Tempo Shaman Standard

[Damien 1,514]

This thread is for comments about our Tempo Shaman Standard deck.

[Refusenik 0]

I'm scratching my head as to how this build holds its own in the current meta.

I've played a short run (and therefore not very scientific, I know) and am finding myself either out-controlled or out-aggroed by the current favourites such as pirate warrior or the warlock build that seems to be specifically anti-shaman.

I did defeat a C'Thun druid, my one victory in a inglorious 1-9 run!

[positiv2 952]

20 hours ago, Refusenik said:

I'm scratching my head as to how this build holds its own in the current meta.

I've played a short run (and therefore not very scientific, I know) and am finding myself either out-controlled or out-aggroed by the current favourites such as pirate warrior or the warlock build that seems to be specifically anti-shaman.

I did defeat a C'Thun druid, my one victory in a inglorious 1-9 run!

This deck plays differently from midrange shaman and from what I have seen, it is the most common mistake players do when playing tempo shaman. You should be mulliganing way harder and should be hitting face more often than with midrange shaman. Could you please provide a few replays?

[FanOfValeera 253]

23 hours ago, Refusenik said:

I'm scratching my head as to how this build holds its own in the current meta.

I've played a short run (and therefore not very scientific, I know) and am finding myself either out-controlled or out-aggroed by the current favourites such as pirate warrior or the warlock build that seems to be specifically anti-shaman.

I did defeat a C'Thun druid, my one victory in a inglorious 1-9 run!

Last month, I went 40/21 with this deck, which is around 65%,  around rank 10. I can say it works.

According to tempostorm, this is an aggro deck, actually it is really close to that , there are some aoe and point removal. But you mostly go face, it should be the priority over trading most of the time. 

So this is basically an aggro deck, with some removal. You should play accordingly.

[Refusenik 0]

Thanks for the advice, guys. I think I have been playing it too timidly. After a break to let the tilt ease I'm giving it another go.

postiv2, I've no idea how to record games! If I could do stuff like that I'd probably be much better at other things, like HS. 

[Paracel 165]

4 hours ago, FanOfValeera said:

Last month, I went 40/21 with this deck, which is around 65%,  around rank 10. I can say it works.

According to tempostorm, this is an aggro deck, actually it is really close to that , there are some aoe and point removal. But you mostly go face, it should be the priority over trading most of the time. 

So this is basically an aggro deck, with some removal. You should play accordingly.

Keep in mind that it was pre-nerf, where the deck was clearly oppressively dominant. Sorry to ruin the fun, but flashing these old numbers doesn't help the current problems.. 

 

On 10/23/2016 at 7:59 PM, Refusenik said:

I'm scratching my head as to how this build holds its own in the current meta.

I've played a short run (and therefore not very scientific, I know) and am finding myself either out-controlled or out-aggroed by the current favourites such as pirate warrior or the warlock build that seems to be specifically anti-shaman.

I did defeat a C'Thun druid, my one victory in a inglorious 1-9 run!

Short answer is that Midrange Shaman is clearly superior to this deck after nerfs hit. There is literally no reason you should play this deck instead.

Long answer is that this deck is a brother to Midrange Shaman. But where Midrange goes for value, Aggro Shaman went for undercosted damage cards, and Tuskarr enabled that transition pretty easily. Those damages were nerfed, but not the value parts of Midrange. That's why it became the better deck.

You lose in these scenarios, because these deck you mention target Shaman in a lot of ways, and reduced power level compared to pre-nerf versions contributes to that a lot. Your offense is vulnerable to many interactive tools now, you are not as fast and as resilient as before. These decks are effective against any kind of Shaman, I admit, but you have much more chances playing your game with big dudes and sweepers in your sleeve rather than catfight them where they excel at.

If you still wish to endure suffering playing something other than Our Glorious Leader Midrange Shaman, a piece of advice that I have to you is this - think ahead. Specifically, about three things : how your dudes are going to die (Horribly.); how to use your mana efficiently, considering Overload; how much damage can you push over next couple of turns you are not dead. Those are fair basics, but this deck plays Basic Hearthstone, after all.

[positiv2 952]

7 hours ago, Paracel said:

There is literally no reason you should play this deck instead.

Ever heard of fun and personal preference? Malygos druid is better than taunt druid, yet I prefer to run 10 taunts in my deck.

 

11 hours ago, Refusenik said:

postiv2, I've no idea how to record games! If I could do stuff like that I'd probably be much better at other things, like HS. 

You could try HS deck tracker or plays.tv (easy to do with raptr). The best solution for analysis is in my opinion deck tracker, since I wouldn't have to pause the video every few seconds.

[Refusenik 0]

Thanks guys.

The reality is I'm limited to the decks I can play due to being legendary-poor. This site is good for putting up budget deck options and I try all the ones I can make.

I think I'll just be ticking over, doing daily Qs and saving gold until the next expansion where I might be more able to compete on an even playing field.

[FanOfValeera 253]

14 hours ago, Paracel said:

Keep in mind that it was pre-nerf, where the deck was clearly oppressively dominant. Sorry to ruin the fun, but flashing these old numbers doesn't help the current problems.. 

 

Short answer is that Midrange Shaman is clearly superior to this deck after nerfs hit. There is literally no reason you should play this deck instead.

Long answer is that this deck is a brother to Midrange Shaman. But where Midrange goes for value, Aggro Shaman went for undercosted damage cards, and Tuskarr enabled that transition pretty easily. Those damages were nerfed, but not the value parts of Midrange. That's why it became the better deck.

You lose in these scenarios, because these deck you mention target Shaman in a lot of ways, and reduced power level compared to pre-nerf versions contributes to that a lot. Your offense is vulnerable to many interactive tools now, you are not as fast and as resilient as before. These decks are effective against any kind of Shaman, I admit, but you have much more chances playing your game with big dudes and sweepers in your sleeve rather than catfight them where they excel at.

If you still wish to endure suffering playing something other than Our Glorious Leader Midrange Shaman, a piece of advice that I have to you is this - think ahead. Specifically, about three things : how your dudes are going to die (Horribly.); how to use your mana efficiently, considering Overload; how much damage can you push over next couple of turns you are not dead. Those are fair basics, but this deck plays Basic Hearthstone, after all.

What fun, it is just a couple of numbers, considering them as useful or not is your preference.

Also it is a data from not long ago (25 days), and an appropriate answer to what i claimed "this deck is playable" could be another set of numbers showing that I was completely off.

You may be a huge MR Shaman worshipper, and not accept anything else as glorious as that (this is partially correct), but people play different decks and have some success with it, I know, its really weird.But what could be done?

For this deck and every other deck here, as long as you can understand its playstyle, you can see higher ranks with it. And basically, main point of these topics is to aid people about any deck they are having problems with it. Instead of spamming MR Shaman everywhere, try this.