You can against something like Warlock or DK.
Ahem… Singleton Warrior is one the greediest deck and is most popular with the ‘fatigue’ option.
Meet Tony, King of Piracy, you newb! 
That’s literally interactive: playing minions, removing enemy board and whatnot, except for Magtheridons probably — which still do get removed by Reno (and they said ‘permanents’ or dormant minions are untouchable)…
Well, they literally play big boards, very much like a Classic Handlock, it’s more than just the Wheel itself, although I still don’t consider it quite ‘legitimate’.
Still reminiscent of the old Freeze Mage with its many iterations: you either are fast enough and kill it first, or you get armour, or you just die to it, most likely.
Or perhaps they are picking it because they have a guaranteed exorbitant win rate (from ‘The Algorithm’), no matter what deck they play, so they just pick this one to troll and abuse their opponents. Doubly so for so-called streamers (see also this, for instance: Why did I have this win rate if the matchmaking is rigged? - #120 by SparkyElf-2852): not only do they have ‘skilL’ (yep, ‘L’ for ‘skill’), but they can also show it off by abusing ordinary players in front of others. Apparently, some are even mentioned here:
Well, yeah, except that the ‘streamer magic’ — the very same that allows them to have 90% win rate with Sif Mage vs Odyn Warrior, for example — wouldn’t apparently work if you’re not ‘certified’ (perhaps ‘aNNointed’ — ‘official’ ™ Blizz orthography — is a better word), no matter how good and entertaining or educational you are.
Yeah, that’s definitely due to a skill difference. I’ve seen that for many years: for example, a ‘top-legendary’ Ramp Druid would always start with a Wild Growth on turn 2, followed by a perfect curve, while a lower-rank or ‘perpetually Rank 5 / D5’ player would be so unskilled that he or she woud have to use a hero power instead… Really skillful players never get their Window Shoppers without a massive discount and always discover a Magtheridon or better, unlike those newbs who can’t play this game well…
Nope — because ‘kayfabe’.
Since when have so-called ‘hate cards’ — more a sign of bad design than anything — been generally successful at stopping problematic archetypes? Speaking generally there, not necessarily re a particular one.
As in, your pet troll to sic on people, so that you could flag their posts with your ‘forum privileges’, all the while playing a superficially positive ‘community rep’, and partake in forum abuse and bullying without doing the dirty work yourself?
Speak for yourself, please, wouldn’t you?
Besides, just below the very same person says:
I’m tempted to say: make up your mind.
(Highlighted by me)
That definition of ‘early’ is highly subjective, to put it mildly, that’s why I’m not content with such a formula.
The good old ‘no OTK’ rule was just so much better, in my opinion.
I agree, see, for instance, this: Shaman summoned Deathwing on turn 2 - #25 by SparkyElf-2852
However, there’s apparently a niche among players for such cards — all those people with the “I’m the dung pile that smudged the boots of someone” mentality (same for resident forum trolls, by the way). There’s also the extreme ‘Jimmy’ (or was it ‘Johnny’?) mentality, as MTG players call it.
That resembles stock market a bit: you could have all the data about the past, which doesn’t mean you’ll be able to predict the future.
That’s one of the many reasons I consider those ‘deck trackers’ with ‘stats’ and so on to be ‘snake oil’ for most players. Those who gather the data are a different story, though…
Absolutely not — or, at the very least, not as trivially as you’d think.
Gotta self-quote again, tired of explaining the same thing over and over again:
Try going higher, then you might see what this game is really made of, how it’s not rigged and how skill matters.
Well, at least the DK has some interesting ones.
Precisely — I underline ‘terrible’.
Back where you ‘belong’, according to “The Algorithm’s” judgement — that’s how it generally goes.
Not necessarily.
Some people utilise also rational thinking, logic and even a mathematical approach. Having estimated somehow the ‘subjective probability’, as de Finetti would probably put it, that the game is more likely rigged than not, they have come to that conclusion — which might be right or wrong, but it’s rational from a mathematical viewpoint.