Board 8 > Hearthstone Discussion Topic: BONESTORM!

(+) Yeah! (+)

debating whether i should craft some pally legendaries to go with uther

namely Ragnaros and Tarim
---

dowolf posted...

Nighbane Templar is a common, which makes it significantly less likely. More importantly, you aren't approaching this question the right way; namely, is Mage better or worse with Jaina removed from the pool? The answer, quite simply, is that it is better.

also Gul'dan is significantly better than Jaina what are you smoking.

1. I'm not sure exactly how or why the math works out, but it's confirmed that you're about equally as likely to see any given common card as any given rare card

2. you're just objectively wrong about jaina. she's a 75 point card

3. you're just objectively wrong about Gul'dan, he's a 52 point card
---

I mean no offense but I'm giving information based on stats and you seem to be trying to refute that information or correct it based on your personal impressions. obviously I'm going to trust hard data more than what some random guy on board 8 thinks.
---

MariaTaylor posted...

1. I'm not sure exactly how or why the math works out, but it's confirmed that you're about equally as likely to see any given common card as any given rare card

Not on the first pick you're not.

also Jaina is a 128, while Gul'Dan is 151. Historically, the Lightforge list has been better; I will continue to reference that, as I have been. I do not appreciate the snark, bee tee dubs. Especially since I have stated numbers before in this conversation; your insinuations that I am not using real numbers are, at best, rude.
---

I'm not even being snarky I'm just telling you straight up; I trust hard data more than I trust personal opinion

Hearth Arena is based on stats while Lightforge is based on player input

you also didn't reference anything relating to stats or numbers before right now so I have no idea where you're getting this idea that you did and I'm somehow being """"rude"""" by insinuating that you didn't. because, uh, you didn't. you just said what cards are supposedly better than others. then I looked it up and what you said wasn't even correct.

I honestly have no control over the fact that you for some reason think it's rude for me to look up information, see that it doesn't match what you're saying, and then think you're wrong instead of just implicitly and blindly trusting anything you say. have no idea why you think you've earned this level of blind trust from anyone, least of all me
---

dowolf posted...

i'm just more confused as to the Sindragosa, since we have confirmation Blizzard screwed up and didn't put it in the Arena.

wait what
---

bng_mmmk posted...

dowolf posted...

i'm just more confused as to the Sindragosa, since we have confirmation Blizzard screwed up and didn't put it in the Arena.

wait what

I mean I have the replay on my computer at home. uhh..I don't think he played anything else that would have put a random legendary into his hand but I'll have to double check...
---

hmm...maybe he played kabal courier into free from amber, or something?
---

...The Lightforge tierlist is entirely algorithmic.

More importantly, Maria: drop the snark. Drop the rudeness. Currently, you are approaching this as an argument to be won, rather than something to be understood or learn from. Please stop.
---

look dude all I'm saying is that I trust hard data more than I trust your opinion

sorry if that offends you or if you think it's an argument or if you think that is somehow rude

that's just how it is
---

What's the hard data? Seems like you both are relying on different tier lists
---

Expert Arena Tier List

The Lightforge Arena Tier List is the continuation of ADWCTA's Arena Tier List, the most-consulted Hearthstone Arena Tier List since classic. Here at the Lightforge, we use our expertise and experience to crack every Arena meta, oftentimes before the cards are even released into the Arena, to ensure that you always have the edge. Our Tier List is updated multiple times through every Arena meta, and we pledge to keep the Lightforge Arena Tier List updated with new valuations of new and altered cards on Day 0 of every Blizzard expansion and patch release.

We have upgraded to a slightly different scaling from the old tier list as we continue to tweak our internal mathematical model of card values with new experiences. Our philosophy is that Hearthstone Arena is a game of skill (in addition to luck) and therefore the true value of cards can be best recognized by the best players. Our card values have always proudly differed in many areas from statistical performances of data gathered from average players. After all, the best cards are usually the ones easiest to play with. This is the Lightforge's underlying philosophy and its edge in Tier List performance. We are always pushing to find the highest potential of each and every card, rather than settling for the comfortable mediocrity of a statistical approach.

From LightForge's own website
---

VeryInsane posted...

What's the hard data? Seems like you both are relying on different tier lists

yes, I'm using the one that relies on hard data, he's using the one that relies on more player input to tweak the tier listings.
---

Isn't the bold part of that quote saying that Lightforge doesn't just go strictly based on the "average" outcome?

They determine for themselves what is good or what is bad and made an algorithm to assign a value to each card based on their own evaluations.
---

furthermore with regards to this discussion you can basically frame the two different philosophies this way

lightforge represents the top potential of the highest skilled arena players
hearth arena represents the average value of each card by the average players on the field

which of these tier lists do you think is more relevant to the discussion about how commonly different cards are going to start showing up in arena as compared to before? I'll give you a hint... there are very few top level players and there are a high number of average level players. so if you increase the number of instances of certain cards in the meta it's more important to know how these cards are going to scale in power when wielded by the average player.
---

I probably phrased that poorly.

By "average" outcome, I meant if the majority of players are using a card in a certain way, but lightforge decides the majority are wrong, then they're going to rate the card based on what they perceive as right, regardless of what the massive amount of recorded games has to say about the card.
---

bng_mmmk posted...

Isn't the bold part of that quote saying that Lightforge doesn't just go strictly based on the "average" outcome?

They determine for themselves what is good or what is bad and made an algorithm to assign a value to each card based on their own evaluations.

yes this is correct. this is why I prefer Hearth Arena which uses hard data to determine everything.
---

bng_mmmk posted...

I probably phrased that poorly.

By "average" outcome, I meant if the majority of players are using a card in a certain way, but lightforge decides the majority are wrong, then they're going to rate the card based on what they perceive as right, regardless of what the massive amount of recorded games has to say about the card.

yes this is correct, this is why I prefer HearthArena which uses hard data to determine everything
---

It would be more accurate to say that they design an algorithm that constructs possible gamestates and determines what cards would be valuable and when, which is fueled by their understanding of the game.

In other words, it uses math and assumes perfect play from you and average play from your opponent.
---

MariaTaylor posted...

From LightForge's own website

The key part in what you quoted is "data gathered from average players". Hearth Arena basically has people value a card and then adjust it for how well it performs for people using the app. The Lightforge has built an algorithm that determines how valuable every aspect of a card is based on the meta (what is freeze worth? 4 attack on a 3 drop? Doing one damage all minions?). There is no player valuation of cards with the rare exception of when the algorithm spits out something that seems very wrong and they either find a bug or adjust the card (there are maybe 20 cards they've done this for, and often it turns out the algorithm was more correct than they were).

So the difference is that, whereas Hearth Arena tries to evaluate how well the average player uses a card, the Lightforge evaluates how good the card is objectively if it were used perfectly. That's why Hearth Arena is better for average players, because the card values will be closer to how well they will be able to use them. Once you hit a 4-5 win average and understand arena fundamentals and how you should be using each card, you should be looking at the Lightforge (technically the audience they target is 7+ win players, but if you have a 5 win average and are looking to improve it will be much more useful).
---

CybrMonkey posted...

MariaTaylor posted...

From LightForge's own website

The key part in what you quoted is "data gathered from average players". Hearth Arena basically has people value a card and then adjust it for how well it performs for people using the app. The Lightforge has built an algorithm that determines how valuable every aspect of a card is based on the meta (what is freeze worth? 4 attack on a 3 drop? Doing one damage all minions?). There is no player valuation of cards with the rare exception of when the algorithm spits out something that seems very wrong and they either find a bug or adjust the card (there are maybe 20 cards they've done this for, and often it turns out the algorithm was more correct than they were).

So the difference is that, whereas Hearth Arena tries to evaluate how well the average player uses a card, the Lightforge evaluates how good the card is objectively if it were used perfectly. That's why Hearth Arena is better for average players, because the card values will be closer to how well they will be able to use them. Once you hit a 4-5 win average and understand arena fundamentals and how you should be using each card, you should be looking at the Lightforge (technically the audience they target is 7+ win players, but if you have a 5 win average and are looking to improve it will be much more useful).

okay let me take a step back for a second because for some reason this apparently needs to be said.

use whichever tier list you prefer when drafting, I do not care

this discussion was about how the synergy pools are yet another change which is going to benefit mage the already top class in the arena. see my post above about how changing the instances of things appearing in draft will have the largest impact on the average players because there are more average players in arena than any other group. with this understanding you will hopefully see why I chose to reference hearth arena's tier list when having a discussion about how changing the instances of things appearing in draft will give mage another bump in arena that they do not need. when discussing a change that is going to impact the player base as a whole it's important to look at how these cards are valued in relation to the largest group -- the average players. this is what hearth arena does.
---

Holy shit this is a stupid argument nobody cares
---

MariaTaylor posted...

okay let me take a step back for a second because for some reason this apparently needs to be said.

use whichever tier list you prefer when drafting, I do not care

this discussion was about how the synergy pools are yet another change which is going to benefit mage the already top class in the arena. see my post above about how changing the instances of things appearing in draft will have the largest impact on the average players because there are more average players in arena than any other group. with this understanding you will hopefully see why I chose to reference hearth arena's tier list when having a discussion about how changing the instances of things appearing in draft will give mage another bump in arena that they do not need.

But they don't. My point has been and continues to be that you're focusing on one outlier that doesn't really matter.

Like, you're far more likely to see rares and epics than legendaries. At rare, Crystal Runner is a bad card, and while Steam Surger is solid, it's going to be worse this expo now that there's fewer elementals. Meanwhile, mage has no synnergy epics. It has two solid ones at common, but again, since you can't get a first-pick common, you are far less likely to see them than rares. Meanwhile, since FLJ is not the best Mage legendary available by a longshot and gets both class and KFT offering bonuses, its existence makes it less likely that you'll see cards that are better.

That is all I'm arguing.
---

dowolf posted...

It would be more accurate to say that they design an algorithm that constructs possible gamestates and determines what cards would be valuable and when, which is fueled by their understanding of the game.

In other words, it uses math and assumes perfect play from you and average play from your opponent.

That's interesting.

I now want there to be values based on number of wins.

"This card is GREAT if you're playing people who suck. But once you get to 8 wins this card is not nearly as effective."
---

skullbone posted...

Holy shit this is a stupid argument nobody cares

it's a discussion, not an argument

I care, dowolf cares, VeryInsane and turbopuns seem to care to some extent. at least enough to engage in the discussion

Cybr, maybe. I dunno.

people who are interested in discussing the game of hearthstone are discussing the game of hearthstone in the hearthstone discussion topic. get over it. nobody is forcing you to read it.
---

like if you want to get upset at mages, get upset that they get kazakuses >_>
---

It's also tough to make an algorithm at the start of the expansion, a lot of the cards are new to the pool so it's not like we know the true value of them yet

It's like knowing which cards are playable in standard
---

I faced a mage who played a kazakus... and also discovered one.

It's discovering one that's even dumber.
---

Good lord this topic has a lot of new posts. Let's contribute to that!

Guldan > Jaina.

That's all I've got...
---

dowolf posted...

But they don't. My point has been and continues to be that you're focusing on one outlier that doesn't really matter.

I'm not. I think you're misunderstanding something here. You seem to be under the impression that I only looked at the Legenday cards or something which is not the case. That just happens to be the only ones I felt motivated enough to make a graphic for and go through every class and type out a comparison. Because... it's a lot of work and doing it for every single card doesn't really benefit me in any way. It would only benefit you people who, hell, seemingly don't even want to hear what I have to say. So yeah. If I thought it was a waste of time before I certainly am not going to waste my time doing it now.

dowolf posted...

At rare, Crystal Runner is a bad card, and while Steam Surger is solid, it's going to be worse this expo now that there's fewer elementals. Meanwhile, mage has no synnergy epics. It has two solid ones at common, but again, since you can't get a first-pick common, you are far less likely to see them than rares. Meanwhile, since FLJ is not the best Mage legendary available by a longshot and gets both class and KFT offering bonuses, its existence makes it less likely that you'll see cards that are better.

this is basically just a difference of you're looking at a different tier list than I am. not even really worth arguing over. I said my piece already. the reasons why I'm using the Hearth Arena list here has already been stated. if that's not good enough for you then there's nothing else I have to say on the matter.
---

dowolf posted...

like if you want to get upset at mages, get upset that they get kazakuses >_>

I did! That was my second post about it. This is super frustrating because Aya would be a HUGE boost to Druid, Shaman, and Rogue. All classes which I'd be okay with getting a boost. And she's actually a Synergy card.

Kazakus isn't even a synergy card but for some reason blizzard's favorite class gets Kazakus while the others don't get Aya.
---

VeryInsane posted...

It's also tough to make an algorithm at the start of the expansion, a lot of the cards are new to the pool so it's not like we know the true value of them yet

Unless there is a new mechanic, though, you've already seen what everything is worth. Almost every card is just a variation on a card we've seen before, so all you need to do is plug in the specifics of the new cards into the existing algorithm. And unlike constructed, it's pretty easy to predict the meta in arena because it will always be based on neutral commons and rares as well as how easy it will be to curve out.
---

dowolf posted...

i'm just more confused as to the Sindragosa, since we have confirmation Blizzard screwed up and didn't put it in the Arena.

can someone point me to this
---

bng_mmmk posted...

dowolf posted...

i'm just more confused as to the Sindragosa, since we have confirmation Blizzard screwed up and didn't put it in the Arena.

can someone point me to this

https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/6t8y45/12_cards_that_are_not_being_offered_at_all_in/

There's a nice infographic somewhere, but I can't find it. Other notables include the one elemental, Arfus, and the 3-mana 4/4 that freezes your own board. Confirmation came from Iksar in Adwcta's thread on Reddit.

EDIT: Oh! They pushed the patch last night. Did not realize that; cool.
---

dowolf posted...

the 3-mana 4/4 that freezes your own board. Confirmation came from Iksar in Adwcta's thread on Reddit.

I drafted this card last night.

Also Hafu faced it on stream and was like "wait wtf, how have I never seen this card and it's a common?"

I think they fixed it.
---

Here's my 2 cents: I think DK Jaina is better than DK Guldan in arena for this reason:
It seems less reliant on synergy already drafted in the deck. Jaina gains the ability to create new elementals, so even if you got DK Jaina and like 1 other elemental, her hero power still lets you create others that work with her ability. Guldan, meanwhile, is equally synergistic for his battlecry (elementals vs demons) but he has no way to create demons, while not only does Jaina's hero power have the potential to generate elementals, her battlecry gives you a water elemental to start off. I think his hero power is better and less situational (there may be times where you just can't create an elemental) but I personally prefer the mindgames Jaina plays on the opponent of "Now I have to find a way to clear the board without leaving any minion at 1 health," as well as the potential long term gain that jaina nets you when she does create those elementals.
---

bng_mmmk posted...

dowolf posted...

i'm just more confused as to the Sindragosa, since we have confirmation Blizzard screwed up and didn't put it in the Arena.

can someone point me to this

https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/6t8y45/12_cards_that_are_not_being_offered_at_all_in/

according to this thread it is one of the cards that was thought to not be appearing due to a bug. however, one of the top upvoted post is someone saying that they were offered sindragosa. so it may actually be appearing.
---

MariaTaylor posted...

Kazakus isn't even a synergy card but for some reason blizzard's favorite class gets Kazakus while the others don't get Aya.

It seems like they're using "synergy" as a short hand for cards that change how you build your deck around it. So Kazakus forces you to skip duplicates just the like the Princes force you to skip their respective drops. The problem is that by this definition every card should be a synergy card, because you should always be drafting based on what you've already picked. Divine Favor a "synergy" card because it pushes you to draft cheap cards, but it doesn't make the cut. The whole thing is poorly done. Including your complaint that Aya somehow doesn't get synergy status.

MariaTaylor posted...

according to this thread it is one of the cards that was thought to not be appearing due to a bug. however, one of the top upvoted post is someone saying that they were offered sindragosa. so it may actually be appearing.

Yep, they patch all of the missing cards back in yesterday.
---

it was also patched 2 days ago looks like?

so yeah whether it was one of the ones that was appearing or not I suppose it doesn't matter. it would still be able to appear after the patch.
---

damn it I type too slow and then I post without looking. I was literally sniped twice in a row.

anyway on the subject of average vs high level players I always found this interesting:



high level players seem to pick

mage less often
rogue way more often
druid more often
shaman more often
priest less often
hunter way less often
---

Yeah. One of the reasons for mages being omnipresent at high ranks is that you can highroll with Meteors and Glyphs and still do good, even if you're kind of garbage. With the offering bonus to those gone, those players should see a lot less success.
---

MariaTaylor posted...

hunter way less often

This is the really interesting one. Hunter is probably the hardest class to play perfectly because every single point of damage matters and it's hard to time when to flip the switch and go face. And there are some very good arena hunter players - Merps had the best average in NA the past month and Hunter ended up his highest average class. Hunter is also generally a counter to rogue and mage, which dominate the high win brackets. So you'd think good players would be picking it.
---

rogue is the most skill intensive class so that makes sense. mage is the least skill intensive class so that also makes less sense, yeah. one thing I will say about playing druid is that I feel like it becomes less of a problem when I go second as compared to some other classes. not sure how accurate this is but it's the "feeling" I get when playing the class. I'll definitely be picking Druid again in the future if offered them.
---

CybrMonkey posted...

MariaTaylor posted...

hunter way less often

This is the really interesting one. Hunter is probably the hardest class to play perfectly because every single point of damage matters and it's hard to time when to flip the switch and go face. And there are some very good arena hunter players - Merps had the best average in NA the past month and Hunter ended up his highest average class. Hunter is also generally a counter to rogue and mage, which dominate the high win brackets. So you'd think good players would be picking it.

I don't think I'm very good but I usually pick Hunter when offered. Hunter is awesome. yeah I agree that knowing how to play it effectively takes a bit of practice but it's my most used Constructed class as well so a bit of the expertise carries over from there.

I honestly think that the reputation of playing a face/aggro deck has a sort of negative stigma attached to it. there's probably a lot of Arena Mastery players who see themselves as being "above" playing Hunter and this could explain why it gets picked less frequently. that is just speculation though, I really have no idea.
---

MariaTaylor posted...

rogue is the most skill intensive class so that makes sense. mage is the least skill intensive class so that also makes less sense, yeah. one thing I will say about playing druid is that I feel like it becomes less of a problem when I go second as compared to some other classes. not sure how accurate this is but it's the "feeling" I get when playing the class. I'll definitely be picking Druid again in the future if offered them.

Nah, warrior's the least skill-intensive class. Just press escape and then click the big red button. Easy peasy.

I felt like hunter suffered (at least, personally) due to the prevalence of taunts (gorram tar creeper). It might be doing better now? I dunno.
---

CybrMonkey posted...

and it's hard to time when to flip the switch and go face.

well there's your problem

everybody knows the face is the place
---

Lol I showed my friends that vid they both cracked up.

FACE NEVER TRADE
---

dowolf posted...

MariaTaylor posted...

rogue is the most skill intensive class so that makes sense. mage is the least skill intensive class so that also makes less sense, yeah. one thing I will say about playing druid is that I feel like it becomes less of a problem when I go second as compared to some other classes. not sure how accurate this is but it's the "feeling" I get when playing the class. I'll definitely be picking Druid again in the future if offered them.

Nah, warrior's the least skill-intensive class. Just press escape and then click the big red button. Easy peasy.

I felt like hunter suffered (at least, personally) due to the prevalence of taunts (gorram tar creeper). It might be doing better now? I dunno.

The ideal opener in my latest attempt at control hunter is venomstrike trap + snail (preferably going second)
---

Druid is the most "average" class, in that it's good at everything but not great at anything. Pretty good spells, pretty good minions, pretty good value cards (until they printed Ultimate Infestation for some reason). So if you're good at knowing when to trade, how much tempo to put on the board, and other fundamentals, you should do well with Druid. The only thing it's bad at is dealing with lots of large minions, but in this meta you want to be ahead and on the board so it shouldn't be a big problem unless it's a game you'd be losing anyway.

MariaTaylor posted...

I honestly think that the reputation of playing a face/aggro deck has a sort of negative stigma attached to it. there's probably a lot of Arena Mastery players who see themselves as being "above" playing Hunter and this could explain why it gets picked less frequently. that is just speculation though, I really have no idea.

I'm not sure that's it. If you really understand the game you understand how hard it is to play aggro, especially in arena. I think dowolf is on the right track that all of the good taunts in Un'goro dissuaded all but a few people from figuring out how to best play hunter, when they could otherwise just play classes that didn't change much and were just as good.
---

has hearthstone become the total opposite of WoW such that hunter actually takes the most skill?
---