Hearthstone

[Phage]

* NA has weaker competition in all competitive gaming
* there is little skill in spamming ranked with fotm meta decks
* short people are unattractive to women

 

[sser]

Doesn't NA have the toughest server for Hearthstone? I thought I read somewhere that it was one of the rarer cases where the West was actually better than the Asians/Euros.

 

[Explorerbc]

Rank 4 now. Aren't you one of the myriad infants in this thread who can't get past rank 15?

No, I usually finish rank 6-4 each season doing quests but I mostly play arena.

I do it in the difficult server (EU) though and without cancer decks .

 

[Phage]

No, I usually finish rank 6-4 each season doing quests but I mostly play arena.

I do it in the difficult server (EU) though and without cancer decks .

Interesting. Difficult to believe you, because someone who can regularly finish at rank ~5 would (hopefully) be intelligent enough to understand that every deck in this game is cancer; and they'd also be capable of comprehending that a deck like Midrange Druid / Paladin / Control Warrior is actually just as simple to play, if not simpler, than aggro.

As I've mentioned before, the only deck that's "difficult" to play is Patron, and that deck is so egregiously overpowered that you can make clear misplays nonstop and still win.

Then again, you're allegedly reaching rank 6 on the Euro server, which we all know is the second easiest, only behind Asia, so we can't expect you to know much

 

[Phage]

Doesn't NA have the toughest server for Hearthstone? I thought I read somewhere that it was one of the rarer cases where the West was actually better than the Asians/Euros.

(There's actually like no discernible difference between NA and EU except for some NA arena pros claiming that EU is easier. It's just fun to make the euros in this thread get insanely butthurt by pretending otherwise)

 

[FeelTheRads]

Yeah, tell us some more about how that face hunter is teh difficult to play when you can easily reach rank 10 or higher by just pointing the cursor to the face.
Oh but you need SOME skill to get to legend. Well, no shit. Having ANY skill with huntard is probably necessary only above rank 5.

 

[Phage]

Yeah, tell us some more about how that face hunter is teh difficult to play when you can easily reach rank 10 or higher by just pointing the cursor to the face.
Oh but you need SOME skill to get to legend. Well, no shit. Having ANY skill with huntard is probably necessary only above rank 5.

Then do it. Instead of talking shit, sit down and play the game - prove yourself. You'll notice that the only time I call people out for their rank is when they randomly get butthurt that I'm having success with Aggro Paladin on the ladder, or they yell that I'm not legend

Btw, I've hit rank 3 with Midrange Paladin in March (I believe), and Rank 3 with Midrange Druid in 2014 - there was actually much less decision making in those runs; especially with druid.

I wish I could understand the unending butthurt everyone feels about aggro decks. Is it frustrating to lose to Face Hunter? Sure, but how is that any less frustrating than sitting around as a Patron warrior ropes every turn until finally one big flurry of 40 animations goes off and OTKs you? How is it less interesting than waiting until literal fatigue as some rogue jerks off casting gangup on his healbots or whatever? If you'd rather spend actual 20-30 minutes going to fatigue every game, then that's your choice. From an ergonomic standpoint, if you have a 60% winrate with an aggro deck, and a 65% winrate with a control deck; but you can literally play 3x as many games as the aggro deck, why wouldn't you play the aggro deck?

Let's face it bub, this game is miserable to play, every deck is aggrevating to face against; but at the same time there's something addicting that draws us all back to it. Almost every card game is this way tbh.

 

[Explorerbc]

every deck in this game is cancer; and they'd also be capable of comprehending that a deck like Midrange Druid / Paladin / Control Warrior is actually just as simple to play, if not simpler, than aggro.

Then again, you're allegedly reaching rank 6 on the Euro server, which we all know is the second easiest, only behind Asia, so we can't expect you to know much

I've reached higher than 6, but to be fair it is not that difficult as long as you have a good deck. The skill is mostly needed to make the 5-1 grind more quick and bearable.

Sadly that grind favors cancer decks just because they are quicker, and the ladder is a boring mess because of that. Hopefully the expansion will make the meta more control oriented.

 

[Phage]

I'm not trying to troll. How is Midrange Druid harder to play? You just play out your curve, make smart trades, slowly whittle them down, then finish with a combo. Hardest part is calculating lethal each turn (which isn't hard), and properly using innvervates (just make sure you have something decent to play every turn if possible).

Midrange Paladin (when that was actually a thing in March) - you literally just play out your curve and control the board. Don't even need to care about innervates or combos for lethal. Hardest part is knowing when to make a guy and when to burn more gas, and when to play a quartermaster.

Control Warrior - you just control the board for the first half of the game, then slowly dump out huge threats; usually finishing with a Grommash + Task if you haven't knocked them over. Hardest part is knowing what answers to use on what threat (which you can simplify to a spreadsheet)

Shaman - this deck was so simple that bots literally brought it to legend.

I mean, come on dude. The decks themselves in Hearthstone don't require much technical ability. Patron Warrior requires some quick thinking due to the short turn length and animation time. The whole circlejerk of "muh deck is harder than ur deck1!!" is stupid because all of the decks are simple. Almost everything can be distilled into reading a guide and watching a streamer play a few games. The real skill of the game on ladder is consistently responding to strange gamestate situations correctly, making the correct dech/tech choices, and persevering.

 

[Explorerbc]

Looks like a euro made you a bit upset

Yeah, hearthstone is pretty simple compared to other card games, but for its own standards even trading and choosing answers is more complicated than dumping your hand and going face. Even some aggro decks like zoo are considered more complicated than face hunter or ebola because they require good planning, good positioning etc. You may be able to play all decks, but half the people who have played only cancer would fuck up a lot if they were given a control deck.

 

[Phage]

I suppose so - sometimes it's tough to tell when people are serious and when they aren't, so I just responded in earnest to be safe.

Btw, you do know that ebola controls the board for the first 5 or so turns, right? It's very comparable to zoo in that sense.

 

[hivemind]

I think the reason why aggro decks are "difficult" is that reaching for the face of your opponent is hard if you are just 5'8.

 

[Phage]

I think the reason why aggro decks are "difficult" is that reaching for the face of your opponent is hard if you are just 5'8.

 

[hivemind]

Come on, it was a good joke.

 

[Phage]

Not really, that ship sailed like a week ago after DU got curb stomped so hard he gave me a super exclusive tag. Gotta get with the times gramps!

 

[Seari]

"Burglar"

"Whenever this minion attacks your opponent's Hero, it will put a coin into your hand."

 

[Phage]

"Burglar"

"Whenever this minion attacks your opponent's Hero, it will put a coin into your hand."

Cool mechanic. Unfortunately having decent stats on your 2 drop, or something immediately impactful like divine shield, is paramount. Likely won't see play, and will be a middling arena pick (you'll definitely want to choose it over chicken and target dummy)

 

[UglyBastard]

It's just a shame that so many interesting cards in this set are gimped by overpriced manacost or underwhelming stats. I really wonder why Blizzard hired progamers for their balance department if they still shit out wasted potential on every turn.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

For what it's worth, I've gotten to Legend with Midrange Hunter (without traps or bows, back before all the nerfs), Handlock, Kolento Druid, Teacher Miracle and Midrange Shaman; Miracle was by far the most difficult, followed by Handlock. Druid was really easy, Shaman and Hunter were average.

Generally speaking, I feel that, while making a "good enough" play in HS tends to be intuitive and straightforward, the "optimal" one is often not so. Like, I sat in Top100 EU with Handlock for half a season at one point, and I'm confident that if I watched, say, Metro, play the deck, I'd be able to point out tons of mistakes. He'd still be able to get to a decently high rank making those mistakes, but that doesn't make him good, or HS easy.

 

[Phage]

It's just a shame that so many interesting cards in this set are gimped by overpriced manacost or underwhelming stats. I really wonder why Blizzard hired progamers for their balance department if they still shit out wasted potential on every turn.

Part of the problem is their refusal to nerf extremely strong cards (with rare exception), or buff the weaker ones. When you compare this guy to, say, Mad Scientist, you start to see the huge difference in power level. Mad Scientist is a 2/2 that, unless silenced (or very bad draws) will always summon a 1, 2 or 3 mana secret; and cast it. That's easily ~6-7 mana worth of effects (body, draw a card, play it) for a 3 mana creature.

This guy on the other hand, has the potential to generate mana, sure; but he has to both survive until the next turn and land a hit on the enemy hero before generating any value.

So basically they're sitting around with their thumbs inup their asses terrified of Power Creep and P2W accusations, and instead pump out all of these underwhelming sidegrades. It'd be better to just have 40 of the cards be legitimately strong, then implement a yearly rotation with this winter's expansion/adventure release.

 

[Seari]

What if the effect was a battlecry: gain a coin. Would that make rogues too OP? Or maybe if it were a 2 mana 2/1 with the battlecry.

 

[Phage]

I don't think that would make them OP at all. I'm not even sure if the card would be played, but it would sure be cool.

Compare this card to Darnassus Aspirant, which actually has proper stats for a 2/3, and if it lives, permanent ramp. (Plus you can silence the DA to keep the ramp regardless for matchups where you don't need the silence)

 

[WhiteGuts]

Such a shame too, the free coins are also neat to activate the combo effects of many Rogue cards.

 

[Andhaira]

Such a shame too, the free coins are also neat to activate the combo effects of many Rogue cards.

Why 'such a shame'? The card is certainly playable. You can always drop it behind a taunt, or play it anytime later on in the game. Some of the rogues most powerful combos come into play late game.

While I am holding my opinion on TGT until it is released, I am at least glad they are scaling back the powercreep they introduced with Naxx and GvG. All I wish they would do now is revise some of the older cards, Guardian of Kings for example, really really needs to have Taunt to make it viable. Boom needs a slight nerf (they can do this by either scaling back the boom bots, or not have them target face) and control decks need to become viable again. They need something to halt early face aggro.

 

[Metro]

The key to getting to legend: spending far too much time grinding wins in a children's card game on a monthly basis.