Hearthstone

[Brotherman Bill]

Anyone else finding constructed way more entertaining than arena? Kind of the reverse of what I was expecting, going into this game.

I was kinda surprised to find I was enjoying constructed too. But it's less high-pressure and engaging, losses just don't matter, and decks are too predictable. Hell, I've conceded a game before turn one once seeing I was facing a priest and really didn't feel like facing another bullshit deck, haha. Arena is definitely more engaging, less predictable and more nailbiting.
My Shadowpriest deck is up to 3 star diamond but I think that made it/me reach its limits, I'm not winning a lot of games there. Too many people with counters to the random priest nonsense.

Had a few good arena runs, including a 6-3 with a priest, but arena is a strange beast; I drafted a mage deck I really liked, all the powerful mage cards you could want, pyroblast, flamestrike, fireball, some arcane nonsense, mana wyrm in place, everything. Even got that mana wyrm coin mirror entity play in one game (a 3/3 and two 0/2s with taunt on turn 1? lulz), but it just went nowhere, kept getting my ass handed to me and went 1-3. I was probably just doing it wrong.

Then a hunter deck with a draft that kept me sweating for how awful it went. I drew some awful beasts early but took em anyway expecting later synergy, think Oasis Snapjaw, Bloodfen Raptor, River Crokolisk, even a Stonetusk Boar I think. Then the draft had me sweating with no synergy cards at all, until in the last 10 I drew the necessary timber wolf, scavenging hyena, starving buzzard and a pair of beastmasters. Didn't do great on removal either; one deadly shot, one multishot, one arcane shot, couple of hunter's marks. And guess what? That deck got me to 7-3, with the final match being a down-the-wire one, where I had a giant out, he had 8 health left, and only just managed to finish me off. Funny how that goes. I think I play hunter better than mage tho, hunter and priest I feel most comfortable with so far, then mage and druid. Gotta learn decks before you can play em well!

It's shit like this that really confuses me. I win most of my constructed games at Masters 3, but my best arena run was 6-3, and the majority of my runs are more like 4-3 or 5-3. And it's not like my constructed deck is hella rigged or anything--it has no legendaries, no gimmicks, it's just straightforward.

I suppose it's possible (make that almost certain) that I suck at arena because I am not as good at every class, and random class picks mean you get classes you are not great at more often than not if you don't play every class.

I'd think that arena is much harder competition than constructed. Two reasons:Bad players gets heavily discouraged from playing and are likely to quit running, second, bad players gets to play much less, both because they have less gold=fewer runs + they get to play fewer matches per run.

 

[Zeriel]

Anyone else finding constructed way more entertaining than arena? Kind of the reverse of what I was expecting, going into this game.

I was kinda surprised to find I was enjoying constructed too. But it's less high-pressure and engaging, losses just don't matter, and decks are too predictable. Hell, I've conceded a game before turn one once seeing I was facing a priest and really didn't feel like facing another bullshit deck, haha. Arena is definitely more engaging, less predictable and more nailbiting.
My Shadowpriest deck is up to 3 star diamond but I think that made it/me reach its limits, I'm not winning a lot of games there. Too many people with counters to the random priest nonsense.

Had a few good arena runs, including a 6-3 with a priest, but arena is a strange beast; I drafted a mage deck I really liked, all the powerful mage cards you could want, pyroblast, flamestrike, fireball, some arcane nonsense, mana wyrm in place, everything. Even got that mana wyrm coin mirror entity play in one game (a 3/3 and two 0/2s with taunt on turn 1? lulz), but it just went nowhere, kept getting my ass handed to me and went 1-3. I was probably just doing it wrong.

Then a hunter deck with a draft that kept me sweating for how awful it went. I drew some awful beasts early but took em anyway expecting later synergy, think Oasis Snapjaw, Bloodfen Raptor, River Crokolisk, even a Stonetusk Boar I think. Then the draft had me sweating with no synergy cards at all, until in the last 10 I drew the necessary timber wolf, scavenging hyena, starving buzzard and a pair of beastmasters. Didn't do great on removal either; one deadly shot, one multishot, one arcane shot, couple of hunter's marks. And guess what? That deck got me to 7-3, with the final match being a down-the-wire one, where I had a giant out, he had 8 health left, and only just managed to finish me off. Funny how that goes. I think I play hunter better than mage tho, hunter and priest I feel most comfortable with so far, then mage and druid. Gotta learn decks before you can play em well!

It's shit like this that really confuses me. I win most of my constructed games at Masters 3, but my best arena run was 6-3, and the majority of my runs are more like 4-3 or 5-3. And it's not like my constructed deck is hella rigged or anything--it has no legendaries, no gimmicks, it's just straightforward.

I suppose it's possible (make that almost certain) that I suck at arena because I am not as good at every class, and random class picks mean you get classes you are not great at more often than not if you don't play every class.

I'd think that arena is much harder competition than constructed. Two reasons:Bad players gets heavily discouraged from playing and are likely to quit running, second, bad players gets to play much less, both because they have less gold=fewer runs + they get to play fewer matches per run.

It should on average have a lower caliber of player than Masters 3, since people will run it for packs. It's common knowledge it is the most efficient way to do card acquisition, so there is that. Then again, ranked is kind of borked until next patch when we'll be able to advance to GM and actually see some sense of what our ELO is.

 

[Brotherman Bill]

Anyone else finding constructed way more entertaining than arena? Kind of the reverse of what I was expecting, going into this game.

I was kinda surprised to find I was enjoying constructed too. But it's less high-pressure and engaging, losses just don't matter, and decks are too predictable. Hell, I've conceded a game before turn one once seeing I was facing a priest and really didn't feel like facing another bullshit deck, haha. Arena is definitely more engaging, less predictable and more nailbiting.
My Shadowpriest deck is up to 3 star diamond but I think that made it/me reach its limits, I'm not winning a lot of games there. Too many people with counters to the random priest nonsense.

Had a few good arena runs, including a 6-3 with a priest, but arena is a strange beast; I drafted a mage deck I really liked, all the powerful mage cards you could want, pyroblast, flamestrike, fireball, some arcane nonsense, mana wyrm in place, everything. Even got that mana wyrm coin mirror entity play in one game (a 3/3 and two 0/2s with taunt on turn 1? lulz), but it just went nowhere, kept getting my ass handed to me and went 1-3. I was probably just doing it wrong.

Then a hunter deck with a draft that kept me sweating for how awful it went. I drew some awful beasts early but took em anyway expecting later synergy, think Oasis Snapjaw, Bloodfen Raptor, River Crokolisk, even a Stonetusk Boar I think. Then the draft had me sweating with no synergy cards at all, until in the last 10 I drew the necessary timber wolf, scavenging hyena, starving buzzard and a pair of beastmasters. Didn't do great on removal either; one deadly shot, one multishot, one arcane shot, couple of hunter's marks. And guess what? That deck got me to 7-3, with the final match being a down-the-wire one, where I had a giant out, he had 8 health left, and only just managed to finish me off. Funny how that goes. I think I play hunter better than mage tho, hunter and priest I feel most comfortable with so far, then mage and druid. Gotta learn decks before you can play em well!

It's shit like this that really confuses me. I win most of my constructed games at Masters 3, but my best arena run was 6-3, and the majority of my runs are more like 4-3 or 5-3. And it's not like my constructed deck is hella rigged or anything--it has no legendaries, no gimmicks, it's just straightforward.

I suppose it's possible (make that almost certain) that I suck at arena because I am not as good at every class, and random class picks mean you get classes you are not great at more often than not if you don't play every class.

I'd think that arena is much harder competition than constructed. Two reasons:Bad players gets heavily discouraged from playing and are likely to quit running, second, bad players gets to play much less, both because they have less gold=fewer runs + they get to play fewer matches per run.

It should on average have a lower caliber of player than Masters 3, since people will run it for packs. It's common knowledge it is the most efficient way to do card acquisition

Lolno, it is only the most efficient way if you consistently get high scores on it (>5). Which poor players won't.

 

[J1M]

Don't you get a card pack +50 gold/dust from only 3 wins in arena?

 

[Brother None]

Yeah, since cardpacks are 100 Arena is a real efficient way of doing things. That said, it is discouraging/intimidating to players in a way ranked is not, simply due to the high relative cost of ragequitting or being screwed by bad draw.

Man

Is that about as dead as you gonna get or what?

 

[Gragt]

I guess I'll deck around a bit more with the various heroes before I try arena. I like the idea but it sucks there is an entrance fee I have to say.

 

[DakaSha]

I think im the only one who doesnt prefer arena here. I rather just spend my gold on packs and play constructed

 

[Zed]

I have actually enjoyed my recent trip in constructed as a druid.
By trying to stick to 4 attack monsters and spells, priests can't really do much.
Mages are still annoying though. Warriors are quick fights and can go either way.
Warlocks in constructed are really damn annoying, as are Shamans.

 

[DakaSha]

Yeah, since cardpacks are 100 Arena is a real efficient way of doing things. That said, it is discouraging/intimidating to players in a way ranked is not, simply due to the high relative cost of ragequitting or being screwed by bad draw.

Man

Is that about as dead as you gonna get or what?

 

[Damned Registrations]

I should have taken a screenshot of my druid run. At one point I had a board of ~8 creatures with about 6 attack each.

 

[Zed]

is it just me or is getting daily quest completely random? I haven't got one today, and it's not the first time it has happened.

 

[Brother None]

"I choose death" indeed

By trying to stick to 4 attack monsters and spells, priests can't really do much.

4 attack monsters? My deck has more than that, including the type of heavy hitters you can't silence (y'know, yeti, ogre). Priest decks seem like they're too easy to gimmick out, making them vulnerable, I like a little more variance in any deck. I should polish that deck up a bit more and try to jump to master.

 

[abija]

I think he means he tried to keep 4 attack creatures so shadow word spells are useless.

 

[Berekän]

is it just me or is getting daily quest completely random? I haven't got one today, and it's not the first time it has happened.

There's always one every day for me.

 

[Brother None]

I think he means he tried to keep 4 attack creatures so shadow word spells are useless.

Oh right, yeah, 4 attack is the sweet spot, and can get pretty annoying to handle if as a priest you rely solely on the shadow words. You shouldn't, though!

 

[J1M]

is it just me or is getting daily quest completely random? I haven't got one today, and it's not the first time it has happened.

The daily quest resets at the same time each day, but for some reason it seems to be 5pm PST instead of 3am, which would make more sense. Additionally, it will only check if you have a new quest at certain times, such as logging in or when a game ends. If you know you should have a new quest, but didn't get it, hop into play mode and concede a game.

 

[Zeriel]

I don't like relying on the "only 4 attack gimmick!" because if you run out of 4 attack creatures, you then have a full roster of removal cards they're raring to use. I much prefer just to exhaust them in general.

 

[Damned Registrations]

Thats not really viable though. Between shadow word pain and madness, you can take out 6 creatures the 3 attack or less. Shadow word death and mind control can take out another 6 large creatures. And thats with only 8 priest cards vs 12 minions. The only way you can hope to overwhelm all that is with weenie spam, which will die to holy novas, or just be plain awful vs fatties being healed constantly.

Rather than trying to exhaust a priest, I find it's more effective to rush them down. A mittful of removal isn't helpful if you die before you can cast it.

The 4 attack minion thing can work, but it has tempo problems, it's not very flexible, and if the priest didn't pack all the shadow cards, it's gonna fail.

 

[Brotherman Bill]

The shadow words are 1-for-1 trades that are also inflexible to boot. Idk why people focus so much on them. Perhaps the same reason nabs always freak out at terror in MtG.

 

[Brother None]

They're fairly flexible, just in a certain range. Pain takes out big stompy taunt creatures, fen creeper and shieldmaster included, death is well held back for balance situations or real big stompy creatures (depending on if you have a mind control or not). Also, 1-for-1 or not, they're also dirty cheap, which lets you remove and follow up.

That said, I wouldn't deck out my priest with full pain, madness, death, and mind control. That's too much focus on situational removal. I think switching one or two of those out for good creatures makes a more balanced deck, and makes you less susceptible to rushdown. Shadowform helps there too, of course.

I pulled Prophet Velen in a pack, haha. With two shadow forms (one gold and pretty!) and Velen, that'll make for some fun games. Hard to match a 6-damage hero power. That change from just spells to spells and hero powers is quite a buff.

 

[Zeriel]

Thats not really viable though. Between shadow word pain and madness, you can take out 6 creatures the 3 attack or less. Shadow word death and mind control can take out another 6 large creatures. And thats with only 8 priest cards vs 12 minions. The only way you can hope to overwhelm all that is with weenie spam, which will die to holy novas, or just be plain awful vs fatties being healed constantly.

Rather than trying to exhaust a priest, I find it's more effective to rush them down. A mittful of removal isn't helpful if you die before you can cast it.

The 4 attack minion thing can work, but it has tempo problems, it's not very flexible, and if the priest didn't pack all the shadow cards, it's gonna fail.

I play paladin in constructed, so trading 1 for 1 (like Herostratus mentioned) generally works in my favor. I can even (and mostly do) cycle through their mind controls and wipe them out, winning around that point. I mean, sometimes you do luck out and get a perfect run of aggression, but I like having something to fall back on if that doesn't work.

As a rule of thumb, I generally don't like the idea of building a deck purely to counter one specific thing. Maybe I'm retarded and should run a murloc aggro deck like everyone else at 3 Masters, but I don't have enough dust to buy the several legendaries/epics that would take, so that'll have to wait. Hopefully they address the aggro dominance at some point. (Probably months from now, knowing Blizzard.)

 

[DakaSha]

having to build your deck around one class is bullshit in any case and i just flat out refuse to play against priests right now. i auto concede. yes im a fag but i prefer to have fun while playing this game

 

[Zeriel]

Well, there is hope. In Masters 3 priests generally lose a lot, and decks that are strong against other decks stomp priests. I really, really hated them in Diamond, but now that I've seen the meta at the top, I can understand why some people say they're not that great, and those stats from Blizzard make a lot more sense.

Of course, if the meta ever shifts to a place where aggro is not super popular (i.e when Blizzard adds more cards or mechanics that say you can't just play 20 murlocs by turn 4), I can see priests becoming monsters again.

 

[Brother None]

This is all a pretty good argument against constructed really. I mean, you play priests because they're spazzy and people don't know how to handle them (and often enough I do feel bad. At one point I played a Lightwell turn 2, then on turn 3 turned it into a 14/14 lightwell with +health and inner fire, it just feels cheap) until you hit Masters, and then you play super aggro because that's the only thing that's efficient. Doesn't sound appealing exactly, sounds more like "this is why you play arena instead of constructed".

 

[Damned Registrations]

I'm having a hard time imagining aggro stand up to a mage deck loaded down with aoe. Between blizzard and arcane explosion and arcane missiles and cone of cold and fireballs and polymorphs, the enemy is pretty much certain to run out of cards before you, no? I stopped watching streams once I got the game though, so I have no idea what people play in masters these days. I'm a few hundred cards away from having a shot there. Still haven't gotten a legendary, and my epics are all shitty ones, scattered between classes to boot, no neutral ones.