Ok someone needs to stop this VS people from spreading misinformation…
2 reports in a row with Paladin on top,they truly are on an unholy mission to slander the order of the holy brotherhood.
On a side note looking at Demon Hunter borderline tier 1 and still the least played class restores my hope in the playerbase.
I weep of happiness at such a gift.
I call Shenanigans, in my meta compared to Hunter everyone plays Demon Hunter. I played 9 games vs DH and 1 vs Hunter in 159 games 
Well im so sorry for that unpleasant experience, no one deserves to play 9 Demon Hunters in 159 matchs.
Thats 9 too many, but still the data for over 1.5m games shows it to be the least played class.
Theres some lucky people out there that in hundreds of games never saw Illidan ugly face.
Lucky bastards.
I was going to post this yesterday but knew it wouldn’t do any good. People believe what they want to believe and openly reject data.
We’ve reached a point on these forums where real numbers and real data simply do not matter to people.
Facts show it’s tier 1 top deck? Nah man. My experience says it’s the 3rd worst class. If anything, it needs buffs. That’s the reality we’re living with now.
and mage players who complain on the SOTG are just “doomposters”, lol.
This needs a Poe’s Law disclaimer. I mean, I know it’s pure raw sarcasm, but not everyone will be able to tell.
For a good reason, I’m afraid xD
I mean, it’s OK to look at matchup data and class frequencies, but Power rankings, which show the tiers, is a total nonsense piece of data.
Not only is pirate DH a terrible, barely playable deck (unlike Naga DH), but also Rainbow Shaman isn’t played anywhere near top 1K (can’t speak for other rankings), let alone winning enough to be a tier 1 deck. I’ve been everywhere from 1k to 85 the last two weeks, and I can’t remember playing a single game against it, although I probably did 1-2.
Handbuff pally being tier 1 wasn’t supposed to change, and didn’t change, it’s believeable.
Tempo druid falling to tier 2 is believeable.
I don’t think it’s possible to put InsanityLock in tier 2. It’s a clear tier 1, nothing changed.
Please don’t be like this. Sure, call out people as you have been doing with your “receipts”, but VS tier list is nothing you can rely on.
And why is this claim true? Do you have more comprehensive data that refutes VS?
Schyla, keep being like this.
Altair, please don’t be like this.
I was thinking about telling you that you were too pessimistic. Good thing I didn’t type it fast enough.
Yes and no
Yes, I know what I’m talking about as I literally played 256 games only in the last 7 days, let alone since 14th when the patch came out.
Total shaman frequency was 14/256 = 5,4% which is slightly lower than VS report’s 6%.
Now, the important thing to point out here is that VS report recognizes 4 different shaman decks inside those 6% so the highest possible frequency of rainbow shaman is 1,5 - 2 %, in a relatively low sample of 75 000 games.
This is not good enough. Disregarding the usual nonsense from Scr0tie how sample of 25 is enough (unless it’s my own tracker data, then 200 games aren’t enough xD), it’s too low of a sample to claim a deck to be tier 1, due to the good old law (I always forget the name) which states that variance is higher in lower samples and falls down in bigger.
Conclusion: it’s a nonsensical piece of data. The deck isn’t even played in top1k at all. I clearly remember playing all sorts of shamans inside those 14 games, so the most I could have played against rainbow was 2-3 games.
?
I did say which data are relevant, and I can stand behind them with my tracker.
I can’t stand behind nonsensical imaginary stuff like this and devaluing the strongest and most frequent 2 decks from tier 1 into tier 2, when together their play rate is almost 40%.
You can go to VS, HSReplay, D0nkey, and then Tempostorm.
When all their data matches fairly closely and drastically differs from your personal opinion, the correct thing to do is adjust your opinion instead of thinking the other sites are all wrong.
VS has proven itself time and time again. They often get all the nerf targets correctly and predict metas based on changes fairly well.
You can say all day long that no one in top 1k plays X, because you don’t experience it, but when they have the data to show it does, not to mention you can see the replays from other sites to prove it, you have to stop putting so much faith in your anecdotal evidence.
Just went to D0nkey. 236 games for Rainbow Shaman recorded in top 1k. Streamed 4 times. Lists the streamer so you can literally watch it for yourself.
And he did it at rank 48.
There you have it.
I’m sorry, it’s impossible for me to go against data + experience.
I did play 256 games in 7 days in top 1k, so…
Hahahahhahah that sample is 20 games lower than my own personal sample
And you DARE to mock my experience and put faith into that data? Why?
Did you know that me and D0nkey come from the same country? Why would you put your faith into a software engineer you never even talked to, who plays in similar ranks as I do, but much less, when you have 2600 posts of knowledge about me?
I’m very disappointed.
You crossed a line and I won’t be able to forget this very soon.
I mean, we live in a society, aren’t we? If general public is going wacko and does not believe legitimate news sources it’s a give that we will get some of it here in the forums.
And since most of the people here are the usual suspects (or usual suspects using there sock puppets) then we have to relitigate every other day which decks is top tier and if HS is rigged…
Nothing legitimate about made-up statistic calculated God knows how
Are you serious with this?
Do you really not understand the difference between 250 games you personally played vs 230 games logged by a specific deck type in top 1k legend?
No, I must be too dumb.
Too bad I don’t think I can learn anything from you, at least not anymore.
I wasn’t being mean I was being sincere.
If you play 250 games and never see deck A but deck A had 230 games logged by 30+ different unique users, you shouldn’t expect your data to match theirs and your data has exactly 0 affect of what their data says.
Bro, 75 000 games recorded in top 1k and you pull the data of 236 of those 75k and you expect me to take it for granted?
1st of all, that’s 0,3% of the total sample of games. Less than 1%.
2nd, putting it in tier 1 “Power rankings”, calculated God knows how, based on such a low sample (it’s not really a sample, let’s be real), is a crime against truth and data in general.
I’ll always have a better picture of the meta than some made-up ranks putting equal weight on 40% sample and 0,3% sample.
And I pity anyone who disagrees.
Ok let me ask you an honest question.
If a deck has 1000 games logged only at top1k legend, via 50 different sources piloting the deck, and overall their win rate with the deck is 55%, what does that tell you, if anything, about the deck?
Would it tell you the deck is good there or bad there?
Would it tell you that the deck only hit that win ratio by luck?
Honestly asking you what your interpretation of what that means for that deck?
This is a hypothetical question.