Hearthstone

The Master_sl said:

Because you're conflating two unrelated things. Weapons only lose durability when youattackwith them. Are you attacking when something hits you? No.

Click to expand...

You're completely missing the point. Just because weapons only lose durability when you *attack* with them, does not mean that isn't lazy coding or "lazy whatever" when they still do damage but don't lose durability because of a rare case such as Misdirection. Your argument is as if the weapon is unsheathed and therefore the minion just impales itself onto the weapon. I guarantee it was lazy coding where they thought the only case for a weapon to do damage was during your turn when attacking, and only coded durability loss on the attack, because that's the only anticipated damage and coded the attack value in a simple way to appear on your turn, because you can only attack on your turn. Still all comes down to lazy, think about it further than you are right now.

I bet if/when they change it they will make it so minions don't take that damage. I'd never actually encountered this and just assumed it would not cause damage to a misdirected minion. Maybe it should, maybe Blizz likes it that way. Its probably only come up in the thread at this point due to the increase in hunters.

Because fuck Hunters, that's why!

I conceded to a Buzzard->UTH today. That's some bullshit ass bullshit.

Mr. MorrowGirl_sl said:

You're completely missing the point. Just because weapons only lose durability when you *attack* with them, does not mean that isn't lazy coding or "lazy whatever" when they still do damage but don't lose durability because of a rare case such as Misdirection. Your argument is as if the weapon is unsheathed and therefore the minion just impales itself onto the weapon. I guarantee it was lazy coding where they thought the only case for a weapon to do damage was during your turn when attacking, and only coded durability loss on the attack, because that's the only anticipated damage and coded the attack value in a simple way to appear on your turn, because you can only attack on your turn. Still all comes down to lazy, think about it further than you are right now.

Click to expand...

That is an interesting opinion. I don't agree.

AngryGerbil_sl said:

Because fuck Hunters, that's why!

I conceded to a Buzzard->UTH today. That's some bullshit ass bullshit.

Click to expand...

Buzzard > timber wolf > uth is even worse. Turn 5 likely wipes the board and draws 3 cards.

There's no point running Buzzard in UTH, your opponent is over by round 6. Card draw isn't even an issue.
If you are running a slow game with that agro deck then you probly lost anyway.

Whole point of UTH is to continually damage them till round 6 to 7 where you launch leeroy comboing into UTH because of the synergy.
Any place you have to stop damaging them you are hurting yourself.

The hunters I mirror that run the Buzzard, I laugh at it's so easy to beat them.

Only good variations on the main deck is to run owls for less damage to get past taunts, but honestly I find the main deck is still the most powerful for win ratio.

Hepl!

Column_sl said:

There's no point running Buzzard in UTH, your opponent is over by round 6. Card draw isn't even an issue.
If you are running a slow game with that agro deck then you probly lost anyway.

Whole point of UTH is to continually damage them till round 6 to 7 where you launch leeroy comboing into UTH because of the synergy.
Any place you have to stop damaging them you are hurting yourself.

The hunters I mirror that run the Buzzard, I laugh at it's so easy to beat them.

Only good variations on the main deck is to run owls for less damage to get past taunts, but honestly I find the main deck is still the most powerful for win ratio.

Click to expand...

I am only a pauper player at rank 17, heh

Avenging Wrath for the finisher, or possible board clear.

Other people may have some other ideas tho.

I'd take Avenging Wrath, out of those, LoH would be my second choice.

AngryGerbil_sl said:

I am only a pauper player at rank 17, heh

Click to expand...

It's Column being Column. I've seen it played by folks with UTH at rank 8 pairing quite successfully in fact without it I don't think the two cases I can recall would've won since it gave them more gas to get through my taunt.

But aggro vs aggro matchups where you're just racing it is a waste.

I've seen it played by folks with UTH at rank 8

Click to expand...

And that's why they are still rank 8 imho. Like I said card draw is not even an issue with the UTH deck. If anything it would be better to run owls.

Any taunts or healing they play from rounds 1-6 they are not killing anything you've left on the board which is what gives you the gas that gets through there taunts.
There's rare exceptions like Handlocks taunting on turn 5 with drakes, but rarely anyone plays handlock in ranks 5-1.

And a druid who ramps to avatar barely ever happens.

That is why the original UTH deck is so popular in the lower ranks. It's perfect as is. It's built to win games very fast, or lose very fast.
You can easily go 5 games in a row with the original UTH deck, and then play something more consistent like strife and roar co.

If you wanted to play a more calculating agro deck , UTH isn't the one you go with to begin with,

The Master_sl said:

I'd take Avenging Wrath, out of those, LoH would be my second choice.

Click to expand...

I wanted Avenging Wrath to be honest. I didn't take it though, for a silly reason.

I have never played Blood Knight in a deck in which he might synergize. Also, on my last run, as a Mage, I seemed to run into an awful lot of divine shield....

I ended up getting one more Argent Protector, a Hand of Protection and a Sunwalker. So, we shall see. Avenging Wrath was probably still the correct choice though I agree.

AngryGerbil_sl said:

I wanted Avenging Wrath to be honest. I didn't take it though, for a silly reason.

I have never played Blood Knight in a deck in which he might synergize. Also, on my last run, as a Mage, I seemed to run into an awful lot of divine shield....

I ended up getting one more Argent Protector, a Hand of Protection and a Sunwalker. So, we shall see. Avenging Wrath was probably still the correct choice though I agree.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I can't see why you did this.

17/30 and you had 0 consecrates, I'd have gone for avenging wrath. Fuck if my opinion means anything though, I blow at arena.

Famm_sl said:

Yeah, I can't see why you did this.

Click to expand...

To suck up all my own shields and make a mega-monster?

I never said I was any good..

I'm always leery of buffing a card too much in arena. There's always ways to directly remove it or silence it and you end up just wasting a bunch of cards. Of course on the off hand that your opponent doesn't have direct removal in hand, you'll likely win, but that's the exception rather than the rule, in my experience.

Plus you're taking divine shield off your own dudes.... I'd rather have a sunwalker with it's shield intact + avenging wrath or Lay On Hands in my hand than a 6/6 blood knight and a 4/5 with taunt.

AngryGerbil_sl said:

To suck up all my own shields and make a mega-monster?

I never said I was any good..

Click to expand...

You picked win harder. If you are in a position to sacrifice 2 shields to make a 9/9 you were probably going to win anyway. You had no removal and no real late game.

Was dicking around on a priest deck, had 3 rags to play, shit is retarded.