Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Vlad

Secrets Midrange Hunter Karazhan Standard

34 posts in this topic

3 hours ago, TheEviscerator said:

Any thoughts of running more secrets?Im just curious because i saw other decklists that run like 6-7,such as thjis's

Thijs uses face secret. This deck is midrange secret, so I would not recommend running more secrets in this deck, but we do have a face secret that has 7 secrets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, TheEviscerator said:

After a bit of playing i cut the toads for snipe,what do you think?

Even though Snipe has better synergy with the deck, it is not powerful enough and does not help you establish a strong early-game board, and is useless against a lot of aggressive decks because of cards like Argent Squire and Possessed Villager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I am playing this at rank 14 and it is doing 1 win 1 loss consistently. You cannot possible move up with that kind of win ratio. I am wondering if I am doing this wrong or something. the main issue is that as soon as warrior throws on armor using cthun cards (which is every warrior noone is creative with warriors anymore) or some taunts are thrown in my way as any deck I may have the clear spells to get rid of them but that instantly makes my deck useless in terms of huge damage. Also after I use that spell another taunt on the field ends the game for me. Strangely enough I win against mages and warlocks easy. but everything else is just so rediculous it makes me wonder if hunter is useless this season. Especially against all these dragon decks. There is no set weaknesses for dragon decks. It's not like if I kill these cards the rest of the deck is useless. They are for all intents and purposes God decks. I don't know maybe I am missing something. But if thousands of people can get to legendary every season I don't understand why I can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guest ThisRandomGuy said:

So I am playing this at rank 14 and it is doing 1 win 1 loss consistently. You cannot possible move up with that kind of win ratio. I am wondering if I am doing this wrong or something. the main issue is that as soon as warrior throws on armor using cthun cards (which is every warrior noone is creative with warriors anymore) or some taunts are thrown in my way as any deck I may have the clear spells to get rid of them but that instantly makes my deck useless in terms of huge damage. Also after I use that spell another taunt on the field ends the game for me. Strangely enough I win against mages and warlocks easy. but everything else is just so rediculous it makes me wonder if hunter is useless this season. Especially against all these dragon decks. There is no set weaknesses for dragon decks. It's not like if I kill these cards the rest of the deck is useless. They are for all intents and purposes God decks. I don't know maybe I am missing something. But if thousands of people can get to legendary every season I don't understand why I can't.

I was able to get past rank 14 without any losses with this deck earlier this season, so you either have bad luck, which is always possible, especially with lower amount of games, or you might be playing the deck suboptimally, or a combination of the two, of course. Could you please upload a replay?

If it is not a possibility, I could give you a few general tips: let the warrior trade. You are the aggressive deck, you should be pushing damage. Don't overextend though, especially past turn 5. From my experience, this decks plays a bit faster than regular midrange, so you should in general be going face more than with regular midrange hunter. 
Main weakness of dragon decks is inconsistency. If you get good draw, you steamroll almost every deck you face. If you get bad draw, there basically nothing you can do. Having to drop a 1/4 for 2 mana (in case of priests) or 2/6 for 4 mana is really bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello sorry for taking so long to get back to you. I have figured out somewhat of the problem but I still have a few issues. I figured out the warriors by putting in bear trap to account for the weapons. It seems to work just fine and synergize with my other beast cards. But I learned through deck tracker that the main deck I consistently lose to is the shaman deck. I am stuck at 13-12 because of this. I will get 3-4 wins and then hit a patch of 4 or 5 shamans in a row and go back to rank 13. I cannot for the life of me figure out how to counter shamans I always lose to them. Here is a link to my last shaman game maybe you could tell my why this is happening so consistently. Is it me or the deck or does it really boil down to luck? Thanks for taking the time to listen to this by the way. Makes me feel like I am not just shouting at air lol. 

 

https://hsreplay.net/replay/9MBUVLwycQpEVMGQedjn3J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Guest ThisRandomGuy said:

Hello sorry for taking so long to get back to you.

It's always worth quoting the person you are replying to, since you'll grab their attention faster. Tagging @positiv2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Blainie said:

It's always worth quoting the person you are replying to, since you'll grab their attention faster. Tagging @positiv2

Thanks for pointing that out I am sorry I spaced it I will try to remember this from now on. 

 

On 11/14/2016 at 1:40 PM, positiv2 said:

I was able to get past rank 14 without any losses with this deck earlier this season, so you either have bad luck, which is always possible, especially with lower amount of games, or you might be playing the deck suboptimally, or a combination of the two, of course. Could you please upload a replay?

If it is not a possibility, I could give you a few general tips: let the warrior trade. You are the aggressive deck, you should be pushing damage. Don't overextend though, especially past turn 5. From my experience, this decks plays a bit faster than regular midrange, so you should in general be going face more than with regular midrange hunter. 
Main weakness of dragon decks is inconsistency. If you get good draw, you steamroll almost every deck you face. If you get bad draw, there basically nothing you can do. Having to drop a 1/4 for 2 mana (in case of priests) or 2/6 for 4 mana is really bad.

One thing about asking for help is politeness and manners go alot farther than rage.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Guest ThisRandomGuy said:

Thanks for pointing that out I am sorry I spaced it I will try to remember this from now on. 

No problem. Just a few points on your replay from me:

  • Coining Bear Trap was the wrong move. You should have waited until Turn 2 and coined your weapon. 
  • You shouldn't have played the Cat Trap, since you had already devalued your Huntress by playing Bear Trap. You then ended up playing a Vanilla 3/4, which gave no extra value when it was played.
  • You also lost the value of 2 secrets that would buff your Bow for 2 more charges.
  • You misplayed by using the Kill Command before the Grandmother, which then meant your 3/4 died for nothing to the 4/1 Drake.

You had a very good starting hand here, you just didn't capitalise on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Blainie said:

No problem. Just a few points on your replay from me:

  • Coining Bear Trap was the wrong move. You should have waited until Turn 2 and coined your weapon. 
  • You shouldn't have played the Cat Trap, since you had already devalued your Huntress by playing Bear Trap. You then ended up playing a Vanilla 3/4, which gave no extra value when it was played.
  • You also lost the value of 2 secrets that would buff your Bow for 2 more charges.
  • You misplayed by using the Kill Command before the Grandmother, which then meant your 3/4 died for nothing to the 4/1 Drake.

You had a very good starting hand here, you just didn't capitalise on it.

Yeah I noticed the kill command before grandmother after the play honestly. That was a literal facepalm moment. I didn't think about coining out the weapon turn two in fact I don't think I have ever thought of that. Kinda sad actually. I have noticed that huntress was more often than not being played without secrets in hand before. Seems like I need some more practice on capitalizing on my synergies. Thanks for the advice. 

 

47 minutes ago, Blainie said:

 

You had a very good starting hand here, you just didn't capitalise on it.

So I am a little confused at the moment. I built the deck exactly the way it shows and I am making (at least I think I am) better plays and synergising moves but I have now gone 0-4. 3 shamans and 1 warrior. The main issue is unless you get unleash the hounds turn 1 you have zero field clear. you have nothing.  One of the shamans beat me because he threw out two things from below turn 5 and unless I had a beast on the field and 2 kill commands in hand the hunter deck has no way to deal with that. Also anything I throw out every shaman has an answer to. They always have all there damage spells and spell damage adding cards in hand at all times and they always get the spell damage weapon turn 1. Is shaman just a better hero or am I just using this deck wrong? Sorry to talk so much lol just want to do what I can to improve how I play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To add to the info Blainie gave you:

Reason that coining out Bear Trap was a wrong move was because you had a double 3-drop (Eaglehorn Bow + Cloaked Huntress) and you would be able to play the secrets for free thanks to the aforementioned Cloaked Huntress.
You should have played Infested Wolf in place of Cloaked Huntress on turn 4 because of mana efficiency. 

45 minutes ago, Guest ThisRandomGuy said:

So I am a little confused at the moment. I built the deck exactly the way it shows and I am making (at least I think I am) better plays and synergising moves but I have now gone 0-4. 3 shamans and 1 warrior.

Of course, more replays will help us more. General rule against warrior, as said previously - don't overextend after or on turn 5 without knowing that the warrior does not have Brawl.

45 minutes ago, Guest ThisRandomGuy said:

Is shaman just a better hero or am I just using this deck wrong? Sorry to talk so much lol just want to do what I can to improve how I play. 

Midrange shaman is a superior and the most oppressive deck in current meta. Still, you should be able to win against it. 
No need to apologize - we are glad that you want to improve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Guest ThisRandomGuy said:

https://hsreplay.net/replay/2Z7869SSftGdgwsnPUdgLK

 

This is exactly what I am talking about. This brings it up to 0-5 now. 4 shamans and 1 warrior. 

Misplays: On turn 3 you should have played Cloaked Huntress, even though you did not have any secrets. You would have used your mana more efficiently. Additionally, you would be left with a 3/2 on the board after Maelstrom Portal.
Again, turn 4, inefficient mana usage.
You arguably should have attacked with your weapon on turn 6 to clear the Stoneclaw Totem before it gained 2 attack.
On turn 7 you should not have used hero power, but rather should have equipped another Eaglehorn Bow. You had a secret in play and you would have used your mana more efficiently.

So, your most common misplay is inefficient mana usage, which is a very big issue when playing hunter. You should check how much mana you have and what is the highest amount of mana you can use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, positiv2 said:

So, your most common misplay is inefficient mana usage, which is a very big issue when playing hunter. You should check how much mana you have and what is the highest amount of mana you can use.

So mainly I need to become more efficient with mana usage. Good to know. Was there anything I could have done against that shaman or once he was given a chance to put thunder bluff valient on the field was it all over? I couldn't see anything to be done but maybe you can. I thought about killing that stone totem but even if I did he would have probably gotten it again by that point and I never would have gotten 6 damage on the thunder bluff valient. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Guest ThisRandomGuy said:

So mainly I need to become more efficient with mana usage. Good to know. Was there anything I could have done against that shaman or once he was given a chance to put thunder bluff valient on the field was it all over? I couldn't see anything to be done but maybe you can. I thought about killing that stone totem but even if I did he would have probably gotten it again by that point and I never would have gotten 6 damage on the thunder bluff valient. 

I have seen only the mana usage issue in the latter replay. It is possible that I missed something though. Still, mana usage is a huge problem when playing hunters (and most midrange decks in general) and I believe that once you improve it, your winrate will go up by a significant margin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Guest ThisRandomGuy said:

https://hsreplay.net/replay/q2ChrEGvE7psXcc7hwADpY

Is this a good example of efficient mana usage or is this an example of I got lucky that he didn't have anything to play that wasn't high cost? Also did I make any misplays on this?

Keeping Unleash the Hounds against priest is not recommended, as priest will rarely flood the board. 
Using the second charge of Eaglehorn Bow might not have been optimal, as you had Cloaked Huntress with Cat Trick to add another charge while building a board. If the priest played a minion, it could have caused some minor problems. Luckily for you, it did not.

Yeah, that was nice and efficient mana usage. GG! If you have any more replays you aren't sure about, feel free to send them to us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This deck is similar to one that I play except I run 2 Freezing/ 2 Explosive/ 2 Cat-Trick/ 1 Snake no Call of the Wild/ Huge Toad/ Fiery at. Honestly I only have Highmane for Barnes to pull it out or versus board clear/ kill command activator.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, peekaboo said:

This deck is similar to one that I play except I run 2 Freezing/ 2 Explosive/ 2 Cat-Trick/ 1 Snake no Call of the Wild/ Huge Toad/ Fiery at. Honestly I only have Highmane for Barnes to pull it out or versus board clear/ kill command activator.

With so many secrets you might want to consider adding Lock and Load to the deck as well. Works great on turn 5 with Cloaked Huntress and a ton of secrets - you might even get more secrets from the Lock and Load.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, positiv2 said:

With so many secrets you might want to consider adding Lock and Load to the deck as well. Works great on turn 5 with Cloaked Huntress and a ton of secrets - you might even get more secrets from the Lock and Load.

Interesting thought .. If I get one in a TGT pack I might consider using it .. Trying to stay away from crafting TGT cards since it will cycle out ..

I just dislike using random cards, one of the reasons I stopped playing Tempo Mage and now use the more dependable C'Thun mage that you'll guys posted,

I just feel that that meta currently even with the control decks is just too aggressive .. My hunter games barely go beyond turn 8 by which time either I concede or kill the other person .. Cloaked Huntress made hunters a broken class IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Zadina
      The live Q&A with the two well-known Hearthstone devs took place yesterday and we've made a recap of the most interesting points.
      First of all, if you want to watch the whole thing, the VOD can be found here (it starts at 14:10). If you prefer a shorter version, Redditor EpicMelon has made a 10-min video of everything important said. Ultimately, if you don't feel like watching videos, we've made a summary of anything worth noting from yesterday's Q&A.
      Ben started talking about the new player experience, a topic he has discussed again this week. He repeated that most new players start off by playing versus A.I., some go to Casual and a minority goes to Ranked. The team has made it so that in Casual new players are exclusively matched against other new players and their MMR is kept to a 50% winrate.
      One of the currently most discussed hot topics in the Hearthstone community is the Ranked ladder. The team is satisfied with how clear the current system is in how it works. However, they do realise that its grindiness and the monthly reset can be a disadvantage and feel repetitive. To counter that, they are looking into short-term increasing the amount of bonus stars players can gain. This will hopefully increase the number of players in medium and higher ranks and move veterans away from Rank 20. However, they don't want everyone to be a Legend player either, since this would devalue the ranking. New breakpoints are also an idea the Hearthstone team is considering. As far as winstreaks stopping at Rank 5 are concerned, the idea behind this is that they wanted players to get to Legend "legit"; this could change as well, though.
      Moving to the topic of Arena, Dean announced that they are thinking of moving it to Standard format. Moreover, they want to try decreasing the amount of commons you get, as well as the amount of neutral Classic and Basic cards (especially minions). Some of these changes for Arena are already ready to be added to the game they are just waiting for the right time to patch them in. In early February, top 100 rankings for Arena will be published - just like the Ranked season ones. These rankings will be calculated based on highest average wins per run basis with a minimum requirement of 30 runs.
      The guys had a few things to say about the current meta, too. Pirate Warrior represented 30% of the meta game near the launch of Mean Streets of Gadgetzan, while there were also a lot of Pirate Shamans and Rogues. Thankfully, these numbers have dropped as other decks (like Jade Druid and Reno decks) started surfacing. Pirate decks are slightly more popular than Team 5 would like and decks with the pirate package feel same-y. If this persists, they might take a look at Pirates. Hunters and Paladins are having a hard time at the moment because they can't keep up with the aggro pirate decks. Overall, the internal meta report shows a stability in the meta: there is only a 3% difference between the winrates of the top deck and the 11th best deck.
      Lastly, there was mention of the Wild format. Ben admitted that they could do some things better for Wild. For example, it's possible that Blizzard will encourage more Wild tournaments in the future. The upcoming rotation will be interesting since Wild will have more card sets than Standard. Wild is far from dead: it's just half as popular as Standard, although Ben hasn't looked in the numbers recently. Earlier in the stream, Ben also said that the team is considering two options to keep Standard fresh: either nerfing cards or just move them to Wild.
      Lastly, Ben and Dean talked about various other small topics like the possibility of reprinting cards (no actual answer given), more Hunter and Paladin talk, wording inconsistencies and rewriting old cards, how a healthy meta is defined and Team 5 itself.
    • By Zadina
      Hearthstone Game Director Ben Brode and Game Designer Dean Ayala will answer all your questions on a live Q&A session on Twitch this Friday!
      The complaints about the lack of communication from the part of the Hearthstone team have been answered. This Friday the 13th (!) of January, Ben Brode and Dean Ayala will answer questions about some of the most heated topics that currently affect the playerbase. Ben has already made some posts about issues like the Classic card set and the possibility of some Classic cards rotating out of Standard.
      As always, we will try to have a recap of the Q&A as soon as it is finished.
      Blizzard Entertainment
      Pull up a chair by the hearth! Join Hearthstone Game Director Ben Brode and Game Designer Dean Ayala January 13 at 9:00am PST for a live Q&A session on Twitch. Our developers will be sharing some insight about the state of the game, the new player experience, the ranked play system, and answering your questions live.
       
      Have some questions for Ben and Dean? Here’s how you can be part of the conversation:
      - Tweet @PlayHearthstone with the hashtag #QA with your question
      - Post a question below in the blog comments
      - Join us live in Twitch chat and direct questions to us @PlayHearthstone
       
        Can’t make it? Don’t worry – we will be posting the full video on the PlayHearthstone YouTube after the Q&A has completed.
       
       
      Follow the official Hearthstone Twitch channel to be notified when the stream begins.
      We’ll see you there!
      (source)
    • By Zadina
      Ben Brode was active on the official forums and on social media these past few days and he had a lot of interesting things to say about various hot topics. Most notably, he noted that it's possible that additional Basic and Classic set cards may be nerfed or rotated out of Standard in the future.
      You probably remember that with the release of the Standard format, something less than a year ago, 12 Basic and Classic cards were nerfed. Now, Game Director Ben Brode revealed that more Basic & Classic card nerfs can happen or at least they may be rotated out of Standard. The reasoning behind this is that the team wants to keep a fresh feeling in Standard and they don't want to see the same core cards appear too frequently. That's why they are also not considering buffing underused vanilla cards, since Basic and Classic cards are already being used a lot and they want new sets to be more impactful.
      Ben Brode
      + Show- Hide The goal with Standard is to keep the meta fresh for each yearly rotation. There are some benefits to keeping Basic and Classic cards in Standard: Returning players have an entry-point to the new format, and new players experience classics like "Hogger" and "Arcane Missiles" that are iconic and great introductions to the game. People take breaks from Hearthstone, and being able to jump right back in with a few cards you already own and understand makes that experience a lot better. That upside has a real downside in working directly against the big goal for Standard. It needs to feel different each year, and if Basic and Classic cards are still appearing in large densities year after year, we will not be achieving our goals for Standard.
      We knew we weren't going to get there when the Year of the Kraken began, so we nerfed 12 basic/classic cards, to put more of the weight of the meta into the rotating sets. We always knew we'd have to watch the meta to see if any future changes would be needed when we got ready for the next year of Standard. If things are looking like they are going to be too same-y for that next year, we could see more nerfs, or we might rotate some additional classic cards to Wild, like we did with Old Murk Eye. No matter what, we're committed to making Standard fresh and exciting each new year. (source)
       
       
      Are you guys considering, besides nerfs, implementing buffs for underused vanilla cards?
      Given the goal of Standard is to keep the game fresh each year, it's important to keep a lot of the power of the cards in the expansions, and not in the basic and classic sets. It's not clear what that balance of power should look like (is it ~10 cards from the basic and classic sets on average?), but we're currently skewed so high towards basic and classic cards in decks, that we are at high risk for 'samey-ness' as the years change in Standard. Buffing Basic/Classic cards *increases* that risk. If the goal is to get more cool cards into the meta, just releasing awesome new cards in expansions should make an impact there, and still keep Standard fresh. (source)
      Obviously, this comment caused a lot of reactions and Ben took to Reddit (specifically this thread) and Twitter, where he answered various questions. A brief summary of his responses is that the Basic set is currently the most powerful in the game (source), while the team intends to keep the vanilla set unchanged (the term used was 'evergreen' - source). Ben repeated that the team's intention behind any future Basic and Classic card nerfs or changes is to keep Standard format fresh and "less same-y". A difficult question was posed to the community: would they prefer the affected vanilla cards to be nerfed, rotated out of Standard format or remain as they are, even if it results in a staler meta?
      On the same Reddit thread, Brode also talked about why the Charge nerf was necessary due to the Grimy Goons synergy and how new/F2P players are currently still able to reach Legend rank - something that he expects to keep happening in the future as well.
      Ben Brode
      + Show- Hide [...] We nerfed Charge (the spell) because we knew the upcoming Grimy Goons mechanic in combination with Enraged Worgen and Charge was not really fair or fun. There have always been F2P players at Legend, and there have continued to be since that change. (source) Ben Brode
      + Show- Hide We did this in 2016 when we nerfed 12 classic cards and it made a huge difference in how much the meta was able to change with the release of Old Gods (instead of just continuing to be Druid Combo). New players were able to reach legend without spending money after that change, and I expect that will be continue to be true if we change a few more cards in 2017. (source) On a somewhat relevant topic, with the end of the Year of the Kraken the end of Reno Jackson is also approaching. Ben excluded the possibility of this game-changing card making it into the Classic set - once again the reason being "keeping the meta fresh".
      Placeholder for tweet 817625802116214784 For consistency's sake, I've also included two Brode blue posts from last week. In the first one, he talks about the new player experience and how it still needs more work. For example. the climb from the introductory quests to actually playing the game feels steep, while getting into Ranked is also difficult. However, for their first games new players actually play in a seperate matchmaking pool designed to match new players with each other. There has also been a 15% increase in new player winrates on Casual.
      Ben Brode
      + Show- Hide Hey there! We agree that the new player experience needs more work. We've been tweaking it for years and have seen significant increases in retention among new players since launch. Most new players start playing against the AI and then take on other players in Casual. The Casual matchmaker has gone through a lot of iteration and new player winrates have increased by ~15%.
      Ranked is a different story. Ranked is becoming more difficult for new players over time. I spoke about some of the challenges we are currently facing with our ladder system before I left for paternity leave here: https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/58pxgt/ben_brode_confirms_the_2_game_win_streak_is_not/
      Something you may not realize is that new players actually play in a seperate matchmaking pool for their first several sessions. In Casual, we match them entirely against other brand new players with similarly-sized collections.
      That all said, we think the introductory missions up through Illidan feel pretty good, and after that it still feels like a bit of a cliff. It's definitely something we're aware of. Thanks for your feedback, and for the feedback of everyone else who's been chiming in on this over the last few months.
      (source) Lastly, Ben made an interesting post about another community hot topic: the ladder system.
      Ben Brode
      + Show- Hide [...] We have been discussing the ladder system a lot recently - we're not 100% happy with it.
      Here are some things we are currently discussing:
      Rank 18 players are higher ranked than 50% of HS players. That number doesn't make you feel like you are in the top 50%, and that's a missed opportunity. We try and counter this by telling you all over the place what the mapping is to the rest of the population, but it'd be better if expectations and reality matched here.
      We've received feedback that the last-minute jostling for high Legend ranks at the end of a season doesn't feel all that great.
      We've received feedback that the ladder can feel like a grind.
      We are reanalyzing the number of ranks, the number of stars per rank, the number of bonus stars given out at the start of the season, and other parts of the system.
      We are developing simulation systems that let us predict what changes to the ladder would do to the population curve. If we inflate too many stars, the whole population ends up in the Legend bucket and while that might feel great for a single month, the entire system falls apart eventually. People who played waaaay back may remember when "3-star master" was the pinnacle of achievement, and it meant nothing because so many people ended up in that bucket. With better simulation tools, we are planning on trying a lot of crazy things. Iteration is important in design, and getting the tools to iterate quickly is very important.
      Something I want to emphasize is that while I think we can improve the ladder, the metric for that improvement isn't necessarily any one player's individual rank increasing. Players want the better rewards (and prestige) associated with high ranks, or the Legend card back, so any change we make that increases the chances of those are likely to be perceived as "good", at least for the short term. But part of what makes the ranked ladder compelling is that exists to rank players. If you want to see how you stack up, ranked is the place to do it. So while some inflation might improve the experience, we need to be careful and make sure we end up with a system that makes people feel rewarded for increases in personal skill or for finding a new deck that breaks the meta.
      (source)
    • By Pogsz
      Since I talk like an ogre I can as well practice my 3D skills and play around with the hearthstone logo.  Here is a quick render I made this morning.  Maybe I will do some more, wallpaper, t-shirt print or other stuff... I don't know

      I will probably also just play some Hearthstone for myself.  If I am better I will maybe do a "silent" stream tonight! :-D Or at least keep the conversation to a minimum.

      See you around guys and have a good day!

    • By Damien
      This thread is for comments about our Budget Anyfin Paladin Gadgetzan Standard deck