Sure, sure it does, lol. Whatever.
Not always and not even reliably. not when you’re pulling them seven at a time on turn five or six from spell burst. That also rolls aggro out of the game, too.
I think you’ve seen the slow, bad lists and think that’s what I’m talking about. It isn’t. There’s a very aggressive and effective list that wins in less than seven turns.
That’s a loaded statement. Handbuf was only good for a couple of days because nobody expected it would be played; libram is clearly better in the hands of pilots who can play both perfectly; the main reason is that handbuff is too one-dimensional and predictable while libram has more room to dance around the opponent hence with a higher skill cap.
Honestly it’s probably way better to play exca today.
It combines handbuffing now and it also has Finley.
This is just false. Handbuff is still a good deck and better than libram at most ranks.
Because neither you nor I fall into that category, it’s really not relevant to this discussion. Beyond that, you can’t say this because top legend would never play handbuff unless it was so broken as to be obscene due to the fact that it’s not the type of deck they want to spam for the games it takes to be at that rank.
Top 1k has both power and playstyle considerations more than any other rank. They will force a slightly lower miracle rogue rather than win a game or two more with a paladin. This is a fact.
Lol. K, dude, whatever. Maybe this is the season you get to diamond. I’m rooting for you.
A vomit of credentialism is not an argument. I don’t care if you are starstruck by people on the top of the ladder telling you what to do. Bring actual arguments on gameplay.
What are you even on about here, dude?
I guess this struck a chord, lol.
Apparently, if your opinion just so happens to be the same opinion of people who play at the highest levels, this is what he says to you.
He thinks you’re some kind of Top1K listener/streamer watcher shill that can’t think for your own.
He just did it to me in another thread.
Nice strawman. If your argument is “the people I’m starstruck with at the top of the ladder didn’t tell me the same thing” then you have no argument.
First bring and argument then you have a chance to be convincing.
This is your problem. I don’t care about a single person at the top of ladder. I honesty couldn’t care less. I might know of maybe 3 by username.
I already brought my argument in the other thread that undeniably refutes everything you’ve argued against. Your rejection of them isn’t a me issue.
Then don’t bring them as an “extra argument”. I don’t care who they are.
a) They often don’t agree with each other anyway
b) You don’t know if they changed their mind
b) They are often full of crap
There’s a reason science is never changing by showing your Diplomas but exclusively by showing your Papers,
your Diplomas only give you a title; they give you a job; they don’t give you an argument.
You brought them up first by saying VS is wrong. VS takes the data and voices from those at top legend…you literally did it first by arguing against VS point of view.
I simply reiterated that you’re arguing against those people.
If you don’t want people at the top of the ladder to be introduced into an argument, then perhaps don’t bring them up in the first place?
I’m pure trash player at this point. Haven’t bothered to climb to legend the last three months, actually.
That doesn’t mean I can’t identify play patterns that are toxic… like asteroids… or sense when the mechanics are over tuned… like shuffling three each time instead of two.
Dude, I don’t watch streamers and can’t name a single top player in this game. The best player in the world could make me tea, and I wouldn’t have a clue.
This is the very antithesis of “starstruck” in every sense of the word.
I look at aggregate data from the complilation of the very best players and then interpret that data.
I think the biggest problem you have is you think data and statistics make decisions, which is wrong.
Here again, you’re bouncing to the anecdote from the data. We aren’t talking about any one player, we are looking at the trends in aggregate data. Your refutation is a fallacy on its face.
Right, but people without diplomas often struggle to understand the arguments when brought because they lack specific expertise that is gained from years of study and practice.
What are you even talking about. Dissing VS is the opposite of credentialism, since so many people treat their opinion as a religious gospel.
Your other thread.
At this point, I don’t feel like you’re properly following the flow of conversation or you’re talking about something completely non-related.
VS is a team made up of analytics who also get their points of view from others at Top1K Legend. When I bring up those very same people in your argument against VS, you’re saying I shouldn’t bring them up.
It’s just a weird argumentative point that doesn’t make sense. You’re either talking about them or you’re not. You were, so I was as well then you threw it back in my face as if I am “starstruck” which is just weird.
You misunderstand how VS works btw. If they took their opinions only from players then they would be terrible at their job. Their main job is to collect stats form games and then talk about the stats.
Also if they do take their opinions mainly from players who try to be Champion then it would be a very compromised method,
people who want to be Champion may not necessarily spill the beans.
I didn’t say that. They use both the data and player insights. They don’t just rely on opinions of top players and experiences.
Most of their team were very high level players themselves and this is why they have “contributors”. The list has dwindled over the years, but they absolutely listen to others. You can see this in their discord and podcasts.
Bottom line is that VS are/were people at top legend. So saying not to talk about people at high legend is directly saying don’t talk about VS itself.
Most players are dumb and the people who have a chance to be Champion have an incentive to not spill the beans early.
Honestly I think they DO try to mainly collect the stats and avoid listening to random opinions of players,
I just don’t think they do a great job (e.g. their homebrews before releases are usually terrible).
Mainly, sure. But they do listen. They have conversations all the time in discord and are in contact with high level players.
This is true. They really suck at predicting metas before expansions and pretty bad at gauging which cards are good/bad and which classes will be good/bad.
But so is literally every other HS player. No one is getting it spot on all the time. Most get it wrong more often than not.
Also what “team” are we talking about? Isn’t it mainly ZachO collecting stats from Firestone/Tracker and making spreadsheets?
If you go to a report, you will see below the contributors. Recently, there have only been 4.
If you go back further to older reports, there was many, many more. They used to have an “expert” in each class so the contributor list was quite long.
If you listen to podcasts, there have been some where he says he spoke to X or Y or heard X or Y and agrees with X or Y in top legend. Those are harder to find since they are in audio form, but it’s clear he does speak to people that actively play at high ranks.
Put back in steamcleaner, it punishes braindead decks like this.