I forgot, I followed a lot of news articles on the game I really can't point at the source for that statement, they did said January though, I didn't find it in the article you linked..
Tbh since they set the release date to late 2020.. Maybe it's for the best the beta releases as late as possible to have more "fresh" time without an expansion.
The deck is very fun, but it loses to the main meta contenders, deathrattle rogue and galakrond shaman, as well as zoo warlock.
Thanks for confirming my suspicions--I was wondering last night what could come of combining quest druid with either Ysara or Alexstrasza, and I figured they were entertaining possibilities but not anything that could compete with all these big-stat decks.
Hmm, the combination with Brann might indeed make Sathrovarr strong enough to stay. You could perhaps add Vereesa Windrunner on top of it and swap out a spell. That way you kinda change the lay-out of the deck from a Malygos deck to a deck which has multiple good pulls from Jepetto which might increase versatility. I think I'll probably try your list tomorrow and add Vereesa Windrunner to see how it performs.
I don't think Frizz Kindleroost would be a good card in this deck as it is another card for the the Jepetto Joybuzz pool and you want as little as possible of those. Furthermore, with the amount of fast decks around these decks, I do not believe you would have enough time in most games to first play Frizz Kindleroost and then be able to combo your dragons with the necessary spells. That said, if you draw it before turn 4, it's obviously very good but that is not very often the case
Thanks for the Frizz suggestion as well! I was thinking along the same lines at the start of this expansion and used him as a replacement for Emperor Thaurissan. While he definitely softened the blow of drawing Malygos early (and enabled another strong Turn 7 play via Alexstrasza), I ended up cutting him due to a number of FeelsBadMan moments when I hit him with Jepetto. However, I definitely didn't play enough games to know for sure whether it was worth the drop in Jepetto consistency.
I've been playing around with it too the last couple of days. I am currently trying something close to the original build from Rise of Shadows with mixed results. Your build is probably(and at least had more of a back-up plan when you draw Maly). I think the deck will be in a better place as face hunter numbers currently are dwindling.
If I could make one suggestion it would probably be to replace Sathrovarr with Vereesa Windrunner as you're probably not gonna be able to have something on board to use it on and Vereesa is very strong when reduced to 1 mana. However, I'm interested in hearing what your results are with Sathrovarr.
I also would advise against putting in anti-aggro minions as they mess with your Jepetto pool and Hunters has plenty of options to contest the board with spells.
Thanks for your feedback! I agree that I should give Vereesa another shot and I think I'll try her in a non-Highlander build so I can double-up on the burn spells. Although I also agree that she's much better than Sathrovarr when played from hand so I'll re-think adding her to my Highlander build as well.
Thanks as well for you advice on avoiding anti-aggro minions, this makes sense to me and I'm glad others feel likewise.
My experience with Sathrovarr:
Most of the time it functions as another Faceless (i.e. you rarely use the card in hand or the one shuffled back in deck because you're going for lethal) but makes discounting "Faceless" more consistent and can be combo'd with a 5-cost Faceless if you hit either Malygos or Brann with your other Jepetto draw.
If you draw both Faceless and Sathrovarr with Jepetto you can still play them on a 7-cost Brann for 3x the King Krush which has won me a number of games.
The 9-cost Sathrovarr makes a 1-cost Zephyrs not such a bummer and I've also used it a couple times on the 0-cost dragons from Alexstrasza (or on a 1-mana Alexstrasza which is the other weaker Jepetto target). I've also hit both Sathrovarr & Zephyrs with Jepetto on occasion and even with 9-mana Zephyrs typically offers Tirion so you can play two 1/1s + two Tirions on Turn 10 (with another Tirion in hand) which isn't too shabby.
You're going to need to do something about the cancer that is Hunter. I've been trying to figure something out with Warlock since the release and honestly, Highlander Hunter and Quest Hunter are problems right now. Especially with that damned Side Quest that they have that will summon 3 leper gnomes..
On a side note, having life gain is going to be a must and transmogrifier is a sketch run... do it at your own risk.
If you wanna have some fun power spike card instead of Tess I would try cards like Jepetto Joybuzz or Archmage Vargoth. From a utility point of view I'd go for something like Acidic Swamp Ooze, Sap, Faceless Corruptor, Spellbreaker, Leeroy Jenkins or Bone Wraith. I could suggest a lot of other cards as well, but bottom line is replace her with something that helps vs yr most common foe OR go for the high roll line. Good luck!
hey everyone, i was running an handlock style deck back in uldum, and it felt pretty good but it was lacking a little bit of oomph, now with the new handsize support it might just be viable. I've tried to make it work for a while, but now I dont have all the cards to try it, so if any of you has them and want to try it out here is the list.
the main concept is that you want to cycle and multiply your aarnasi broodmothers, in that deck sense demons is pretty strong as it is a draw 2 and heal 8. Also you got very decent removals and giants. Transmogrifier seems like a very decent late game tool and the old broodmother shell i was running always felt super good.
2: Oh yeah, it will take a LONG time. Like I said I think this is one of the main reasons why Team 5 canned a few years back, BUT that doesn't mean there aren't players who won't play it daily. You can break in between games if you win fast enough, there's also a two minute break if the other player is waiting on you to finish. It's in the wall of text somewhere up there, and it may need to be adjusted to 5-10 minutes but then again that's adding onto total time. I think I should add in a check system if all the players are done making their decks the match can go ahead and start, but that could also cause griefing/trolling. Plus the deck box could help but that would need some more thought than what I put into it, the main reason for deck crafting is so that people can adapt their strategies to what cards are legal. I defaulted to 8 players simply because we know Hearthstone can handle 8 players in a session at once. I want to keep it at 4 decks so players can ban a deck as they see fit. Unless banning is removed then yeah go down to three decks and make it best of 3, BUT that means less games in total which then should reflect on total rewards. Less Games = Fewer rewards.
That isn't what I meant when I said that players wouldn't be able to take breaks. I mean like how when playing arena you can play two games and then the next day play two more games and then three days later finish the run. With tournament mode you would have to be attentive to your game and be at your computer for over an hour all at once. Battlegrounds already takes about half an hour and with what you proposed simply building your decks will take even longer than that.
I like the idea of tournament mode, but I don't think you should have to invest so much time and attention to it. I am sure that if it worked like you suggested than most players wouldn't even bother to use their free run each week simply because there is so much effort involved.
I think it would work better if players only had to build 3 decks, and one of them would get banned so that you only had two decks to play with and you would build these before the tournament mode started. I understand about the limited set thing would make building the decks a bit harder, but you could easily put a "Tournament" filter in the deck building section to only show the sets that are being used. You would only need 2 decks because you wouldn't be fighting the same person more than once (assuming we are doing elimination and not swiss. And even if it is swiss than you shouldn't ever be fighting the same person more than twice). Also I would reduce the number of players so that it won't go on too long, having six players instead of eight wouldn't be the end of the world. Besides you could always just add the option to cue up against six or eight players.
If they did confirm January (and that would explain the bizarre certainty I have over it despite having no firm evidence to support it) I'd be pretty happy to at least have that much. Any chance you can remember the source?
Honestly, though, I didn't start the thread to beg for news - it's just an expression of impotent frustration. This is why I don't usually play betas - I hate feeling like I'm sat around waiting for something.
EDIT - nvm, found something. Linked here if interested.
One, the rewards seem a bit small. Tournament mode seems like a big investment of time and gold, playing for over an hour straight only to make a 10 gold profit would be frustrating for a lot of players. You didn't mention exactly how much gold or dust would be rewarded, but it would have to be a lot. Only the top 3 players get a pack, and it looks like 3 and 4 don't get enough rewards to compensate for their investment. If only the top 2 players get to make a profit then this mode will be swarming with only the most competitive spikes and a LOT of salty people.
Two, it will take forever. You get forty minutes to make four decks, and then there will be four rounds of elimination, that can easily take over an hour and a half. Plus you cannot break in between games, you have to play throughout the entire thing. I just don't think a lot of people have that kind of time on their hands. If there wasn't a 'deck building' phase then it would take much less time, you could just make your decks before entering. Another thing you could do is have only 6 players instead of 8, this would also mean you only have to build 3 decks instead of 4.
1: I left the rewards ambiguous because I honestly don't know how much the actual rewards would be. I'm sure there's several combinations of awards that can be given to the players, I was more focused on writing the article rather than do the math of the rewards themselves. It's mainly there to show what to realistically expect. I think top 3 should make a profit, 4th place should come just under even. Plus giving players dust helps them craft cards they want/need for the Ladder.
2: Oh yeah, it will take a LONG time. Like I said I think this is one of the main reasons why Team 5 canned a few years back, BUT that doesn't mean there aren't players who won't play it daily. You can break in between games if you win fast enough, there's also a two minute break if the other player is waiting on you to finish. It's in the wall of text somewhere up there, and it may need to be adjusted to 5-10 minutes but then again that's adding onto total time. I think I should add in a check system if all the players are done making their decks the match can go ahead and start, but that could also cause griefing/trolling. Plus the deck box could help but that would need some more thought than what I put into it, the main reason for deck crafting is so that people can adapt their strategies to what cards are legal. I defaulted to 8 players simply because we know Hearthstone can handle 8 players in a session at once. I want to keep it at 4 decks so players can ban a deck as they see fit. Unless banning is removed then yeah go down to three decks and make it best of 3, BUT that means less games in total which then should reflect on total rewards. Less Games = Fewer rewards.
One, the rewards seem a bit small. Tournament mode seems like a big investment of time and gold, playing for over an hour straight only to make a 10 gold profit would be frustrating for a lot of players. You didn't mention exactly how much gold or dust would be rewarded, but it would have to be a lot. Only the top 3 players get a pack, and it looks like 3 and 4 don't get enough rewards to compensate for their investment. If only the top 2 players get to make a profit then this mode will be swarming with only the most competitive spikes and a LOT of salty people.
Two, it will take forever. You get forty minutes to make four decks, and then there will be four rounds of elimination, that can easily take over an hour and a half. Plus you cannot break in between games, you have to play throughout the entire thing. I just don't think a lot of people have that kind of time on their hands. If there wasn't a 'deck building' phase then it would take much less time, you could just make your decks before entering. Another thing you could do is have only 6 players instead of 8, this would also mean you only have to build 3 decks instead of 4.
If you multiply my Attack and Health and subtract from that the Cost of my other half, you will receive a number that is three times lower than my Cost. What is my name?
IIRC They said it would be January and it would be an open beta without a downtime...
Of course they wouldn't want to really compromise on a date so they don't need to apologize if it doesn't release on time..
we will probably get news about it next week.. Riot are very talkative and I am certain you are not the only one that want it released.. (I feel the same.. really miss that game..)
Standard Meta Report #16 - December 22, 2019 - December 29, 2019
But I'm having fun with it anyway, so you can take your data and go home, Mr. Negativity! la la la can't hear youuuu
-Whine-
I forgot, I followed a lot of news articles on the game I really can't point at the source for that statement, they did said January though, I didn't find it in the article you linked..
Tbh since they set the release date to late 2020.. Maybe it's for the best the beta releases as late as possible to have more "fresh" time without an expansion.
[Legacy] Ysera's Untapped Potential
Thanks for confirming my suspicions--I was wondering last night what could come of combining quest druid with either Ysara or Alexstrasza, and I figured they were entertaining possibilities but not anything that could compete with all these big-stat decks.
Tess & Albatross [R5 to Legend]
+1 for making a clever and innovative deck
-1 for not naming it "Tess & 'Tross". :-P
Malygos Hunter
Hmm, the combination with Brann might indeed make Sathrovarr strong enough to stay. You could perhaps add Vereesa Windrunner on top of it and swap out a spell. That way you kinda change the lay-out of the deck from a Malygos deck to a deck which has multiple good pulls from Jepetto which might increase versatility. I think I'll probably try your list tomorrow and add Vereesa Windrunner to see how it performs.
Barrel Toss
Theorycraft Plot Twist Warlock
yeah i was thinking about cutting faceless for seer
Group Therapy! Need to blow off some steam? Mega salty? Here's the place!
Has Schrutebucks come back?
Malygos Hunter
Thanks for the Frizz suggestion as well! I was thinking along the same lines at the start of this expansion and used him as a replacement for Emperor Thaurissan. While he definitely softened the blow of drawing Malygos early (and enabled another strong Turn 7 play via Alexstrasza), I ended up cutting him due to a number of FeelsBadMan moments when I hit him with Jepetto. However, I definitely didn't play enough games to know for sure whether it was worth the drop in Jepetto consistency.
The Standard Shakeup Event is Live - Unlock 2 Card Styles & XP
Flux Channeler?
Flux, the card was made for you.
Sidequest Token Paladin
Just watched the video, seems cool! Nothing fancy but i‘m gonna give it a try n
Malygos Hunter
Thanks for your feedback! I agree that I should give Vereesa another shot and I think I'll try her in a non-Highlander build so I can double-up on the burn spells. Although I also agree that she's much better than Sathrovarr when played from hand so I'll re-think adding her to my Highlander build as well.
Thanks as well for you advice on avoiding anti-aggro minions, this makes sense to me and I'm glad others feel likewise.
My experience with Sathrovarr:
Overall, I've been pretty happy with Sathrovarr.
Theorycraft Plot Twist Warlock
You're going to need to do something about the cancer that is Hunter. I've been trying to figure something out with Warlock since the release and honestly, Highlander Hunter and Quest Hunter are problems right now. Especially with that damned Side Quest that they have that will summon 3 leper gnomes..
On a side note, having life gain is going to be a must and transmogrifier is a sketch run... do it at your own risk.
Tess & Albatross [R5 to Legend]
I would try Acidic Swamp Ooze, Sap, Spellbreaker, Faceless Corruptor, Betrayal, Bone wraith, Siamat or Leeroy Jenkins.
Tess & Albatross [R5 to Legend]
If you wanna have some fun power spike card instead of Tess I would try cards like Jepetto Joybuzz or Archmage Vargoth. From a utility point of view I'd go for something like Acidic Swamp Ooze, Sap, Faceless Corruptor, Spellbreaker, Leeroy Jenkins or Bone Wraith. I could suggest a lot of other cards as well, but bottom line is replace her with something that helps vs yr most common foe OR go for the high roll line. Good luck!
Theorycraft Plot Twist Warlock
hey everyone, i was running an handlock style deck back in uldum, and it felt pretty good but it was lacking a little bit of oomph, now with the new handsize support it might just be viable. I've tried to make it work for a while, but now I dont have all the cards to try it, so if any of you has them and want to try it out here is the list.
Wild · Plot Twist Warlock · by Fierytear · 6 years, 8 months ago
the main concept is that you want to cycle and multiply your aarnasi broodmothers, in that deck sense demons is pretty strong as it is a draw 2 and heal 8. Also you got very decent removals and giants. Transmogrifier seems like a very decent late game tool and the old broodmother shell i was running always felt super good.
tell me what you think about it
The Standard Shakeup Event is Live - Unlock 2 Card Styles & XP
The art goes all the way to the end of the card, the text box is transparent, and there is a sort of 3-D effect when you move the card around.
Tournament Mode
That isn't what I meant when I said that players wouldn't be able to take breaks. I mean like how when playing arena you can play two games and then the next day play two more games and then three days later finish the run. With tournament mode you would have to be attentive to your game and be at your computer for over an hour all at once. Battlegrounds already takes about half an hour and with what you proposed simply building your decks will take even longer than that.
I like the idea of tournament mode, but I don't think you should have to invest so much time and attention to it. I am sure that if it worked like you suggested than most players wouldn't even bother to use their free run each week simply because there is so much effort involved.
I think it would work better if players only had to build 3 decks, and one of them would get banned so that you only had two decks to play with and you would build these before the tournament mode started. I understand about the limited set thing would make building the decks a bit harder, but you could easily put a "Tournament" filter in the deck building section to only show the sets that are being used. You would only need 2 decks because you wouldn't be fighting the same person more than once (assuming we are doing elimination and not swiss. And even if it is swiss than you shouldn't ever be fighting the same person more than twice). Also I would reduce the number of players so that it won't go on too long, having six players instead of eight wouldn't be the end of the world. Besides you could always just add the option to cue up against six or eight players.
The Standard Shakeup Event is Live - Unlock 2 Card Styles & XP
What is a card style?
-Whine-
If they did confirm January (and that would explain the bizarre certainty I have over it despite having no firm evidence to support it) I'd be pretty happy to at least have that much. Any chance you can remember the source?
Honestly, though, I didn't start the thread to beg for news - it's just an expression of impotent frustration. This is why I don't usually play betas - I hate feeling like I'm sat around waiting for something.
EDIT - nvm, found something. Linked here if interested.
Tess & Albatross [R5 to Legend]
Any good replacement for Barista?
Tournament Mode
1: I left the rewards ambiguous because I honestly don't know how much the actual rewards would be. I'm sure there's several combinations of awards that can be given to the players, I was more focused on writing the article rather than do the math of the rewards themselves. It's mainly there to show what to realistically expect. I think top 3 should make a profit, 4th place should come just under even. Plus giving players dust helps them craft cards they want/need for the Ladder.
2: Oh yeah, it will take a LONG time. Like I said I think this is one of the main reasons why Team 5 canned a few years back, BUT that doesn't mean there aren't players who won't play it daily. You can break in between games if you win fast enough, there's also a two minute break if the other player is waiting on you to finish. It's in the wall of text somewhere up there, and it may need to be adjusted to 5-10 minutes but then again that's adding onto total time. I think I should add in a check system if all the players are done making their decks the match can go ahead and start, but that could also cause griefing/trolling. Plus the deck box could help but that would need some more thought than what I put into it, the main reason for deck crafting is so that people can adapt their strategies to what cards are legal. I defaulted to 8 players simply because we know Hearthstone can handle 8 players in a session at once. I want to keep it at 4 decks so players can ban a deck as they see fit. Unless banning is removed then yeah go down to three decks and make it best of 3, BUT that means less games in total which then should reflect on total rewards. Less Games = Fewer rewards.
Tournament Mode
This sounds great! I do have 2 issues though.
One, the rewards seem a bit small. Tournament mode seems like a big investment of time and gold, playing for over an hour straight only to make a 10 gold profit would be frustrating for a lot of players. You didn't mention exactly how much gold or dust would be rewarded, but it would have to be a lot. Only the top 3 players get a pack, and it looks like 3 and 4 don't get enough rewards to compensate for their investment. If only the top 2 players get to make a profit then this mode will be swarming with only the most competitive spikes and a LOT of salty people.
Two, it will take forever. You get forty minutes to make four decks, and then there will be four rounds of elimination, that can easily take over an hour and a half. Plus you cannot break in between games, you have to play throughout the entire thing. I just don't think a lot of people have that kind of time on their hands. If there wasn't a 'deck building' phase then it would take much less time, you could just make your decks before entering. Another thing you could do is have only 6 players instead of 8, this would also mean you only have to build 3 decks instead of 4.
[Game] Card Treasure Hunt (The Resurrection Attempt)
If you multiply my Attack and Health and subtract from that the Cost of my other half, you will receive a number that is three times lower than my Cost. What is my name?
-Whine-
IIRC They said it would be January and it would be an open beta without a downtime...
Of course they wouldn't want to really compromise on a date so they don't need to apologize if it doesn't release on time..
we will probably get news about it next week.. Riot are very talkative and I am certain you are not the only one that want it released.. (I feel the same.. really miss that game..)