Gauntlet Update - Patch Notes 1.1.0.060

    • Morwath wrote:

      Wolzarg wrote:

      Morwath wrote:

      Wolzarg wrote:

      Darkwonders wrote:

      Found the deck he's talking about.

      hexpvptools.net/gauntlet/run/17513954977850875468

      Quite the hilarious deck.

      Complete shit against burn decks game 1.

      Looks like he needs to side in interrupts G2. Apart from Gambit, there's no drawing in this deck. There's only a single gambit in this deck. Deal with that and you're golden.

      Bury would be the best way to deal with that. That and discard cards as it takes at least 3 turns to set up if he wants to have resources ready for interrupts.
      Any interupt or instant speed removal and the deck loses. That is beyond the fact that it needs to hit 3 ice and have its colors. Like i said thats a non deck to be upset about you can literally mulligan to 2 looking for your removal since that is all it does so card disadvantage doesn't matter.
      You can muligan into your quick removal only G1, as G2 and G3 having that one Burn will be completly irrevelant due to Arcane Zephyr... but I agree, it's not a deck one should be upset about, as anyone can easily simply play more quick removal. This deck isn't even good against [SAPPHIRE] decks as Runebind or Transmogrifade can totaly devastate it.
      Didn't even realize it had a reserves. Like sure i guess but for every card putt in from reserves the ice are now infinitely worse right? Does the deck even work with reserves it seems like each card you add makes it so much slower that the interupt is actually inferior to just yoloing.
      In last ICS it was the only match I've lost and I've lost it 0-2. I guess its worth mentioning I was yoloing as Yotul Mogak, you can check coverage, there was nothing I could do with the list I was playing. If they put single Arcane Zephyr against Burn they are just one turn slower, assuming they won't draw any piece without fateweave. Uninterrupted deck should win by turn 4. Anyway, I don't think this deck is any issue, there are many combo decks in this game and this one is probably the easiest to deal with.
      It is one of those decks that blindsides people who aren't prepared for it. And some people don't like losing to decks like this

      You could make a purposeful version of this deck with scour the archives. It shouldn't be your only win condition, but it'd be fun to try.
      There was a signature here. It's gone now.
    • Turn 1 they fateweave.
      Turn 2 they fateweave
      turn 3 they fateweave
      turn 4 they do combo with protection and fateweave
      turn 5 they win if you can counter

      Like again that seems so tame by turn 4 i feel like it should be quite possible to have two answers or a win immortal is quite the powerful format. What deck can't race or beat this and is still competitive?

      That said any rematching is absolutely horrible to me and i would rather not get a game at all than play the same person again in a row.
    • Wolzarg wrote:

      That said any rematching is absolutely horrible to me and i would rather not get a game at all than play the same person again in a row.
      It seems matchmaking is either disabled completely or isn't happening due to not enough players. If you look at the API data you can see a 4-0 getting paired against an 0-2.
    • Mach wrote:

      Wolzarg wrote:

      That said any rematching is absolutely horrible to me and i would rather not get a game at all than play the same person again in a row.
      It seems matchmaking is either disabled completely or isn't happening due to not enough players. If you look at the API data you can see a 4-0 getting paired against an 0-2.
      To be fair i don't really think there should be any matchmaking in constructed gauntlet beyond not facing the same person.
    • JeffHoogland wrote:

      Metronomy wrote:

      I prefer the current standard format over the current immortal format (in terms of meta
      We don't know what the "meta" for Immortal looks like. It is essentially a new format. You need a good deal of information to have a realistic picture of a meta game, and an ICS every two months is nowhere near enough to get that picture.
      Maybe you won't like Immortal, but saying that based on what it is at the moment is like looking at the first week of a freshly rotated standard and concluding the format is awful when it still has yet to be explored.

      Metronomy wrote:

      The stated reason was that they were afraid of splitting up the playerbase (aka "too many buckets"-problem). Now the playerbase is even smaller
      Citation needed on the second part here.
      I'd try to explain why having a gauntlet and a ladder that are the same format directly competing doesn't make sense regardless of player base size, but I've done that enough in the past to know you are just going to dismiss it outright again.
      Well...i get what you say but its not like we have no info on immortal. When you count it all up it adds up to actually a not small amount of games. I have played a good number of immortal weeklies and I played most ICS tourneys. I can have at least a good estimation on how a meta might play out. And its not so much the exact meta-shapeup that concerns me but that most if not all strategies are very straight forward with a minimum of interactions.
      Since I am afraid that you will only respond to this part I will concede anything you like regarding meta though. Thats not what I want to focus on.


      Regarding playerbase you can look at all kinds of metrics. Steamcharts, auction house data, ladder activity, tournament numbers. All have been trending downwards for quite some time.

      You seem to misunderstand completely what I am trying to say. The whole point of my suggestion is to not have gauntlet and ladder compete but integrate them in one queue. That shot towards me falls flat completely therefore. Sigh..

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Metronomy ().

    • Wolzarg wrote:

      Turn 1 they fateweave.
      Turn 2 they fateweave
      turn 3 they fateweave
      turn 4 they do combo with protection and fateweave
      turn 5 they win if you can counter

      Like again that seems so tame by turn 4 i feel like it should be quite possible to have two answers or a win immortal is quite the powerful format. What deck can't race or beat this and is still competitive?

      That said any rematching is absolutely horrible to me and i would rather not get a game at all than play the same person again in a row.
      T1 Chronic Madness
      T2 Inquisition
      T3 Inquisition
      T4 Withering Gaze
      T5 They auto concede cause you removed their only win condition.
      There was a signature here. It's gone now.
    • Wolzarg wrote:

      Turn 1 they fateweave.
      Turn 2 they fateweave
      turn 3 they fateweave
      turn 4 they do combo with protection and fateweave
      turn 5 they win if you can counter

      Like again that seems so tame by turn 4 i feel like it should be quite possible to have two answers or a win immortal is quite the powerful format. What deck can't race or beat this and is still competitive?

      That said any rematching is absolutely horrible to me and i would rather not get a game at all than play the same person again in a row.
      try finding and drawing 2 playable answers that cost less than 4 mana total in diamond. or wild

      or are actually playable cards in blood (i.e. strangle and rot cast, not cheap shot)

      unfortunately they fucked up the troop balance so hard that the 1 or 2 hate cards they made are mostly useless because a 2/2 for 2 isn't worth a card. also a 2-color deck can't even cast a threshold-intensive card reliably.

      anyways, the problem is facing the same player 3 times. i already knew the devs aren't really good at game balance when i signed up to play the format, so i knew i'd probably play against something idiotic in a few of my games. my deck was playing its fair share of idiotic cards too (rune ear, annihilix, wax sacrament)

      but if i'm playing purely for competition and not for fun, i'm not going to play a -150p EV queue
    • Biz wrote:

      Wolzarg wrote:

      Turn 1 they fateweave.
      Turn 2 they fateweave
      turn 3 they fateweave
      turn 4 they do combo with protection and fateweave
      turn 5 they win if you can counter

      Like again that seems so tame by turn 4 i feel like it should be quite possible to have two answers or a win immortal is quite the powerful format. What deck can't race or beat this and is still competitive?

      That said any rematching is absolutely horrible to me and i would rather not get a game at all than play the same person again in a row.
      try finding and drawing 2 playable answers that cost less than 4 mana total in diamond. or wild
      or are actually playable cards in blood (i.e. strangle and rot cast, not cheap shot)

      unfortunately they fucked up the troop balance so hard that the 1 or 2 hate cards they made are mostly useless because a 2/2 for 2 isn't worth a card. also a 2-color deck can't even cast a threshold-intensive card reliably.

      anyways, the problem is facing the same player 3 times. i already knew the devs aren't really good at game balance when i signed up to play the format, so i knew i'd probably play against something idiotic in a few of my games. my deck was playing its fair share of idiotic cards too (rune ear, annihilix, wax sacrament)

      but if i'm playing purely for competition and not for fun, i'm not going to play a -150p EV queue
      Putt 1 damage reduction spirit in sb you are now immune and its also decent against yotul
    • Hex's limited was already incredibly cheap and high EV compared to MTGO. Now its just becoming hilarious with the flood of set 9 packs and increased demand for constructed playable cards.

      .....
      .....

      And yet I'll still sit in the queue for an hour or more tonight trying to find a 2-0 match. And then sit in queue for another hour waiting for a new draft to fire.
    • Angmar wrote:

      Hex's limited was already incredibly cheap and high EV compared to MTGO. Now its just becoming hilarious with the flood of set 9 packs and increased demand for constructed playable cards.

      .....
      .....

      And yet I'll still sit in the queue for an hour or more tonight trying to find a 2-0 match. And then sit in queue for another hour waiting for a new draft to fire.
      Only an hour, lucky you. That was only half joking.