a bunch of big solo cards. The deck can put out a LOT of pressure against slow decks.
@Dapperdog: the deck OP is referring to runs both Alura + Tip the scales AND a Nozdormu + big package.
This effectively allows them to highroll in two different ways and they also have tutors for Nozdormu in the 2 mana 2/3 draw a dragon card (forgot its name).
Crafted it yesterday but didn't have much time to play with it. It seems pretty good, and I finally get to play with some new old gods. Heard from high legend players that it's quite a scary concept though.
Apparently High Abbess Alura has a 93% mulligan winrate on coin. To put that in perspective: cards like Prince Keleseth and Barnes hovered around 70% mulligan winrate.
Honestly, I'd say that's more so Hearthstone devs at fault rather than the players.
Same sort of thing applies with the new wild OTK with HysteriaDeathspeaker and Wretched Tiller. If you somehow manage to survive the 60 damage OTK you have to disconnect from the game and reconnect again, otherwise the animation takes up so long that it skips your entire turn.
u kidding right? they touched a standard card in this case darkglare cause it was already plaguing standard too. get your shit together. they nerfed reckless experimenter before the snipsnap launched but left it allowed in wild for some time.
if they touch any of the cards in the combo it wont be hysteria cause its a standard card and they want it to work like that..only thing they can do to it is not being able for minions with immune to be targeted, but thats not touching hysteria thats just altering the overall mechanic of immune.
ez fix would be to make tiller hex proof aka "cant be targeted by spells or hero powers"
Imagine coming in with an attitude like that and being flatout wrong. Darkglare decks in standard barely had a 50% winrate at legend when the card got nerfed.
Lunacy mage's winrate isn't the deck's biggest problem though? The problem is that it has a Keleseth-esque winrate card, is nothing but RNG and ridiculously overplayed for some reason. So much so that about a third of ladder consists of that deck.
If you want to talk problematic winrates talk paladin. Because Uther's the meta tyrant here, with a near-perfect match-up spread. Close to being on-par with AoO demon-hunter, yet everyone would rather go to the casino with Jaina it seems.
Back to your control warlock claim. Just a quick look at the deck's match-ups on hsreplay shows that it loses to basically anything aggressive with some over the top damage (several demon hunter archetypes, several hunter archetypes, aggro shaman, weapon rogue (these last few are really abysmal) and it looks like it can't handle clown druid's value either).
So no, warlock really isn't all that oppressive when looking at the data. Even after we get our first wave of nerfs. (Assuming they'll mostly target paladin and mage)
Oh and lastly, Iksar has already said control warlocks other, if not actual, win condition Tickatus is still on their mind. Since control warlock hasn't changed much since the rotation and they're not a big fan of those type of archetypes.
I've gotten pretty bored of playing the usual meta suspects by now (miracle rogue, libroom paladin, zoo warlock, warrior...) So I've been giving highlander mage and highlander hunter their last spin. Been going pretty well, honestly.
Way to take criticism like a champ (not).
Clearly it's not the perfect solution if everyone in this thread disagrees with it, eh?
It's just such a convoluted and unfun way to try and solve a problem that literally every card game, could even say every game bar something like chess, has to deal with. I don't even know where to begin honestly.
Heartstone thrives off of its simplicity and how appealing it is for casual players. Do you really think hidden, altered draw rates based on a card's strength are going to help in that? Even more so when you consider that most decks that rely on one card strategies are often Timmy decks, which are preferred by the casual audience (big priest and Tickatus warlock for example). They'd literally be breaking down the formula that has made Hearthstone the juggernaut of digital card games that it is today.
And it's even more ridiculous when you consider that their balancing, and I never thought I'd say this, has actually gotten a lot better recently. With both the current and previous expansion we ended on a very varied and, I'd say, good meta. Blizzard have actually been doing really well in this regard, excluding evolve shaman.
Above meta talk obviously applies to standard. Wild has never received attention so it's no wonder the meta over there is as bad as it is.
I can sort of understand the sentiment of wanting AoE in a slow druid deck, although I still doubt running an overpriced Hellfire is really worth. Especially if also adds three other mediocre cards.
But your rationale behind adding it to a warlock deck seems odd to me. Slow warlock decks make up being deeper in their deck than their slow opponents by playing double Tickatus, so isn't needed there either. Only reason I can see him being useful in warlock is if he's your primary win condition. In which case, all the power to you.
It's still a fun card, but unfortunately not as strong as many might have hoped (myself included).
It's mostly a matter of perception. As you can see in this thread as well.
People think it's good because it does something different than what other cards do, which makes it harder to evaluate.
Let me just start out by saying there's a reason most slower decks have tried running the card but he hasn't stuck around in any of them. (Highlander mage and control warrior being the main ones he was tested in most.)
Slow decks generally already have a win condition against other slow decks. Warrior has the Silas/ETC otk and mage has Reno and a ton of value cards.
Other big reason is that it clogs your deck. Sure you can think "well those cards are pretty good", but are they better than the 30 cards in your deck? Probably not. There's a reason other card games play with as few cards as possible (i.e. YuGiOh can have 40-80 cards in their deck, but all competitive ones use 40). It's because you want your deck to be consistent, and C'thun only adds inconsistency by clogging your deck with 4 mediocre cards, only to maybe give you a payoff you will rarely use anyway. Especially in a meta as fast as this one.
She's really not that powerful. In the current wild meta games never even make it to turn 9.
Renolock has enough big demons to cheat out already, and they're mostly trying to get tickatus out as fast as possible nowadays anyway.
Reno priest only gets slowed by her because it's one more card you'll have to get through after you use Polkelt before you get to the cards you want.
So the only deck I'd imagine that would really want her is reno mage (LPG variant of course).
Other than that I don't see many decks adopting her, even after the buff.
I wouldn't say warlock is the priest of old right now. Unlike priest, warlock has a good non-grindy deck (zoo warlock is the best warlock deck right now). So it's not a one-archetype-pony.
The deck does feel similar to facing priest decks though, I'll give you that. It's a slow, unfun grind where they're just trying to not die. Difference is that warlock has an active win condition in the form of Tickatus, something that priest (still) doesn't have.
Luckily the deck is bad so you don't see it that often currently. Here's to hoping it'll fade away completely come next expansion.
I definitely underestimated Crabrider. Turns out cheese paladin is a deck which this guy slots right into it as both removal and a massive threat if it's paired with two Murloc Warleader.
Overestimate would be Ace Hunter Kreen. Thought that card would go into most demon hunter and hunter decks. But eventually it only saw some play in highlander hunter, I think? Before Rexxar decided that face is the place with his highlander deck too and opted for a much faster build. I guess demon hunters never really needed him since it didn't really fit with their gameplan?
People who play priest.
Ah, that's a relief. I was almost afraid they'd actually try to balance wild again. Good to know I can stick to standard for a little longer.
Still appreciate all the info and community interaction he's been doing though.
Murloc Warleader buffs all murlocs, yes.
Secretkeeper never changed in that regard. She still gets buffed everytime a secret is played, doesn't matter if it's you or your opponent. So she won't change.
Your meta snapshot? Bro, literally all you ever do is link Swim or Mobalytics' snapshot and summarize what everyone can read over there, without giving any noteworthy additional input.
And the best part is you're linking to and talking about a meta snapshot that's not updated for the newest update and therefore outdated and moot.
At least Swim's list is updated and tries to predict the actual current meta, even if he's "transitioned into a more casual player space".
Sir, that information is highly confidential and I implore you to not inquire about this subject any further.
The Nozdormu portion wasn't aimed at you, hence the multiple line breaks. Calm your pajamas.
Low sample size yes, but at the highest rank (top legend) too. Of course this percentage will drop as it gets played more, but that doesn't mean the number it's currently at isn't bizarre.
I'm sorry, what?
Saying Nozdormu on curve isn't great because the opponent has a 10 mana turn before you do isn't all that black and white. Generally, the opponent mulligans for their early game, which means they're not going to keep expensive cards. More often than not they have trouble even using all those mana crystals on turn 10, since they're not prepared for it. And why would they be, considering they'd have 5 mana in any other situation.
Usually the thread starter kicks off with their own list, but alright. I guess I'll start.
To preface: I don't play wild much anymore currently as the meta's extremely dull with 3-4 decks dominating the format, leaving not much room for anything else. My list is based on the versatility of each class, as I like to have the option to go either control, combo or aggro with each class. I can't really rate them 1-10 either as that's far too nuanced. I'll just make a short tier list instead.
So:
High tier:
Druid, Mage, Warlock & Warrior
All of these classes allow for a plethora of playstyles which is what I appreciate most. They basically all have viable fast, mid-range slow and combo decks.
Mid tier:
Paladin, Priest & Rogue
These decks are mostly one/two deck ponies if you want to be consistent, but they're still decks I enjoy. I like playing reno priest, although it's far too overtuned currently. I've always enjoyed rogue's aggro decks in the forms of Kingsbane and odd. And yes, dare I say it, I even like playing a few games of odd paladin from time to time.
Low tier:
Demon Hunter, Hunter & Shaman
These classes see little to no play competitively currently, and that's partially also why I rated them so low. Demon hunter simply doesn't have the cardpool to have a lot of different decks. It's mostly a one trick pony in the odd variant. Shaman just doesn't really excel at anything currently, even though it can have a lot of different decks, they all just suck. Hunter has always been wild's redheaded stepchild that's never really meta because its cards just aren't good enough compared to the rest of the classes. A one-dimensional hero power doesn't help Rexxar either, to be fair.
Not only that, they have to deal with (at least one) wave of murlocs, two waves of clowns, followed by two more, a N'zoth board and a bunch of big solo cards. The deck can put out a LOT of pressure against slow decks.
@Dapperdog: the deck OP is referring to runs both Alura + Tip the scales AND a Nozdormu + big package.
This effectively allows them to highroll in two different ways and they also have tutors for Nozdormu in the 2 mana 2/3 draw a dragon card (forgot its name).
Which is why it's been really consistent so far.
Crafted it yesterday but didn't have much time to play with it. It seems pretty good, and I finally get to play with some new old gods. Heard from high legend players that it's quite a scary concept though.
Apparently High Abbess Alura has a 93% mulligan winrate on coin. To put that in perspective: cards like Prince Keleseth and Barnes hovered around 70% mulligan winrate.
Scary stuff, but we'll see how it pans out.
Honestly, I'd say that's more so Hearthstone devs at fault rather than the players.
Same sort of thing applies with the new wild OTK with Hysteria Deathspeaker and Wretched Tiller.
If you somehow manage to survive the 60 damage OTK you have to disconnect from the game and reconnect again, otherwise the animation takes up so long that it skips your entire turn.
It's just stupid.
Imagine coming in with an attitude like that and being flatout wrong. Darkglare decks in standard barely had a 50% winrate at legend when the card got nerfed.