So alot of ppl are kinda upset that a control deck is on top i dont mind - Control dk and Priest.
The only thing i want is that more cards of the new set see play alot of the cards have one or two cards from the new set but essentially is mostly the old metas cards.
I have said it in the past il say it again sunken city castle nathria and i wil add now march of the lich king needs some nerfs so that new sets can see play i love that the new set is lower in power we just need to brng older sets in line.
I would probably play control priest i dont like control decks that doesnt have a wincondition but my point stands that aggro has been on top for long and is stil on top why must control be nerfed first.
I’m looking at HSReplay and wondering where players are getting their information. Diamond through legend, the third best deck is Blood DK. Top 1,000 legend and Blood DK is the fourth best deck.
The rankings have changed lately and Blood DK is no longer at the top. People are starting to figure out counters to it. I am doing just fine against BDK right now, for instance, there are a few sleeper decks that beat both BDK and much of the rest of the meta, so I am vibing amidst the chaos.
I am playing this spooky mage list right now. It is a lot of fun and actually challenging to play. A lot of decisions to make all the time and plenty of discovers to get you out of complicated spots. The worst matchup is Pure Paladin. Not impossible to win, but you need to get lucky with draws and discovers to stall them long enough. BDK usually folds to this unless you get mega unlucky and get both wincons Patchwerk’d. I’m hovering at 60 to 56% WR with over 30 games.
Beating blood DK for me is just a matter of either killing them by turn 5, or creating a board that survives blood boil on turn 5 so I can swing at them again for a turn 6 lethal.
So, totem shaman can do that with some good draws. Just hit legend by learning the right mulligans and play order to create the boards I need for that.
That said, if they play early minions to get corpses, and then corpse explosion me on turn 5, they can usually win after that.
Such a failure of the education system and culture. True self-esteem is not about believing that you’re above average, but about believing that you can be. It’s about not giving up. But when people think they’re perfect they stop trying to get better.
Not all control players want to play the 2 available control decks… every class should have access to aggro, mid and ctrl, ofc in various power level that can flux every exp, but should be viable.
Okay technically self-esteem is just the respecting yourself part. But respecting someone is a two-way street, it doesn’t work long term, it doesn’t sustain, unless the other person maintains respectability, and the same concept goes for respecting yourself. Just kinda imagine a 2x2 grid where one axis is whether or not you admire yourself and the other axis is whether or not you behave admirably, work out what happens.
Respect is earned. Therefore self-esteem is earned.
I beat a Blood DK last night using a fun Menagerie Warrior because my opponent made the classic blunder of not generating or drawing a board clear by Turn 6 in their 40-card deck. I wish I could see the live reaction to my opponent playing Gnome Muncher and having it die the next turn to Black Knight lol (it’s actually a solid tech option as it’s Undead and kills big Taunt idiots).
I hope and assume you respect yourself. I don’t believe you have spent enough time around people in dire situations with potentially terminal problems (like addictive disorders), mental illness, etc. to have a view that I’d respect whatsoever. Human beings deserve at worst a baseline of respect, and in respecting others one needs to also possess empathy (which you seem cold sometimes in that regard).
In short, we all deserve respect, even if the person in reference is misbehaving in whatever way (crime, psychosis, whatever’s).
First off: I was homeless for 3 years. You know this.
Second, and more importantly: I think what’s going on here is that you’re just thinking morally while I am talking mechanically. When it comes to
I’m probably more about that statement than normal. I think even truly horrible people have intrinsic value.
However, there is a difference between deserving and getting. It might be (and I think it is) that everyone deserves enough food each day to remain healthy, but deserving it doesn’t put food on the table. There’s a real mechanical problem to be solved in terms of getting the food into the right bellies , and although it’s a problem we’ve got much better at over time, it is not one that we have perfected.
I’m not talking about how self-esteem should work. I’m talking about how self-esteem does work. And it’s just a fact of the matter that self-esteem without self-improvement rots and decays and becomes corrupted. You need to walk the walk and self-talk the self-talk. That’s just how it is.
I know that, but I didn’t want to come out and say that because that’s your business. However, I have read you expressing that in modern America, homelessness is virtually unrealistic, and is the result of mental disorder (and/or addiction, which also happens to be a disorder). Let me say, I know we don’t know each other well, but I am nevetheless proud of you for overcoming what was an extremely difficult situation. I have been there too, and it is contrary to an easy life (no matter the reasons for the predicament).
I was going to compare your thinking to Jordan Peterson’s, but didn’t want to insult you. You often come across as someone who believes this world works based on meritocracy – it, in fact, does not. In regard to your idea of self-esteem, self-improvement is very dependent on the treatment available to people who are suffering. Alas, when one has no income, no insurance, and is mentally ill and homeless… these people are almost certainly screwed. I’ve been there and it’s based a lot on luck, honestly. Who are you related to? What were you born with financially? And so on.
Self-improvement is not a simple decision. It also is not spontaneously occurring. It takes a lot of insight to even reach the point of admitting you (not you personally) have a problem (i.e. whether that’s mental illness, drugs, or both). The point I am making here is that the opportunities for self improvement, as you mention, are not equal whatsoever among us. While my brother has insurance that has allowed him to go to what was basically a beach resort to overcome his alcholism, I, on disabilitiy, end up at a facility with virtually no therapeutic value, and at best relies on a few AA meetings a day, while we’re confined to some old and poorly managed building.
Sorry for kinda being all over the place Scrotie. I think we have a lot in common, but disagree on some fundamentals.
