Nice variety of decks got nerfed, except face hunter which is now all I’m facing on ladder. No problem its easy to make a counter deck for that braindead face rush nonsense. But wait I dont get matched against any face hunters with my counter deck, that’s quite weird. Best switch back to regular deck, oh no all face hunters again. Great matchmaking.
6 Likes
They probably have an specific algorithm to only match you with the decks which are good against you .
But only you because all the face hunters are waiting to pray on your decks.
Man i know youre reasonable so dont take this post to seriously 
But
1st: not even a day since the nerg
2nd: those streaks do happen. We ve all been there.
Take a break.
Hs world will look better tomorrow 
2 Likes
Sorry, but it’s the cheapest deck you can craft, and with the increasingly prohibitive prices of Hearthstone, one must try to climb with cancer decks. If I had a choice I’d never touch a face hunter deck.
hunter 100% win rate vs rogue and mage. hunter OP. but not nerfed… enjoy
3 Likes
I’ve checked three meta reports. two had them on tier 2 and one on tier 3. meaning hunter isn’t OP against the whole meta. that’s why it doesn’t get nerfed.
if you start nerfing decks/classes because they have very good matchups against a couple of other decks/classes, you get nowhere.
example: rogue is bad against hunter, so nerf hunter. hunter is bad against priest, so nerf priest. priest is bad against rogue, so nerf rogue. rogue is bad against hunter…
a meta in which all decks/classes are on even footing against all other decks/classes might be ideal. but it’s not what the dev team strives for. they’re ok with the tier system. if you want them to change their approach, you should address this instead of class X.
Can we discuss the long term outcome for a “neutral” tier system?
Like how would it look like if every class has decks through every tier list?
I font think it would ve gealthy gor the game but rather make the aproach to build decks quite different.
What is your opinion and what are your ideas how it would look like
since you now made me think about how to do it, I suddenly understand why they’re not doing it 
looking at the VS meta report right now shows a pretty even meta. 7 out of 9 classes have at least one deck with >50% win rate and the win rate difference between the best deck overall and the worst deck with a positive win rate is 2.5 percentage points.
so their design goals are more or less met: no deck is overpowered against the entirety of other decks and most classes have competitive options.
to get to an “all are equal” meta, you’d have to look at every possible matchup (for example 120 in a 16-deck meta) and even that out by changing those cards that make the difference. but you’d have to change those cards in a way that it doesn’t unbalance one of the other matchups.
this is surely not impossible, but it is impractical as hell, especially given that you have to produce 135 new cards every 4 months, that all have to fit into that system.
here’s the catch though: you still don’t satisfy those players that are bothered by the tier system because however even your balance is, you can’t balance individual matches.
there’s still card draw (if no other rng) that influences games and sometimes gives one player a big advantage. so even in a matchup aggro deck vs control deck that is perfectly balanced, you still run into situations where the control deck only draws high-cost cards early on and the aggro deck mops the floor with it.
and in those (and less obvious situations) people wouldn’t say “ah, this time I got unlucky”, but “that damn aggro is so brainless OP, all it does is hit face and I can’t do anything”.
add to that the circumstance that most players don’t play flawlessly. so for example player X doesn’t know how to play against control decks, so he mostly loses against them (even in the perfectly balanced meta). I doubt that he forms an opinion of “hmm I gotta learn how to play better against control decks”, but instead reverts to the more comfortable “control decks are OP! they do nothing all game and in the end beat me with a 10-cost legendary. p2w confirmed!”
of course not everyone has the inclination of blaming the game instead of themselves. but I think that those people, who aren’t inclined to do this, don’t make “nerf X threads” in the first place.
1 Like
I don’t know why whining about hunter. Of course you are meeting face hunter on lower ranks.
1st its good for climbing and 2nd, most important, its very cheap, you can make it on fresh new account. A lot of people just don’t have enough dust to make something more expensive, so they play face hunter. And you can see that those players are new because they making a lot of mistakes that a lot of time cost them the game.
EDIT: people that want some deck to get nerf, did you think how would that nerf affect other decks, decks that are under control because of face hunter?
1 Like
Still the problem isn’t face hunter. Problem is 9/10 decks are face hunter. For me it’s frustrating as that deck is easiest, doesn’t do anything cool it’s just fast win. Then that guy/girl who has no brain function goes to legend and thinks hes good while fact is hes retarded.
I’m deck creator and 6 years i’ve been making control decks that does something “cool” and that deck basicly can’t lose to other control decks, THATS what this game is about atleast for me. At same im dissapointed to all players that can’t do anything themself. Those face hunter players couldn’t make aggro deck themself, they had to copy it, how fxxxing stupid they are? I feel bad for them.
2 Likes
Judging by your comment i can just tell you, get good, or don’t play this game if its to hard for you to understand it. Its not a shame to admit that something is to complicated for you
Actually 6.9%, according to https://hsreplay.net/meta/#tab=archetypes. But don’t let facts get in the way of a good rant.
Cool. So you are very good at creating decks that counter exactly one of the four basic deck archetypes, but you have in those six years not focused on building decks that (also) counter other archetypes, such as aggro, combo/OTK, or fatigue?
Not meaning that as negative in any way, just to clarify whether I interpret you correct.
Quoting this without comment, except to highlight the LAST part of the sentence. Good that you understand that everyone gets to play they game they way they enjoy it.
How do you know they “can’t do anything themself” ?
How do you know they “couldn’t make aggro deck themself” ?
How do you know they “had to copy it” ?
And even if all of that is true, how do you jump from that to “how (unnecessary and also terribly misspelled expletive deleted) stupid they are” ?
When I encounter you on ladder and I see half of your deck before the game ends, how would I be convinced that you made it yourself, that you did not copy it from somewhere?
If someone else copies your deck, and then it becomes popular, how do I know that you were not the one copying it?
But most of all … (and I repeat this) … why, oh why, do you jump from “someone copied a deck” to “they must be stupid”? What happened to “THATS what this game is about atleast for me”?
I have made quite a few decks for myself. I have ALSO copied quite a few decks of the internet, or of streamers. Why? Because I want to have fun. That’s why I play.
So if I find a new card in a pack and I think of all the things I can do with it, I have fun trying to make those ideas work in decks. And at other times, I see a deck somewhere and I think that it’ll be fun to play, so then I copy that deck and start playing. And, who know, perhaps one day I’ll want to climb again, see how high I can come, and then I will of course use the decks that maximize my chances.
You are probably very good at deckbuilding. After doing it for 6 years, I do not doubt that.
But you are bad at making decisions, and/or at reading the meta. If you build decks that counter control but have no tools against any other archtypes, then, to put it bluntly, you are doing it wrong. Or perhaps not, if that is your idea of fun, after all we’re all here for the fun. But you know that you can’t control what your opponents play, you know they won’t all play control, so if you choose to build a deck that doesn’t take the current meta in account, you make a choice (either deliberate or misinformed) to create a deck that will lose the majority of matches.
If that was a deliberate choice, then I don’t understand why you come here to complain about something you knew in advance would happen.
So I’m back at the theory that you didn’t really think this through.
You are a good deck builder. Now learn to read the meta. Soon, you will craft decks that not only give you the grindy control battles against other control players that you obviously enjoy the most, but that will ALSO have sufficient tools to at least generate a decent win/loss rate against other archetypes.
Good luck (and enjoy!)
5 Likes
my only regret is that I have but one like to give your post
Thanks, Khisana!!
Let me correct myself, 9/10 hunter decks i’ve seen has been same face hunter.
Aggro is only deck type that i don’t mind counter. It’s easy but with 30 cards it’s impossible counter everything and have something cool synergy. And i just don’t understand why anyone plays face aggro decks as they don’t do anything if you know what i mean.
How i link it to stupidy… You know how people are called as sheeps? It’s same thing, they don’t think or do own things as its easier to let someone else/smarter do job for them and thats is in RL too. I don’t really mind about the game, everyone plays how they want but seeing no effort from anyone dissapoints me.
Anyway i don’t see what is a point in deck that losses if opponent survives first 6-7 turns. If climbing ladder is the reason, if they arent stupid why they dont make deck themself and climb? Maybe they wouldnt go trought rank20…
1 Like
For someone wjo dont mind you surely made a big complain.
Also jow about people who are bad at deck building but exeptional at piloting a devk they like?
Those are smart players as well
With the 9/10 stuff i assume you mean the deck has the same core do you?
I mean when the game is over on turn 7, you dont see the whole deck to begin with.
For example i climbed with face hunter about 7 ranks last season.
My deck had about 8 cards different from the hs replay list.
In a good amount of games i didnt see this cards.
In a few others they really saved my bumm.
And i cant pin point that enough
Aggro is only brainless when the player is.
Dont mistake a control decks bad draw and so giving an aggro deck an easy win with aggro beeing easy to play.
Imo i think an aggro mirror can be one of the more difficult games to play to begin with
1 Like
letting someone else do things for you is normal behavior in RL. most people don’t bake their own bread, grow their own herbs, fix their cars themselves, program their own software, build their own hardware, dispose of their own garbage and so on.
regarding letting someone smarter to the job: now you’re assuming stuff about other’s intelligence. that’s bad for two reasons: 1) because you don’t know if people netdeck because they can’t build their own decks or if they don’t want to build their own decks and 2) even if they can’t build their own decks it doesn’t mean that they’re less intelligent than the person who built the deck.
I rephrase this for clarity: you’re disappointed that other people don’t put in the same effort as you to play a game. that’s your right of course, but it means that you expect other people to entertain themselves the same way you do. some do, some don’t.
I play mostly control decks because I enjoy the gameplay more. the long games where you fight for board control and sneak in a face attack from time to time until 30 turns later the game ends. this gameplay gets rarer and rarer these days because pretty much every deck needs to be a combo deck of sorts to be able to win.
there’s just one constellation that I find more enjoyable: aggro mirrors. normally I don’t like how aggro plays, but in a mirror, you have a control game, even more so than with control vs control. in an aggro mirror, you need to fight for board control because if you just go face, you will lose. and since aggro doesn’t rely on playing cards that make your other cards double or triple their stats for still the same price, you’re having a game that is closer to the ‘old days’ of hearthstone. at least for me, that was a better time.
what I’m trying to do with this personal anecdote is to show some of the reasons why people might play aggro. now I don’t know how and if face hunter fits into this because I’ve never played it myself and don’t really know if I’ve played against it yet, but I think we’re talking (also) about aggro decks in general here.
2 Likes
Faceaggro hunter everywhere - game ending on turn 4 mana
I really didnt mean we should fix our cars, having a tought in cards what you want to play is different than repairing a car. I dont know how to explain it better. Its more like do you jump from clif if someone says so or if someone jumps do you follow. They arent doing their own thinking process. Either giving their perspective of the game.
Again its my opinion, it might be wrong or right. If the person is smart and still doesn’t want to make deck, he doesnt do good decks or hasnt tried/dont mind and that isnt any better as she/he let some1 else make thinking. I mean that kind of people isnt showing hes full potential if he doesnt even try. At the same game losses that potential too. Would you rather play game where most of the deck is same, couple cards may change but doesnt matter at all. OR most of your opponents play deck/cards/synergy you havent seen played usually? I prefer game that has more than one/two hunter deck.
And we have problem as we can see intelligence differently and there is many ways to measure that, but in this situation i see its about problem solving and creativity.
1 Like
I know and I didn’t mean to say that it’s the exact same thing, but those examples were different shapes of the same concept (using someone else’s service/product instead of doing it themselves) as netdecking, albeit on a different magnitude.
I agree. but why would a person need to show his full potential while entertaining themselves? if all a person wants to do is kick back with a game of hearthstone and not go through the mental effort of building a deck, why would that be wrong?
I would rather have a greater variety of opponent’s decks, but what decks my opponents play isn’t up to me.
but you called it a matter of stupidity earlier. that’s why we’re having this conversation.
and my point was that if you see a person netdecking, you don’t know why he’s doing it. and since you don’t know that, you can’t say anything about the level of intelligence of the person doing it. it could be Terry Tao who just wanted to rest his brain at the end of the day.
1 Like
I think Terry Tao isnt having fun with face hunter, i bet he would create something that actually is fun.
It’s true that i don’t have fact why people is playing these aggro decks or just netdecking, my opinion is that they aren’t that smart/inventive to succes and often ladder is the reason, but there it goes again, you don’t get anything from high rank, ego boost? Everyone just should even try make decks and become better. You’ve made decks if i remember right, i bet winning with own deck was more satisfying and fun.
As i said i don’t have facts. But people are getting dumber. That’s not a judgement. It’s global fact. So is there any small possibility that big part of HS players aren’t the brightest?
2 Likes