Bluetracker

Tracks Blizzard employees across various accounts.

The highest win-rate deck I've ever observed was Force/Roar Druid in Classic. It was 61% for over 2 months. We never nerfed it because its population never got very high and players didn't seem to mind it. Never dipped below 56-57% IIRC. Has my vote for best deck ever.

The highest win-rate deck I've ever observed was Force/Roar Druid in Classic. It was 61% for over 2 months. We never nerfed it because its population never got very high and players didn't seem to mind it. Never dipped below 56-57% IIRC. Has my vote for best deck ever.

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

The highest win-rate deck I've ever observed was Force/Roar Druid in Classic. It was 61% for over 2 months. We never nerfed it because its population never got very high and players didn't seem to mind it. Never dipped below 56-57% IIRC. Has my vote for best deck ever.

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

Galakrond Shaman was 59% on launch or something, which is incredibly high for modern Hearthstone. I think it was very slightly higher than Ashes DH. If we would have let Ashes DH live for longer, I imagine its win rate might have crept up near 60. We'll never know!

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

The 'best deck' of any meta is usually around 53-54% at the top 1% of players. 53-55% is normal nerf territory (we don't nerf by looking at numbers, it just happens to be that this is pretty normal 56-57% is busted 58%+ almost never happens, truly megabustado
Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

The 'best deck' of any meta is usually around 53-54% at the top 1% of players. 53-55% is normal nerf territory (we don't nerf by looking at numbers, it just happens to be that this is pretty normal) 56-57% is busted 58%+ almost never happens, truly megabustado

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

also pls don't tag this tweet and link me future hsreplay data of some deck with a tiny sample size and bias data that has 60% win rate ugh you are going to do it anyway, aren't you? AREN'T YOU

m_mccall

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@IksarHS Wasn’t Patron in the mid sixties or was that just at high legend? I remember it being broken off the hinges

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@m_mccall patron was one of those decks where individual top players had high 60's or low 70's win rates with 100+ games sample size not overall tho

ToastieNL

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@IksarHS @m_mccall Does a similar thing hold for LSDH, which always had middling performances at most aggregate data, but was highly played by some players nevertheless

J_Alexander_HS

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@ToastieNL @IksarHS @m_mccall You’d want to account for player skill there. If a player regularly records a 57% win rate, them recording a 60% is a different beast

ToastieNL

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@J_Alexander_HS @IksarHS @m_mccall Mr Iksar... :)?

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@ToastieNL @J_Alexander_HS @m_mccall Individual players do weird things. The best Hearthstone players frequently play middling decks and call them great decks because of how they feel.

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@ToastieNL @J_Alexander_HS @m_mccall Even in cases where there is a deck that is only successful for very high-legend players, it's usually a result of the niche meta at that level more than it is a result of that deck being mega-high-skill

ZerinaX

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@IksarHS I think Undertaker Hunter beat this out back in the day, it was a VERY high WR

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@ZerinaX it was mid-high 50's i think this is mostly because undertaker was being used in a variety of classes to great success and hunter was just the best of the bunch

kilmarnok1285

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@IksarHS Never nerfed? Force used to summon treants with charge

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@kilmarnok1285 I mean we never nerfed it in the classic era

acrowfliedover

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@IksarHS I wonder how much better ashes DH was if we remove mirror matches

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@acrowfliedover all win-rate data has mirror matches removed

AlAkir_

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@IksarHS What was the highest winrate deck that I was in?

Iksar

Posted 3 years, 7 months ago (Source)

@AlAkir_ I don't know it would take me a long time to read that far down the list

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
The highest win-rate deck I've ever observed was Force/Roar Druid in Classic. It was 61% for over 2 months. We never nerfed it because its population never got very high and players didn't seem to mind it. Never dipped below 56-57% IIRC.

Has my vote for best deck ever. (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483603052103823361">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
Galakrond Shaman was 59% on launch or something, which is incredibly high for modern Hearthstone. I think it was very slightly higher than Ashes DH. If we would have let Ashes DH live for longer, I imagine its win rate might have crept up near 60. We'll never know! (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483603741924212739">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
The 'best deck' of any meta is usually around 53-54% at the top 1% of players.

53-55% is normal nerf territory (we don't nerf by looking at numbers, it just happens to be that this is pretty normal

56-57% is busted

58%+ almost never happens, truly megabustado (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483604125744910339">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
The 'best deck' of any meta is usually around 53-54% at the top 1% of players.

53-55% is normal nerf territory (we don't nerf by looking at numbers, it just happens to be that this is pretty normal)

56-57% is busted

58%+ almost never happens, truly megabustado (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483604277864001539">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
also pls don't tag this tweet and link me future hsreplay data of some deck with a tiny sample size and bias data that has 60% win rate

ugh you are going to do it anyway, aren't you?

AREN'T YOU (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483604583943266304">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@IksarHS Wasn’t Patron in the mid sixties or was that just at high legend? I remember it being broken off the hinges (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483604821873553409">None</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@m_mccall patron was one of those decks where individual top players had high 60's or low 70's win rates with 100+ games sample size

not overall tho (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483605015537209346">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@IksarHS @m_mccall Does a similar thing hold for LSDH, which always had middling performances at most aggregate data, but was highly played by some players nevertheless (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483616896884695042">None</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@ToastieNL @IksarHS @m_mccall You’d want to account for player skill there. If a player regularly records a 57% win rate, them recording a 60% is a different beast (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483619212434227202">None</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@J_Alexander_HS @IksarHS @m_mccall Mr Iksar... :)? (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483619896290283522">None</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@ToastieNL @J_Alexander_HS @m_mccall Individual players do weird things. The best Hearthstone players frequently play middling decks and call them great decks because of how they feel. (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483624932554653697">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@ToastieNL @J_Alexander_HS @m_mccall Even in cases where there is a deck that is only successful for very high-legend players, it's usually a result of the niche meta at that level more than it is a result of that deck being mega-high-skill (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483625226084651014">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@IksarHS I think Undertaker Hunter beat this out back in the day, it was a VERY high WR (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483622059175395331">None</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@ZerinaX it was mid-high 50's

i think this is mostly because undertaker was being used in a variety of classes to great success and hunter was just the best of the bunch (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483623577391828993">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@IksarHS Never nerfed? Force used to summon treants with charge (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483621468382576640">None</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@kilmarnok1285 I mean we never nerfed it in the classic era (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483623983828193284">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@IksarHS I wonder how much better ashes DH was if we remove mirror matches (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483609132082995200">None</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@acrowfliedover all win-rate data has mirror matches removed (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483624317485125635">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@IksarHS What was the highest winrate deck that I was in? (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483626549635162114">None</a>)
<hr/>

<blockquote class="quoted">
 
</blockquote>
@AlAkir_ I don't know it would take me a long time to read that far down the list (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483626776341348354">Iksar</a>)
<hr/>

The highest win-rate deck I've ever observed was Force/Roar Druid in Classic. It was 61% for over 2 months. We never nerfed it because its population never got very high and players didn't seem to mind it. Never dipped below 56-57% IIRC.

Has my vote for best deck ever. (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483603052103823361">Source</a>)

Galakrond Shaman was 59% on launch or something, which is incredibly high for modern Hearthstone. I think it was very slightly higher than Ashes DH. If we would have let Ashes DH live for longer, I imagine its win rate might have crept up near 60. We'll never know! (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483603741924212739">Source</a>)

The 'best deck' of any meta is usually around 53-54% at the top 1% of players.

53-55% is normal nerf territory (we don't nerf by looking at numbers, it just happens to be that this is pretty normal

56-57% is busted

58%+ almost never happens, truly megabustado (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483604125744910339">Source</a>)

The 'best deck' of any meta is usually around 53-54% at the top 1% of players.

53-55% is normal nerf territory (we don't nerf by looking at numbers, it just happens to be that this is pretty normal)

56-57% is busted

58%+ almost never happens, truly megabustado (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483604277864001539">Source</a>)

also pls don't tag this tweet and link me future hsreplay data of some deck with a tiny sample size and bias data that has 60% win rate

ugh you are going to do it anyway, aren't you?

AREN'T YOU (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483604583943266304">Source</a>)
 
 <hr/>

@IksarHS Wasn’t Patron in the mid sixties or was that just at high legend? I remember it being broken off the hinges

@m_mccall patron was one of those decks where individual top players had high 60's or low 70's win rates with 100+ games sample size

not overall tho (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483605015537209346">Source</a>)

@IksarHS @m_mccall Does a similar thing hold for LSDH, which always had middling performances at most aggregate data, but was highly played by some players nevertheless

@ToastieNL @IksarHS @m_mccall You’d want to account for player skill there. If a player regularly records a 57% win rate, them recording a 60% is a different beast

@J_Alexander_HS @IksarHS @m_mccall Mr Iksar... :)?

@ToastieNL @J_Alexander_HS @m_mccall Individual players do weird things. The best Hearthstone players frequently play middling decks and call them great decks because of how they feel. (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483624932554653697">Source</a>)

@ToastieNL @J_Alexander_HS @m_mccall Even in cases where there is a deck that is only successful for very high-legend players, it's usually a result of the niche meta at that level more than it is a result of that deck being mega-high-skill (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483625226084651014">Source</a>)
 
 <hr/>

@IksarHS I think Undertaker Hunter beat this out back in the day, it was a VERY high WR

@ZerinaX it was mid-high 50's

@IksarHS Never nerfed? Force used to summon treants with charge

@kilmarnok1285 I mean we never nerfed it in the classic era (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483623983828193284">Source</a>)
 
 <hr/>

@IksarHS I wonder how much better ashes DH was if we remove mirror matches

@acrowfliedover all win-rate data has mirror matches removed (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483624317485125635">Source</a>)
 
 <hr/>

@IksarHS What was the highest winrate deck that I was in?

@AlAkir_ I don't know it would take me a long time to read that far down the list (<a href="https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483626776341348354">Source</a>)
 
 <hr/>

Bluetracker

The highest win-rate deck I've ever observed was Force/Roar Druid in Classic. It was 61% for over 2 months. We never nerfed it because its population never got very high and players didn't seem to mind it. Never dipped below 56-57% IIRC. Has my vote for best deck ever.

Tweet