Btw, Zilliax and SN1P-SN4P are basically EVERYWHERE, from Aggro to Renodecks, compelling for even more Mechs to be included in any deck.
Not even unnerfed Patches the Pirate reached that point, as at least the Pirate package was restricted to Aggro decks. Yet he was nerfed because of overpopularity...
Reviving this thread, because it seems to me we are approaching some shape of a meta in Wild.
Surely Secret Mage keeps shaping the meta, primarily contested by the plethora of Reno decks.
However, I think Secret Mage is losing part of its initial traction, if anything because people are now used to play around Secrets, and toppling that skill with a Secret tech can often be game winning.
On the other hand, I noticed pretty soon a surge of Handbuff Mech Paladins, but today, curious about these Paladins being probably more common than Odd Paladin, I looked for them in HSReplay, and indeed, they appear to be incredibly consistent, at least in the current meta.
I find them incredibly vulnerable to my typical Wild decks, because I appear to prefer decks that happen to include techs against Buffs (Devolve, Freezing Trap, Spellbreaker), but looking at those charts, the decks seems to be the new Meta Enemy. So I wanted to ask, how can this deck be so apparently consistent, given all the efficient techs that Wild can include against it, starting from the neutral and evergreen Spellbreaker himself?
Also, this deck uses no new cards from SoU, but I don't remember seeing many of them pre-SoU. What happened here? Secret Mage can't account for this alone.
As for Warrior, i think they should have no Secrets at all, as Secrets are not just an automatic reaction, but also something that is prepared, an ace up your sleeves. Warriors are not subtle enough to fit that concept (even Paladins are marginally so but one could argue the ways of the Light are subtle, but Warriors are not at all).
Are you saying that a nutkick is not subtle enough.
If a Warrior could arguably perform a nutkick, then why not Mage or Druid too?
In fact, a nutkick is something I would expect much more fitting for a Rogue.
how do you decide what's a meme deck and what isn't`?
Nobody would need to do that.
The author of a new deck would/should decide between 'Just for Fun' (default) and 'Ranked', with 'Ranked' requiring some decent explanation of the author's experience on Ladder (against Ladder decks, in which ranks etc), with the deck.
If one is unable to provide some decent Ranked experience explanation, then it's a 'Just for Fun' (aka 'Casual'), meme or not.
PS: on the other hand, if one can provide explanation of oneself reaching say rank-5 with a meme deck, it'd definitely deserve the 'Ranked' label.
The label would be a sort of certification of what a given deck *CAN* do, and in turn a discrimination for users browsing the Hot Decks boxes.
Our website is generally populated by a community that tends to prefer and give upvotes to what is off-meta, or meme, and/or with funny description/story. That's ok ofc.
But the result in the Hot Decks boxes of the front page is often that a hot deck could be either a meme, or a candidate meta-breaker (more often the former), without the user being able to discern, before actually opening the deck page.
And imo, the fact we display memes or Casual decks as Hot Decks makes us look as weirdos to a generic new user trying to find a place to improve their Ranked performances with the game.
So my idea is, what about 4 Hot Decks boxes? One for Standard Ranked, one for Wild Ranked, one for Standard Just for Fun, one for Wild Just for Fun.
ALTERNATIVELY, the 'Just for Fun' could all be merged together in a unique box, Standard and Wild.
With 'Just for Fun' as the default option when an author publishes a new deck.
At that point, deck authors should be compelled (maybe with a warning that clarifies that, if they try to select it) to define their deck as 'Ranked' ONLY IF they can provide the description of some decent performances in Ladder. And it'd be pretty easy to spot scams anyway, since a weird deck with no detailed explanation is easily just a Casual deck.
The current Pro Decks (typically overlooked btw) could be merged in the new Standard Ranked, and/or accounted for with an additional variable in the visibility algorithm.
PS: if and when all this is implemented, an additional temporary Theorycraft box could be conceived, across expansions release times.
Exactly, Pirates are not there because they end up being irrelevant as a package, and/or inconsistent due to the Singleton restrictions.
As for Vanish, i am fairly sure it was there in some previous iteration of this deck, probably in the place of Betrayal.
The latter is better against Aggro, but indeed it could be unreliable, as opposed to Vanish.
The Infested Goblin is just a deck filler, but a decent one. It's surprising how good a 1/1 taunt is at stalling the game. Given the current meta, Eater of Secrets is probably better in his place. Or Sludge Belcher.
Looking at how cards like Nerubian Unraveler and Mojomaster Zihi are balanced, this is another alternative for such a tech. Notice that setting its cost at (6) grants that both Kazakus and Zephrys the Great can never be countered if played on curve. Even Reno Jackson itself could still be coined on turn-5 before this tech card can act.
PS: Casts When Drawn always draws you another card. It never denies card draw. Just look at how Bomb works.
I feel like it's kinda petty to print a card to print a pure hate card that does nothing other than kneecap a specific archetype.
I'd much prefer a reprint of The Darkness in some form. You know...a card that has its own purpose and isn't specifically restricted to countering a single decktype (while still obviously being designed for that)
I also don't think a card like this would even see play, mainly because most of the Highlander cards aren't even that much of an issue. You can't just play this on curve and be like "suck it, your deck's unplayable now" because if they draw into 2 scrolls over the course of the game it was a wasted effort.
You effectively will have to predict at which point they'd want to play their respective Highlander (or Zephrys) which, in most cases will most likely be in an agressive deck that wants to prevent a Reno or Zephrys clear...and I doubt aggressive decks can afford an udnerstatted 4-drop that they actually need to draw into in time to get a benefit out of.
HIghlander decks are just a bit too consistent at the moment to really be hampered by this...just play Bomb Warrior if you want a counter.
I'm not sure of Standard, but the average Reno deck in Wild would be vulnerable to Aggro, without Reno Jackson. Not weak, but vulnerable. They should include more healing in their decks, if such a tech existed.
My idea was a specific tech, because i was afraid that a purposeful card would be too easy to throw in a deck as a tech, while i wanted it to be a choice one has to make, to avoid making Reno decks unplayable.
And the whole purpose of Neutral, is indeed it was meant as a tech. I didn't mean to counter Highlander, just generating a vulnerability that all decks could decide to equip.
Yep, you're right, a 6/6 could be more fitting for such an impactful and versatile tech card.
Dungeon Run was top tier for me because of the D&D flavour.
Heist of Dalaran comes second.
I wish i could say Monster Hunt close third, but i actually feel the Gilnean flavour was exceedingly dispersed there...
Then come all the others.
With Boom Labs being my least favourite, both for theme and mechanics.
Zul'Aman Loas are the best ones imo.
As for the next topic, what about the story of a race? Like Dwarves or Orcs.
Ok, I believe I have created the final one, Dr.4 (compare with Loatheb). It was so obvious I can't believe how I wouldn't think of it first.
IMHO you should mark this deck as 'Just for Fun', not 'Ranked'. :)
Btw, Zilliax and SN1P-SN4P are basically EVERYWHERE, from Aggro to Renodecks, compelling for even more Mechs to be included in any deck.
Not even unnerfed Patches the Pirate reached that point, as at least the Pirate package was restricted to Aggro decks. Yet he was nerfed because of overpopularity...
I bought Dalaran for gold, even if it was not worth it for the gold/dust ratio, simply because it was Dalaran.
I don't feel the same appeal for Uldum, so i think i will just skip and save the gold this time.
Reviving this thread, because it seems to me we are approaching some shape of a meta in Wild.
Surely Secret Mage keeps shaping the meta, primarily contested by the plethora of Reno decks.
However, I think Secret Mage is losing part of its initial traction, if anything because people are now used to play around Secrets, and toppling that skill with a Secret tech can often be game winning.
On the other hand, I noticed pretty soon a surge of Handbuff Mech Paladins, but today, curious about these Paladins being probably more common than Odd Paladin, I looked for them in HSReplay, and indeed, they appear to be incredibly consistent, at least in the current meta.
https://hsreplay.net/decks/#playerClasses=PALADIN&gameType=RANKED_WILD
https://hsreplay.net/decks/Vod0Nr3NxaOiWT4m62PV1f/#gameType=RANKED_WILD&tab=overview
I find them incredibly vulnerable to my typical Wild decks, because I appear to prefer decks that happen to include techs against Buffs (Devolve, Freezing Trap, Spellbreaker), but looking at those charts, the decks seems to be the new Meta Enemy. So I wanted to ask, how can this deck be so apparently consistent, given all the efficient techs that Wild can include against it, starting from the neutral and evergreen Spellbreaker himself?
Also, this deck uses no new cards from SoU, but I don't remember seeing many of them pre-SoU. What happened here? Secret Mage can't account for this alone.
If a Warrior could arguably perform a nutkick, then why not Mage or Druid too?
In fact, a nutkick is something I would expect much more fitting for a Rogue.
You probably want to squeeze in Scavenging Hyena and Tundra Rhino.
Possibly some Cult Masters too. Or, maybe better, get rid of non-beasts and include Master's Call.
Nobody would need to do that.
The author of a new deck would/should decide between 'Just for Fun' (default) and 'Ranked', with 'Ranked' requiring some decent explanation of the author's experience on Ladder (against Ladder decks, in which ranks etc), with the deck.
If one is unable to provide some decent Ranked experience explanation, then it's a 'Just for Fun' (aka 'Casual'), meme or not.
PS: on the other hand, if one can provide explanation of oneself reaching say rank-5 with a meme deck, it'd definitely deserve the 'Ranked' label.
The label would be a sort of certification of what a given deck *CAN* do, and in turn a discrimination for users browsing the Hot Decks boxes.
Our website is generally populated by a community that tends to prefer and give upvotes to what is off-meta, or meme, and/or with funny description/story. That's ok ofc.
But the result in the Hot Decks boxes of the front page is often that a hot deck could be either a meme, or a candidate meta-breaker (more often the former), without the user being able to discern, before actually opening the deck page.
And imo, the fact we display memes or Casual decks as Hot Decks makes us look as weirdos to a generic new user trying to find a place to improve their Ranked performances with the game.
So my idea is, what about 4 Hot Decks boxes? One for Standard Ranked, one for Wild Ranked, one for Standard Just for Fun, one for Wild Just for Fun.
ALTERNATIVELY, the 'Just for Fun' could all be merged together in a unique box, Standard and Wild.
With 'Just for Fun' as the default option when an author publishes a new deck.
At that point, deck authors should be compelled (maybe with a warning that clarifies that, if they try to select it) to define their deck as 'Ranked' ONLY IF they can provide the description of some decent performances in Ladder. And it'd be pretty easy to spot scams anyway, since a weird deck with no detailed explanation is easily just a Casual deck.
The current Pro Decks (typically overlooked btw) could be merged in the new Standard Ranked, and/or accounted for with an additional variable in the visibility algorithm.
PS: if and when all this is implemented, an additional temporary Theorycraft box could be conceived, across expansions release times.
Exactly, Pirates are not there because they end up being irrelevant as a package, and/or inconsistent due to the Singleton restrictions.
As for Vanish, i am fairly sure it was there in some previous iteration of this deck, probably in the place of Betrayal.
The latter is better against Aggro, but indeed it could be unreliable, as opposed to Vanish.
The Infested Goblin is just a deck filler, but a decent one. It's surprising how good a 1/1 taunt is at stalling the game. Given the current meta, Eater of Secrets is probably better in his place. Or Sludge Belcher.
Guys, have you ever faced a Bomb?
I added PS on my posts.
Casts When Draw always draws an additional card after autocasting. It is embedded in the meaning of the keyword.
Otherwise Bomb Warrior would be ravaging the meta in both Wild and Standard...
Looking at how cards like Nerubian Unraveler and Mojomaster Zihi are balanced, this is another alternative for such a tech. Notice that setting its cost at (6) grants that both Kazakus and Zephrys the Great can never be countered if played on curve. Even Reno Jackson itself could still be coined on turn-5 before this tech card can act.
PS: Casts When Drawn always draws you another card. It never denies card draw. Just look at how Bomb works.
OR, more simply:
C'mon, enough with this BS. You are so obviously biased that it's not even funny.
I made this as a serious thread, open to serious discussion about how such a card as those i proposed (or similar) could be balanced.
And i repeat, the purpose is NOT to lockdown Renodecks with a card, not more than Loatheb can lockdown Spelldecks.
If you can't stand to discuss it properly, it's sufficient that you stay away from it. ;)
If Zephrys the Great could give you any kind of cards from any set, it would be entirely broken. (And nearly impossible to code properly).
No, sorry.
It's a horribly unreliable coinflip that only few decks (namely, Control and/or other Reno decks) can afford to include in their lists.
That is not a "Neutral Anti-Reno tech". At all.
I'm not sure of Standard, but the average Reno deck in Wild would be vulnerable to Aggro, without Reno Jackson. Not weak, but vulnerable. They should include more healing in their decks, if such a tech existed.
Anyway, i wouldn't mind a Neutral Beneath the Grounds on a stick.
My idea was a specific tech, because i was afraid that a purposeful card would be too easy to throw in a deck as a tech, while i wanted it to be a choice one has to make, to avoid making Reno decks unplayable.
And the whole purpose of Neutral, is indeed it was meant as a tech. I didn't mean to counter Highlander, just generating a vulnerability that all decks could decide to equip.
In what kind of decks did you use it? How did it perform on ladder?
My concern with the darkness is that it is in extreme card, not really fitting as a tech...