That’s the thing. You don’t like the deck. Likely, you’ll not like what’s next. Swallow your pride or get help elsewhere. Remember, beggars can’t be choosers.
Dude give it a break. “Beggars cant be choosers”… If you were actually trying to be constructive you would provide, instead you continue posting nothing constructive whatsoever to the discussion.
I am done, you win. But if youre not going to be constructive in topics related to wild, keep out of them. Saying play standard is not constructive. Saying play the same deck is not constructive.
2 Likes
I posted the list. You assumed it’s going to be used as is. It was intended to demonstrate a point, its flaw. But you can’t be bothered and trolled needlessly.
You are a smart one, aren’t you?
Remember DeathStar Druid?
Do you know why it was nerfed?
Your posts indicate a severe lack of gamebalance-knowledge. And lack of interest in engaging with the topic at hand, dodging questions and giving non-answers.
Your comparison with Rock-Paper-Scissors also makes no sense.
This deck can highroll so quickly, that not even Pirate Warrior can kill them in time.
You just defend a broken deck, that is unhealthy for the game.
Probably because you enjoy playing it yourself. And fail to acknowledge why it is unhealthy for the game.
Your bias is not just toxic.
Everyone is biased to a degree.
But you ignore facts and the effect this deck can have/already has on the game.
5 Likes
This argument is so old and so telling of what you play in Wild and your urge to defend it 
What solutions? You offering a mirrior-matchup? The perfect combo that just delays the problem at best or leaves you perfectly open at worst? (playing Cataclysm … wtf?!)
I’d say everything posted here by the players defending the Hourlock only proves how undefendable the whole thing is since NOTHING offered so far could be called remotely useful.
You want to hear my best solution I came up with? Saboteur turn 6 into hoping that you pull Darkest Hour from their hand - but that’s beyond any real solution because the deck is full of spells because they can’t have any weak minions in their by design.
1 Like
Posting the decklist was supposed to demonstrate a point. It did not mean that it will be used. But hey I guess that’s how netdeckers with no skill play the game.
You assume things way too quickly. Not to mention you’re always fighting against the perfect scenario when the win condition has already been pulled off. You cannot win when you’ve already ingrained in your head that you already lost.
That’s not how it works, Hearthstone isn’t some FPS game where you can lose and lose then make a comeback right at the end. If the answer is not in your hand you will lose. By this logic people lose games by just not believing they can win.
The best I can understand from this logic is that your ASSUMING people are just conceding the second the combo happens.
More likely they can’t beat the combo because they have no answer, or it has just flat killed them. People don’t have a miracle card they can draw from their deck to fix everything.
The best advice you gave was know your enemy, no duh. Knowing how a car is about to run you over doesn’t give you options to save yourself.
2 Likes
Which point? 
Are you kidding me? So far everything you have said just proves my point.
“Posted it to make a point” “not meant it will be used” and then “netdeckers with no skill” - what are you even trying to say? Do you even know yourself what your underlying argument is right now?!
1 Like
Just because I posted a decklist (at the request of some entitled player), you assumed that playing that same deck was the solution. Sure, seeing the deck perform for yourself will shed light on its supposed consistency, not to mention its weakness. Point there is that the entitled player kept demanding a solution to an already unwinnable scenario. You believe that it happens 100% consistently, which is far from the truth.
First point that infuriated everyone else is about playing standard. Absurd as it seems (right?), but the decks every wild player here complained about aren’t played there. Same thing as the unwinnable scenario. Why keep playing on the mode you’re so frustrated about as you claim? If it’s as bad as you claim it, why still keep going at it when you have ingrained in yourself that it’s hopeless?
To answer the question as to why people still (want to) play Wild, despite being frustrated.
First off: The reason for this frustration is facing two very polarizing highroll decks, which are extremely difficult to answer, and cannot be (In the case of Hour Lock), once they do highroll.
Secondly: “Play standard” is not an argument.
Before another non-deck entered the fray, wild was pretty enjoyable and quite unpredictable. While BP was still popular at that time, at least you did not have to deal with DHLock.
Also: Many perceive standard as boring and predictable, due to decks like Tempo Rogue pushing everything else out of the game.
You miss the point. Highroll bs should not exist to this degree.
Besides.
As you ignored it before: Barnes Priest, and especially Hour Lock, are extremely one-dimensional. The latter is reliant on its highroll to win at all (Plot Twist just helping in consistency and fixing dead draws).
Which at that point, it simply does.
There were hundreds of threads on the previous forums, discussing the issue of non-interactivity.
So. Let me ask you a question:
Why do you ignore every second and third point made, which can be summed up under the umbrella statement of: Fix the far more diverse mode of this game.
This is not really directed at you. But rather at the devs.
Though ignoring this is a recipe for disaster.
Lastly. Individuals such as you speak of entitlement. Rich.
As someone who invested money and a lot of time in this game, has grown attached to it and does not want to see it crash and burn, I want it to change and improve. It doesn’t take a alot of brainpower to understand, what is terrible for the game.
As a player, you want to enjoy playing the game. For an extended period of time.
You want it to last.
Decks like these make this impossible.
So.
What does entitled mean, again?
Right. Nothing. Its not a point.
Rather an attempt at belittling concerns and criticism, and to a degree insulting concerned and disappointed individuals.
Due to your way of dealing with the other forumgoers, you almost derailed this thread.
5 Likes
Exactly.
All arguments for those decks, brought up by players to defend them (because they play them themselver I’d wager judging from their line of argumentation) just make them look worse and less fun to play against.
Don’t play Wild - What kind of weak “solution” is that?
Play a mirror-matchup - why would I even consider that? What does that fix?
It’s a highroll - Both decks can close the game around turn 4. A highroll of this magnitude has no reason not see balancing by the devs because needing 3 cards in Hourlock (one of them has a huge variety of cards to replace it) and only 1 lucky draw by priests is just disgusting
As RandomDrunk has so perfectly stated: Asking for Balance in a mode in which 2 decks run supreme is anything but entitled. Some players love to wave senseless words around that they heard that someone else used in completly different contexts. In this case “Entitled” was used by Publishers to make Players look like crybabies because they didn’t want to invest money and those “bad bad players” demanding actual content for their money.
If Blizzard now promises me a mode in which “every card is playable” but hey, only 2 decks run supreme (one of them for years now), how does that make them look?
2 Likes
So what kind of highroll can be did?
Why?
Even if we consider that and kill the combo version of hourlock it is a question of time until a token focused version of it appears due to the nature of the deck and put the exact level of pressure despite of any nerfs and then people would not even say that it is a non game.
In other words. Mana cheating decks are a reality and there isn’t a real way of stoping they from exist unless you want blizzard to delete cards.
The fact that people problem is with mana cheating as a unfun mechanic and not about any real balance issue itself is what makes it dificult/impossible to solve.
And no. Big priest and hourlock aren’t unbeatable monsters.
They are decks that by put big stuff on board at a lower cost makes people feel helpless enough to not look at their fails.
Rethink your way to play slow midrange can be exactly as effective as run aggro making letting only usual control whiners who think that every situation should be solved with a single board clear losing.
So you’re basically saying that “Darkest Hour” and “Bloodbloom” are totally fine despite everything that Blizzard should have learned about mana-cheating with Kobolds?
How did they expect this “destroy minions and exchange with minions in your deck” business go down?! I’m not deckbuilding expert - I really ain’t - but I could have told them about Bloodbloom the second they showed this card. Initially I actually planned to play a deck like this when I saw the reveal (mostly because once upon a time they gave me that useless Morrigan-legendary) BUT I could never have guessed how disgustingly quick this deck is at closing the board.
You dont get it. Balancing takes money /resources away.
Designing shiny new cards creating a dumpster for old cards / sellign new p2win cards brings in money.
Blizzard is committed and interested in creating the most imbalance they can to maximize profit as that is when people spend the most.
They do not even dare to go to Gamescom now knowing they would be boo-d, whistled out of stage. All of their real devs left the company for a reason.
Boom v1 , v2 superop just their boombots do more dmg than any other cards with same cost. Magic carpet a 5mana card for 3… 1.5 mana to create 12mana minions etc. The line of p2win is endless.
Pessimistic talk like that isn’t helping anyone either.
If you hate the game(s) so much and don’t care for changes anymore, don’t play. I’m not supporting their greedy behavior but talking bad about all of their actions is also very wrong since they did implement some very good changes during the last 1-2 years as well.
Well.
They probably expected you to play it as a token deck with the ton of token generation spells that warlock has.
Imagine that we have a cost 4 bloodbloom.
We have as token creation spells:
Forbidden ritual
rafaam’s scheme
fiendish circle
implosion
Kara kazhan
So if your opponent fails at clear the token board a single turn.It is totally and 100% possible to have a turn 4 darkest hour anyway despite of a bloodbloom with double cost.
I’m sorry to say but the deck is really planned to be that fast and the combo version is only a consequence of people wanting a way to not interact with the opponent that will probably get corrected.
The not let this happen in that part of the game argument just not fits here but everyone can see a bloodbloom nerf to make the deck more interactive(read as not fill the board and cheat darkest hour in the same turn).
So do you think a nerf is likely or not? 
The bloodbloom nerf is certain and that is what people can expect but people who expect blizzard to disable the deck from creating powerfull boards at turn 5 will really have a bad surprise.
That said it is also possible to get a total revamp of bloodbloom because it is the first time that the card really find a use in a agressive fashion it was a obvious design restriction that probably got ignored because no one ever managed to use the card as a tempo swing before darkest hour.
But i could not count with the second possibility before blizzard goes here and say it.
Does anybody know when these bastards will kill Big priest already. I am really fckn tired of facing a BS boards of three ysaari, lich king by turn 6.
4 Likes
Calm down man, language!
We all want to see this change but please don’t get personal here.
Yeah - I wonder how much they want to up the cost tho.
It’s not as if we’d miss a tool we used before but how much can you make a card cost that “discounts” the next spell with life?! If it costs 4+, it’d lose its use alltogether.