Damien

Hearthstone Legendary Duplicate Control Mage BrM

Sign in to follow this  

50 posts in this topic

This thread is for comments about our Legendary Duplicate Control Mage Deck for BrM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice deck altough i only miss archmage i have a 90% winrate against al agro matches i replaced the archmage with a healbot, against facehunter just duplicate a couple of healbots till he runs out of steam and you have the win smile.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello sottle , I'm big fan  !

 

Don't you think this deck lacks a powerful finisher next to the Archmage ?

 

I'm thinking about adding KT or Dr Boom !

 

Best regards dude !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest_Rodeknopje_*, duplicate only works if the hunter kills the minion, which he is never likely to do unless he accidentally kills it with explosive trap or if he is mid-range. So with this in mind , do you think 1x echo for 1x duplicate is good sottle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This deck is not good in the current meta.  Been getting destroyed today by all manner of decks.  I'm an embarassing 2-6 with this deck today.  This deck should not be labeled as Legend.  If you don't get the exact draw that you need, you are toast.

 

I think you have been too liberal lately labeling decks as "legend".  Just because one pro piloted it to legend a week or more ago does not make it a "legend" deck for your slightly above average player.  I think this site should consider a different labeling/rating system.  Perhaps separating the "legend" decks into different tiers would help becuase the 50 (just guessing and throwing out a number... I think it's a little more) decks labeled as "legend" are not all equal.  In fact, there are drastic differences among them in terms of their ladder win rate, but that is not reflected anywhere.  It's frustrating to your slightly above average player when a deck is labeled as legend, but then try it out and it bombs.

 

This issue is compounded by the lack of Sottle's weekly posts which used to direct us towards the more successful decks in the current meta.

 

Food for thought...

 

/signed Frustrated

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This deck is not good in the current meta.  Been getting destroyed today by all manner of decks.  I'm an embarassing 2-6 with this deck today.  This deck should not be labeled as Legend.  If you don't get the exact draw that you need, you are toast.

 

I think you have been too liberal lately labeling decks as "legend".  Just because one pro piloted it to legend a week or more ago does not make it a "legend" deck for your slightly above average player.  I think this site should consider a different labeling/rating system.  Perhaps separating the "legend" decks into different tiers would help becuase the 50 (just guessing and throwing out a number... I think it's a little more) decks labeled as "legend" are not all equal.  In fact, there are drastic differences among them in terms of their ladder win rate, but that is not reflected anywhere.  It's frustrating to your slightly above average player when a deck is labeled as legend, but then try it out and it bombs.

 

This issue is compounded by the lack of Sottle's weekly posts which used to direct us towards the more successful decks in the current meta.

 

Food for thought...

 

/signed Frustrated

"slightly above average" players are not supposed to get to legend regardless of the deck they use.that's what legend rank is supposed to be like.don't know if you heard about it,but legend rank is composed of less than 0.2% of the total hearthstone player base(i am not making this up).even if you use one of the so called "easy to play" decks you won't get to legend by being just above average.my best rank is rank 5,and i don't blame it on the decks i picked.why?because many of them were the same as top players use on their streams and get to top 10 legend with.people need to be able to acknowledge their own faults when they play online games instead of just moaning at everything.

 

/rant

 

 

i have played the deck before(around rank 7 or so i think) and i think it's fine(granted,i think it does suffer against all out agressive decks,as it only starts coming into its own after around turn 5,but against all other decks it poses a serious threat).the only complaint is that games usually take long,which doesn't suit people like me who don't always have as much time to play the game as they would like.but that's a given with control decks.

 

 

as a side note,i would love to see sottle play either this deck or fatigue mage on his stream sometime.i understand you probably get this a lot,but i'm a massive sucker for these decks and the mage class in general,so that would be really nice.one can only hope.

Edited by batanete
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This deck is not good in the current meta.  Been getting destroyed today by all manner of decks.  I'm an embarassing 2-6 with this deck today.  This deck should not be labeled as Legend.  If you don't get the exact draw that you need, you are toast.

 

I think you have been too liberal lately labeling decks as "legend".  Just because one pro piloted it to legend a week or more ago does not make it a "legend" deck for your slightly above average player.  I think this site should consider a different labeling/rating system.  Perhaps separating the "legend" decks into different tiers would help becuase the 50 (just guessing and throwing out a number... I think it's a little more) decks labeled as "legend" are not all equal.  In fact, there are drastic differences among them in terms of their ladder win rate, but that is not reflected anywhere.  It's frustrating to your slightly above average player when a deck is labeled as legend, but then try it out and it bombs.

 

This issue is compounded by the lack of Sottle's weekly posts which used to direct us towards the more successful decks in the current meta.

 

Food for thought...

 

/signed Frustrated

If a deck when played correctly, is capable of competing at the highest level, then it's a Legend deck, it's quite simple.

You say "just because one pro player..." etc. But thinking that way is lazy. If someone else can do it, you can as well, just play the deck as well as they do.

As mentioned in the guide, this deck comes from a former team mate of mine, he's used this deck to get second at Insomnia, the UK's biggest LAN event, and recently to qualify for the Gfinity Summer Masters. It's a strong deck, no one is saying it's easy to play, or that the average player can coast to Legend with it, but guess what? The average player can't coast to Legend with any deck, that's kind of why they're the average player. Play the deck well, and you'll get results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

after playing with this deck for a while,i have started getting the impression that having two mad scientists can be more of a hinderance than an advantage.you certainly do not want to use the card early,as popping out a duplicate at the wrong time can easily cost you the game,and later on you have so much mana to spare that it isn't that big of a deal if you can't play the secret for free.i understand that in most decks that play secrets MS is a really important card,but in this deck i feel its mostly about using duplicate at the right time than playing it for free.

 

at the same time,i feel that the deck suffers against decks such as face hunter,as it takes a few turns to start putting it's own threats on the board(unless you draw into zombie chow on turn one,which doesn't happen as often as i would like,given that theres only one in the deck).

 

 

do you think its ok to just replace one MS with another zombie chow,or just another finisher such as rag?i think it could help the deck quite a bit.

Edited by batanete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sottle, awesome deck and guide as usual. Won a couple of games already and only one loss.

 

What is your thoughts of replacing one explosive sheep for one doomslayer for the combo like freeze mage uses with blizzad doomslayer for example. Or do you think at that stage of the game your blizzard and flamestrikes are enough board clear? Im thinking vs handlock with a couple of giants with taunt up and you havent got the chance to duplicate BgH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

after playing with this deck for a while,i have started getting the impression that having two mad scientists can be more of a hinderance than an advantage.you certainly do not want to use the card early,as popping out a duplicate at the wrong time can easily cost you the game,and later on you have so much mana to spare that it isn't that big of a deal if you can't play the secret for free.i understand that in most decks that play secrets MS is a really important card,but in this deck i feel its mostly about using duplicate at the right time than playing it for free.

 

at the same time,i feel that the deck suffers against decks such as face hunter,as it takes a few turns to start putting it's own threats on the board(unless you draw into zombie chow on turn one,which doesn't happen as often as i would like,given that theres only one in the deck).

 

 

do you think its ok to just replace one MS with another zombie chow,or just another finisher such as rag?i think it could help the deck quite a bit.

Sometimes getting Duplicate from Scientist can feel like a hindrance, I agree, but it's usually just a matter of adapting your gameplan. You may have to pass a turn, or just use removal/stall cards, until you get to drop a Belcher etc on Turn 5. You can try to drop one for a 2nd Chow if you want, I certainly don't think that's terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sottle, awesome deck and guide as usual. Won a couple of games already and only one loss.

 

What is your thoughts of replacing one explosive sheep for one doomslayer for the combo like freeze mage uses with blizzad doomslayer for example. Or do you think at that stage of the game your blizzard and flamestrikes are enough board clear? Im thinking vs handlock with a couple of giants with taunt up and you havent got the chance to duplicate BgH.

Poly, BGH, Blizzard into Flamestrike etc should be enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely a possibility, I know Strifecro has been playing a similar deck with a bit of Dragon synergy in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on my experience so far, I have had good results with this deck. It seems to be good against aggro decks (e.g. face hunter), as well as mid-range and control decks. When I lose it's usually not by much. And when I win, I am controlling the game throughout. Although this deck won't get as many games in as an aggro deck, I feel like I have a chance each game. It's refreshing to play a deck that is good against face hunter and can also outlast other control decks by duplicating high priority targets.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice deck sottle. Yeah o saw strifecro playing a similar deck with the dragon synergy. Are you gonna post a duplicate dragon deck on the deck list soon? It would be awesome im loving the dragon synergy decks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working on some Dragon decks today, not sure if i'll get to Mage, but looking like Dragon Druid and Warrior will be up soon :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the cards, played about 7 games with it and did ok-ish, any room to add in a rag?
Also where can I find someone who plays this deck (or a simillar one)? Sometimes I'm not sure I'm making the right descisions..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was talking about the mage deck,
In regards to it I don't think antonidas fits, its extremely difficult to combo in spells with him..
If you are running him you need to add in something like toshley (which I don't have)
The illuminator kinda feels out of place since you don't want to duplicate it, and ice barriers are easily to pop, meaning its just a 2-4 heal 4, almost a far seer. pretty unnecessary 
I don't think this deck can reach Legend, maybe good in tourament but that's not something you compare with laddering..
The good duplicate control mage decks either have echo's for a bunch of card draw and value minions, or a bunch of high end legendaries once you stalled the game long enough (similar to control warrior)

so to recap: the deck runs out of steam, with plenty of healing but not enough damage
illuminator doesn't get any more value than a far seer would
no echos means the deck has less "stanima"
not enough late game minions means you have to rely on antonidas to finish the opponent off, which is unlikely with no low cost spells (thaurissan shinanigens is hard to set up, and you often need to use the spells to control the board)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Zadina
      Dean "Iksar" Ayala was active on Reddit yesterday commenting on the purpose and the design philosophy behind the Basic and Classic sets as well as the reasoning behind nerfs on cards from these sets.
      The Lead Balance Designer explained that the Basic and Classic sets' purpose is to introduce players to the game's mechanics and the fantasies behind each class. Since these sets are always around, powerful cards in them can be frustrating and cause negativity. For example, Wild Growth and Nourish were under the scope for a nerf for a long time. That doesn't mean all Basic and Classic cards have to be weak; some of them, like Fireball, Al'Akir the Windlord, Frothing Berserker and Tirion Fordring, are powerful, they show off class fantasy well enough and are safe from any changes (for now!).
      Card nerfs aren't meant to just solve short-term problems. For example, the Fiery War Axe nerf made it possible for other Warrior weapons to see play. It's true that nerfing cards from the Classic and Basic cards makes players feel obligated to invest their gold or real money on newly released sets. The team has tried to offset this with more seasonal events, as well as the reworked new player experience, which all give packs to players.
      IksarHS
      Ideally the basic and classic set show off the kinds of mechanics each class is about without having too many cards that show up in all possible class archetypes. Basic is important to us because it serves as a set of cards players can use to learn about the game before they choose whether or not to make an investment of their time or money. Classic is important to us because it serves as the secondary jump-off point where you learn the baseline for what each of the individual classes is about along with some of our core mechanics like Battlecry or Deathrattle. From a gameplay perspective, having these sets around forever usually only leads to negativity when the cards are so powerful they show up in every deck in every expansion, making the strategies players use feel more stale than they would otherwise. We've been trying to change some of these power outliers over time, but only when making that change might also be positive for the live game environment. Wild Growth and Nourish were good examples of cards we had thought about changing for some time, so when we arrived in a meta where Druid had been very powerful and popular for a long time, it felt like a good time for those changes. We'd like to continue making these types of changes, as we believe the game will be in a better position to meet the player expectation that the game is new and fresh from expansion to expansion.
      We nerf basic/classic cards that are too powerful instead of rotating them when they hit on class fantasy but at too high of a power level. Ramping mana is a strong identifier for what Druid should be about, so it made more sense to us to have some of the simplest forms of mana ramp exist in the base set to teach players what Druids can be about. It also makes more sense to have those cards be medium power level because if we identify mana ramp as an identity for Druids, it would be nice to be able to make some mana ramp cards from time to time without having to create cards even more powerful than two of the (arguably) most powerful cards in the game. Of course, this doesn't mean all basic and classic cards have to be weak. Generally the cards we target for change are ones that exist in every archetype. Cards like Al'Akir, Frothing, Fireball, or Tirion are probably safe. They are powerful and do an awesome job at selling the class fantasy for the class they represent. They also have some weaknesses and you can imagine an archetype within their class that might not play them. This is a pretty good place to be in. (source)

      I probably should have included this in the first post. It's true that reducing the amount of auto-include cards in the base set makes cards from expansions more important if the goal is to be able to create every powerful deck. This is something that's more healthy to solve with things like gold injection events like fire festival, increasing the gold on the average quest, or having a new player experience that awards 20+ packs. We keep a close eye on the the kind of investment it takes (time or currency) to obtain a deck archetype that is fun and powerful. The end goal is to make that a painless experience and there is more than one way to go about that. Having a wide variety of forever cards that are so high power level they are included in most decks is one way to go about it, I just don't think it's the right one.  (source)

      The main point I think is important to get across here is that we don't ever change basic and classic cards just to solve short-term problems. Warrior was fairly powerful at the time we changed FWA which I think makes the change more palatable. If we truly thought that Warrior was better served in the long-term by have FWA as a (2) mana card, then we certainly would have tried to change expansion level cards rather than something in the classic set. Cards like Sul'thraze, Supercollider, Woodcutter's Axe, and Bloodrazer have all had a little more room to breathe and make Warrior feel different expansion to expansion as a result of the FWA change, which was part of the goal. (source)
    • By Zadina
      Many players - initially from Korea, but then from all regions - have received a survey about Hearthstone and the latest expansions. One of the questions of the survey asks players how likely they would be to to play the card game within the next 30 days, if there were no Blizzard sponsored tournaments.
      The question has made a lot of people nervous, given that Heroes of the Storm esports were recently axed and the game will go in maintenance mode in the near future. The climate is already heavy with the latest WoW expansion not being received that greatly and all the rumours about Activision meddling into Blizzard. The recent news about two Activision Blizzards CFOs leaving the company and Bungie (the developer of Destiny 2) jumping ship from Activision only managed to spark the rumours that things aren't going that well for Blizzard. Hearthstone also saw its game director and public face, Ben Brode, leave this year - along with other notable Hearthstone devs.
      Significant changed to the structure of the Hearthstone Championship Tour were announced less than two months ago, so Hearthstone esports have a future for 2019 at least. Of course, the conspiracy lovers immediately pointed out that HotS devs promised that HGC would continue in 2019, only to announce its cancellation less than a month afterwards.

      The full survey was shared on Reddit by u/HelixFossil89.
      It is important to put this matter into perspective without panicking. First of all, this was a single question in a 35-question survey about the game in general and Rastakhan's Rumble in particular. The conductors of the survey obviously want to get the general opinion of their playerbase on major issues. Just because they asked this particular question, it doesn't necessarily mean they are considering axing Hearthstone esports.
      Second, there is no indication that Hearthstone isn't doing well. Sure, it may have lost some players but it probably still is Blizzard's second best earner. Its competition has definitely not managed to thwart it and the latest balance changes - while they weren't exactly successful in creating a healthy meta - were received with excitement and positivity by most of the community.
      On the other hand, Blizzard has spent quite a lot of money on the Hearthstone professional scene and perhaps there is a limit of how much they can keep throwing at it. There is also the matter that even though Hearthstone has been successful as an esport, it has managed that without being taken totally seriously - even by its own players. The 2019 plans also seem a bit vague-ish, although it should be noted that the January qualifiers are well underway.
    • By Zadina
      This brand new Tavern Brawl challenges you to build a deck with cards from 2 Wild expansions and 2 Standard ones.
      Specifically, you will need to construct a deck using only cards from Goblins vs Gnomes, The Grand Tournament, The Witchwood and The Boomsday Project. We remind you that this month is dedicated to Wild mode with a new Wild Bundle and thematic Tavern Brawls being available.
      Newer players or players that don't have a lot of Wild cards in their collection can pick a Class and a single card and the game will autofill a deck for them with cards they don't have!
      If you don't have cards from GvG and TGT, but still want to make your own deck, Baku the Mooneater and/or Genn Greymane are your best bets. Odd Rogue and Odd Paladin are performing well and Even Shaman is also a decent choice.
      If you have all the cards needed, then it's a great opportunity to show off your Mech power. Mech Hunter and Mech Paladin are absolute beasts, with the Mechs from GvG and The Boomsday Project synergising perfectly.
      This is a very interesting Tavern Brawl, since it creates a whole new meta on its own and it satisfies the players who are asking for yearly/monthly rotations with a specific amount of random sets from all of Hearthstone's history. Sometimes, Tavern Brawls foreshadow future games modes so perhaps this is a small hint on something different being worked on!
    • By Starym
      Here comes another update, once again focusing on Arena balance as classes get the appearance rates of cards tweaked so everyone has a comparable win rate. We're seeing Hunters, Rogues and Warriors getting their rates nerfed, while Druids, Mages, Paladins, Shamans and Warlocks get theirs buffed. This is coming after the more comprehensive update last month that saw some bigger Arena changes, including the removal of Mind Control Tech.

      We're also getting changes to Rumble Run in this update, featuring better synergy for your shrine with new cards picked, boss deck adjustments and the ability to re-pick the shrine you lost with. Check out the full details below:
      January 10 (source)
      This Hearthstone update mixes Rumble Run up for a refreshing new change, while also bringing in some updates to Arena buckets together with the cessation of December 2018’s dust refund. Read on for details!
      Arena Updates
      Following our Arena update last December, we have adjusted the appearance rate of each individual card available in Arena to ensure the overall win-rate of each class remains as close as possible to our ideal of 50%.
      Hunter, Rogue, and Warrior have had the average quality of their Arena picks lowered. Druid, Mage, Paladin, Priest, Shaman, and Warlock have had the average quality of their Arena picks raised. December Update
      The dust refunds that were available following our last update in December 2018 are no longer available as of this post.
      Rumble Run Changes
      Champions, rumblers, and trolls of all sizes! We’ve watched you spend a month punching faces in the Rumble Run, and we think there’s room for some changes based on how things have gone. Here’s what’s new with the Rumble Run.
      Weighted Card Rewards We’ve increased the possibility of synergistic cards for your shrine appearing more often. One of our primary goals with this mode was to showcase the nine troll champions and have you really get to know them. We wanted you to “live the dream” of fighting in the Gurubashi Arena, and to do so, we had to make sure that each Run had its own strong theme. Adjusting the card bucket offerings for decks and re-adding bonus buckets will help strengthen that experience.
      Boss Deck Adjustments One of our design goals with the Rumble Run was to provide huge, overpowered combat. Balancing at such a high power level is a challenge. When it works, it works great. You get epic, monumental combat against overwhelming odds. But when it doesn’t work, it feels random and swingy – like when the AI pulls an overwhelming combo. And since no one likes being repeatedly hit in the face with a club, we’ve pruned some of the power from the boss decks so that your Runs will play out more moderately. We have a lot of data about which bosses have the biggest body counts, and we’ve used that to target the worst offenders. Rumble Runs are now a little easier, but more importantly, they’ll feel a little more fair.
      Shrine Selection Changes In early builds of the Rumble Run, we allowed players to pick a class and shrine before playing. What we found was that playtesters immediately picked their favorite class, gravitated to a certain shrine, and played that shrine repeatedly.
      We had wanted to encourage players to try different shrines, especially to experiment with stuff they normally wouldn’t, so we put the current random shrine drafting in place. While that helped achieve our initial goal, it removed that feeling of mastery – the ability to choose a shrine and play with it until you feel you’ve mastered it or exhausted its possibilities.
      So we want to bring that back. With this update, whenever you lose, you can expect to always be offered the shrine you just lost with. The shrine that the boss used to beat you in your last run will also be offered, per the status quo.
      Some Final Rumble Ruminations
      We always prefer to experiment, try extreme ideas, and get feedback rather than play it safe. In true troll fashion, we went big with the Rumble Run and tried some different ideas to give this expansion a unique feel and to capture the thrill of stepping into an arena against known opponents for some superpowered brutality. It’s wallop or be walloped in there, for better or for worse.
      One of the things we experimented with—and heard great feedback on—was about the earlier pack rewards for the Rumble Run. Previous Hearthstone missions awarded packs via quests for completing content. For The Boomsday Project, we gave packs out without a quest to celebrate the launch of the expansion’s missions. This time around, we front-loaded the rewards and gave players three extra packs on launch day instead of during the Rumble Run. We felt that packs might be more interesting to people during the initial weeks of the expansion.
      As many of you have pointed out, this decision just made the missions feel especially un-rewarding. It’s always more gratifying to earn packs by competing a quest, rather than just being given them. To this end, we’re adding the new quest described above, and going forward, we’ll keep this feedback in mind for the launch of new single-player content.
      We had a ton of fun making mode and really appreciate the time that many of you took to write out thoughtful feedback. Everything we learn helps make future content better.
      And now, it’s back to the Rumble Run!
    • By positiv2
      This thread is for comments about our Imperius guide.