The only class should have so much armor is warrior

Multiplayer Discussion
21

Only 100? Ha!

Played against a Wheel Warlock recently, played a 15-damage Colossus (that bugger even managed to snipe the other one) with Brann two times, so 120 damage, in one turn — and it was still standing… but not for long. :grinning:

Not sure about that part, though.

See above. :stuck_out_tongue: Technically, there are things that can kill even that.

Btw, that wasn’t even my first time doing that.

I don’t think so.

There are Rogues of all kind, there is the most broken and ridiculous deck in the game at the moment, which is Clownius Druid, aka ‘thousands of damage to de face outta nowhere, lol, you die’ (well, I suppose one should thank all the rogues and other obnoxious aggro for keeping at least that rubbish somewhat in check, otherwise it would probably overtake even more of the ladder than it does), which, I think, does a consistent OTK three times before the first AoY even awakens. :grinning:

Those warlock players are mostly parasites trying to ‘troll’ those who play slower or defensive decks with low lethality, that’s it.

No, it’s probably useless, then. :grinning:

Without the ability to troll decks like Taunt Warriors (and maybe some slower DKs, although I’m not 100% sure about that match-up), the deck is probably useless.

What?

The card is an obvious reference to the classic Druid’s AoL. Of course, nowadays AoL is too weak for Druid to even bother with. :grinning:

:rofl: Who would have thought.

And some very smart people claim hero powers are not very useful nowadays. Well, they generally are bad (for the mundane reason of power creep)… unless you’re a Warlock, DH or, in certain situations, Warrior (stacking armour is still a thing sometimes). :grinning:

Not true. If you destroy your big board-wipes with KJ, you might lose just to that.

1 Like
22

I can beat Warlock and DK control decks with my control warrior at an above 50% win rate. Currently i am 63% against Warlock. Simply put. Your Warrior isn’t aggressive enough.

I feel like a broken record but i will repeat this again. THIS IS A BAD CARD TO PLAY IN CONTROL WARRIOR.

This is a GOOD card to play in control warrior.

1 Like
23

:rofl: Reminds me of some snake oil ‘deck tracker’ site(s), where everything has such ‘win rate’ against everything. :rofl: Di stats stronk! And no, don’t ask us how it coincides with the notion of something called zero-sum game and other such rubbish. Buy ‘premium’ and ‘just use more’!

However, even if you look at some other, supposedly more serious attempts at ‘di numbahz’ (like d0nkey or vS even, I dunno), you’ll see that this part simply isn’t true:

The match-up is perhaps the example of a ‘hard counter’, close to ‘hopeless’.

Sure, there is a possibility to win it, in case:

  1. You snipe their KJ;
  2. They overdraw and burn the WoD.

Yes, this can sometimes happen, but otherwise…

A shocking revelation, a surprising insight, a real ‘black swan’! Who would have thought.

I’ve got a couple of other suggestions like that, though.

The Exodar isn’t a bad card to play in Starship decks.
Zilliax has been a good card in many decks, including Warrior.

Bonus:

Your Rogue deck should probably contain two copies of cards like Shadowstep and Preparation.

1 Like
24

The same decklist, but without Wheel, literally exists. I know players who tried it without Wheel.
Btw you can look at video made by PocketTrain where he explains how to play Starship Warlock and he says smth like that his favorite wincon is not Wheel, but the starship (as I heard and as far as I can remember, I am not 100% sure about favorite, but I am sure that this wincon exists).

1 Like
25

Well, I could name stranger things some people have tried… :grinning:

I could, but I dunno why I should. :grinning:

Against all-in aggro decks, perhaps, yes. But to think of it: is it really the reason they play this particular deck — all that aggro (sarcasm) and definitely not the infestation of the ladder by Starships DKs? :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

1 Like
26

Except that i said it was bad in WARRIOR not ALL Starship decks. Reading is key.

1 Like
27

What are you trying to do here, to preach to the choir? :rofl:

28

If your people tried stranger things somewhere in top-200, name those things, it will be interesting

It is close to what I said. Warlock without Wheel is still a strong control deck. It means that it beats aggro and performs well in the meta where fast decks are prevalent. Ofc it is better with Wheel when the meta is full of slow control decks

Nowadays I see only infestation by Paladins, I mean Paladins with spells, without dragons
Starship Warlock has gone through several stages of development of the meta. When slow decks were more popular, Wheel was important. But sometimes faster decks gained some traction and people cut Wheel and added defensive tools

29

Dancing frantically on a Gaming_Chair™ , having pink hair or something like it… For the sake of decency, I’ve omitted some other phenomena and picked relatively innocuous ones, mind you.

I dunno in what ‘meta’ you live, but if anything, I’ve rather seen samples of Wheel Warlock without the Starship package (and they still complain about it — in this topic, as you’ve seen, and elsewhere) on the ladder than the other way around.

They call it ‘drunk’, and there’s no surprise: see, for example, this post and below.

Btw, its return is attributed more to the subject of this topic (as one of the niche counters mentioned there): HS Balance: you're mostly complaining about wrong things - #19 by SparkyElf-2852 — but I see no need to repeat it here.

You’re not gonna tell me Starship DK isn’t still the most popular deck by far, are you?

And if you mean those Rogues or Druids from another topic, I don’t see how this kind of Warlock, Starship and Wheel or not, would counter them in any way — rather the other way around.

30

Is it strange? As far as I can understand, it is about streamers. It is their way of making money. You can like it or not, but it is not strange that some streamers try to provide some kind of show to entertain their audience.

According to statistics it is not the most popular at the 1st k, and it is meaningless to discuss lower ranks while speaking about decks like Owlinius Druid and Starship Warlock, bc they are not easy to pilot and their performance and popularity at lower ranks are more likely highly affected by this.

Starship Warlock is countered by Owlonius Druid bc the great amount of armor that Warlock can gain is not enough against the great amount of damage that Druid can do.
Owlonius Druid is countered by decks that can provide big stats on the board early. Drunk Paladin can do it, Cycle Rogue with some luck can do it.
Decks that can provide big stats on the board early are vulnerable to early agression of very fast decks and to all ways to clear the board and remove minions of slow decks.
So we have the meta where there is no decks without a deck that counters your deck. Such a meta can have other problems, but it is relatively acceptable anyway, bc it is far from being the worst situation.

31

Well, in the previous post, I omitted something cross-dressers for the sake of decency, but apparently, even that wouldn’t be unusual for people like you. :grinning: Okay, whatever… no matter.

Ooh, sample manipulation?

Lol, lol and lol.

I don’t play either of this nonsense, just like any other disgusting decks, but I think it’s not just about the amount of armour or damage, but also about tempo, or how fast either of these can be produced… Warlocks don’t generate their 120+ armour on turn 5 or 6, when a 50-mana combo-wombo is coming.

You’re kinda contradicting yourself here. :grinning:

On the contrary, it’s far from ideal. That’s be a repetition again:

1 Like
32

I don’t think armor should be exclusively warrior but it’s pretty ridiculous how many other classes have stepped all over one of the few identities that warrior had

(Warrior has historically been a weak class with a lot of bad cards, propped up by a few builds, just like Shaman)

1 Like
33

Lmao, no, it was just heavily nerfed when they started removing charge from them. They did great when they could charge you down.

If they could have kept that identity, they would have been fine.

1 Like
34

Funny how warrior went from smash your face to a fortress

1 Like
35

Owlonius Driud can’t kill on turn 5 or 6 too.
More than that, usually Druid can’t kill before the turn 10.

Then I can’t imagine what decks you are playing.
And, what is really strange, you discuss meta decks without having any experience of piloting them.

36

You can see by reading the forum that players of low ranks (below 2000) had troubles with Asteroid Shaman, Zarimi Priest, Imbue Paladin and other weak decks that were giga unplayable in the 1st k.
No way they can pilot Starship Warlock and Owlonius Druid well and it would be ridiculuos to include them in statistics while discussing these decks

37

With neutral cards like Starships, it’s clearly not meant to be… Which is fine by me, however…

It’s remarkable how a number of other classes can get substantially more armour than the ‘armour class’, namely Warrior, itself.

Ridiculous I say. Ridiculous!

I don’t even know what to say here.

If ‘charge’ and ‘fine’ coexist in someone’s noggin, then maybe a chamber pot would contain better design ideas.

What?

Warrior was supposed to be a ‘fortress’ — or rather have this option — since the very beginning — in the first expansions, they even fortified it more until it could become one, maybe with the C’Thun stuff it finally did it for the first time… Although the defensive, tanky kind of Warrior was already quite good in Naxx.

Ever heard of cards like New Heights, Trail Mix, Sleep Under the Stars etc?

Apparently, not. Low skill detected…

Yeah, how could you possibly discuss milk without being a cow?

Did you get such ‘arguments’ from some second-rate demagogue handbook?

Parroting the same nonsense (or was that handbook written or insipred by Goebbels) many times over doesn’t make it become true. Btw, have I not deconstructed it already? Ah, no matter, entire topics sometimes get purged on these forums, and I don’t feel like repeating it all yet again.

Even a pug or, at the very least, a trained chimpanzee could probably do it no worse than you :grinning: — you would do well to just accept this bitter truth, in case your self-esteem is founded on it (I even have my suspicions about whose yet another alt this account is :rofl:, judging by this symptom, for example), and move on with your life. I suspect you’ll not, but it’s your problem, not mine.

What’s ‘ridiculous’ is pathetic attempts to manipulate or hand-pick a small and biased sample to support one’s wild and ridiculous ideas.

For example, no, ‘most popular’ [deck] doesn’t mean "most popular among all my accounts on all servers and my two-three virtual ‘friends’, ‘caise the rest are irrelevant’'. :rofl:

38

Owlonius Druid doesn’t run Trail Mix. It is too greedy. Including it in the deck would not help you anyway to kill on the turn 5 or 6, bc you need not only mana, but also damage cards, spell damage cards and Owlonious. So you should draw a lot of cards to setup the OTK.
Even two copies of New Heights are not enough to kill so early, count better. And in reality you’d almost never play more than one New Heights in the early game bc opponents wouldn’t be AFK and you should answer or die. Also having a lot of mana cheating cards in your hand at the start of the game will not help you to draw cards and survive, so actually you would not be happy to see many of them too early.

A bad analogy is like a kitten with a door.

I had had a similar suggestion about beating weak decks like Zarimi Priest or Imbue Paladin, it looks so easy for me. But it occured to be the great problem for players of low ranks.

What conclusions can be made? You are discussing the deck not only without playing it, but even without knowing the decklist. You make a common mistake: you imagine the game like you could have all cards of your deck in the hand at the very start and also your opponents would be AFK.
Such mistakes are relatively acceptable while discussing low ranks decks. I understand that players of those ranks want to have fun and don’t want to think too much.
But you are duscussing high ranks decks that have a great impact on the balance of the high ranks meta and competitive HS including e-sports events etc. If your preparations for doing it are so poor, your opinion is far from being worthy.

39

Oh, I’ve just read THIS and now I understand everything excepting the reason why I am still talking with you. Have a good day and don’t forget to put on a tinfoil hat :innocent:

2 Likes
40

Well, Aviana Clownius Druid would do so, for example.

And if you wanna really unpack the ‘etc’, don’t forget Amirdrassil.

Since when this has been a problem for druids? :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

Btw, Owlonuis is more of a bonus than a requirement to do an OTK. :grinning:

Oh really?

For example, typical curves:

Turn 1 — New Heights.
Turn 2 — another one.
Turn 3 — Amirdrassil + Dollhouse + Arconite Revelation, for example

Alternatively — Mistah Vistah, or is it turn 7, not 6, when you play the entire deck, then?

Turn 4 — Sleep Under the Stars, possibly with discounts.

… (way too many options)

Turn 5 or 6 — di enemi face iz ded (yes, you can also imitate Malygos Druid with 3 dollhouses, an oracle and that 1-mana spell, for example).

Who should count better? :grinning:

Well, yours is bad, true, but please don’t project.

Moreover, lemme tell you more in terms of analogies: I can tell you that dung is dung without even tasting it. :grinning:

Lookey, another forum telepath?

No, it occurred to be a great problem for you to grasp how people don’t wanna play against unfun and uninteractive decks, that’s all. Maybe the ICQ :grinning: ‘rank’ is too low for that? :wink:

Everything? Truly? Had a revelation and found your enlightenment? :rofl:

Well, if it makes you feel happy… I don’t even know whether I should spoil the mood and tell you you are neither Buddha nor Newton. :joy:

1 Like