Rogue quest OP?

[Blueobelisk]

I would craft Rogue quest and get 60+% win rate just to show you guys, but my finances won't allow me to spend 1600 dust on Patches at the current moment. Zzzzzz.

[Nikkaszal]

I would craft Rogue quest and get 60+% win rate just to show you guys, but my finances won't allow me to spend 1600 dust on Patches at the current moment. Zzzzzz.

Actually playing the deck for an extended period of time would very quickly disprove your notions of it.

There's a reason I stopped playing it in ranked. Way too inconsistent.

[Deleted]

From personal experience I lost to it once 10-1, playing from rank 12 to 5 with midrange paladin. Not that it's saying much since midrange paladin is my only deck this expansion. Also might have been lucky.

Found priest annoying as usual.

[Nanaboostme]

Anyone currently playing Quest Rogue can probably tell you that it's basically becoming more and more worthless. The meta has shifted to the point where almost every deck I see now almost seems designed to counter my quest rogue. I literally played a game yesterday where I drew 2 shadowsteps and a brewmaster in my opening hand, had played 4 of the same minion by turn 3, and still lost the game.

Ever since I got 5 stars into rank 6, literally one game away from rank 5, I've been sliding down the ladder. Literally from rank 6 to rank 8 and then stuck at ranks 7 and 8. I know how to play this deck, I know how to mulligan, and this deck just cannot climb past rank 7 now.

No, Quest Rogue is not OP. The meta has adjusted for it and those of us that dumped all of our resources into making a quest rogue deck are now fucked until the next expansion (unless we want to drop $50-$400 just to remain competitive). Those of you still having issues with quest rogues? Yeah, you're in the same spot we are.

Hell, the best games I see now are other quest rogues, because I know that I actually have a chance against them since they're just as much at the whim of bad RNG as I am.

OP doesnt equal to: Literally Unstoppable

When one card shifts the meta that much, its unhealthy for the game.

The Quest Rogue card is not interactive for the opponent.

To even use "worthless" to describe the shifting transition of Rogues is absurd. Its more like becoming "standard" in terms of you need to play a deck exclusively to counter one quest card

[Pantalaimon]

OP doesnt equal to: Literally Unstoppable

When one card shifts the meta that much, its unhealthy for the game.

The Quest Rogue card is not interactive for the opponent.

To even use "worthless" to describe the shifting transition of Rogues is absurd. Its more like becoming "standard" in terms of you need to play a deck exclusively to counter one quest card

Let's not use terms if you're not going to use them correctly to describe a deck. "Not interactive for the opponent" does not fit what Quest Rogue is. In fact, the non-aggro decks that beat Quest Rogue win BECAUSE they are interacting with the plays of the opponent. For example, various control decks know that if they consistenly clean up the rogue's board before the core that they have a much better chance at winning. Last I checked controlling the board by having your minions attack the opponent's minions is interacting. Take a look at Taunt Warrior, they drop a wall of minions to reactively push back against the rogue's minions. Last I checked being able to respond with controlly react plays to win & outlast the opponent is interative. Lastly, any class can use Dirty Rats in order to force out bounce cards in order to counter and/or slow down the win condition (Priests can also potion of madness the 2/3 elementals to deny the deathrattle). Last I checked being able to both proactively and reactively screw is with your opponent's win condition is interative.

If you want a deck that is closer to the idea of a deck that is not interative to play against queue up against Freeze Mage or Miracle Rogue (the now wild version with conceal).

Also, it isn't simply the quest core spell that is causing the game to change, in some lesser degrees, but the deck as a whole and the playstyle. The quest by itself can hardly be considered "unhealthy".

[Rennadrel]

But shouldn't it be considered OP if the entire meta shifts into countering it? OP is not the same as immortal.
A deck that will make everyone make decks to counter it should be considered OP imo.

It's not even close to as OP as pirate warrior.

[Colmadero]

Had a VERY favorable win rate with it but as the meta has been adjusting, my win rate has gone belly up.

Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

[crazylandd]

Imo quest-rouge is not imba right now, it needs to be lucky to play with this deck, if you get a luck with your strarting 5-6 cards - you'll win everyone!

[Mormolyce]

It's really immaterial that it has an inconsistent win rate, the queues are absolutely lousy with them meaning that (a) the majority of your games are decided by how well your opponent draws and nothing else, and (b) a huge number of decks are not worth playing since quest rogue punishes them extremely hard.

It's cancer.

[Pantalaimon]

It's really immaterial that it has an inconsistent win rate, the queues are absolutely lousy with them meaning that (a) the majority of your games are decided by how well your opponent draws and nothing else, and (b) a huge number of decks are not worth playing since quest rogue punishes them extremely hard.

It's cancer.

You're acting like the player going against the Quest Rogues can't do anything of their own accord to win against them, other than pray that they get a bad draw. Paladins, warriors, and hunters all do great against rogues even if the rogue completes the quest by turn 4-6.

As far it being immaterial that the deck has an inconsistent win rate, I completely disagree. Just because many of your games might be full of the deck at certain ranks doesn't mean the rogues are going to draw any better against you or perform more consistently, they will still be sub par 47% win rate decks. And if people are actually intentionally playing in response to the meta then many decks shouldn't have much of a problem against rogues anyway. If people choose to rank with a deck that gets stomped by rogue, knowing full well that many people are still trying to rank with rogues, then the fault is on that player who wants to be a special snowflake with a deck that is weak against the meta.

Let's also not keep spreading "cancer" please, as it is such a massively overused word that has no real definition other than "I hate decks that beat me, therefore they should be nerfed because I lose against them."

[Mormolyce]

You're acting like the player going against the Quest Rogues can't do anything of their own accord to win against them, other than pray that they get a bad draw. Paladins, warriors, and hunters all do great against rogues even if the rogue completes the quest by turn 4-6.

As far it being immaterial that the deck has an inconsistent win rate, I completely disagree. Just because many of your games might be full of the deck at certain ranks doesn't mean the rogues are going to draw any better against you or perform more consistently, they will still be sub par 47% win rate decks. And if people are actually intentionally playing in response to the meta then many decks shouldn't have much of a problem against rogues anyway. If people choose to rank with a deck that gets stomped by rogue, knowing full well that many people are still trying to rank with rogues, then the fault is on that player who wants to be a special snowflake with a deck that is weak against the meta.

Let's also not keep spreading "cancer" please, as it is such a massively overused word that has no real definition other than "I hate decks that beat me, therefore they should be nerfed because I lose against them."

Let's just reserve it for decks like this then.

[Blueobelisk]

>When you're at 29 health, the Quest Rogue has three 5 attack cards on the field, and you think you'll live another turn to try to lethal him if he doesn't trade.
>"Think again, faggot."
>Rogue plays three 1 mana charge 5/5s, one of which pulls Patches for a 0 mana charge 5/5 (doesn't need to be in hand).

[Naxere]

Just beat a Quest Rogue on my Priest. Mind Visioned him turn 1, got the quest, played it. Got lucky on my Thoughtsteal and got a Youthful Brewmaster and the 2/3 combo bounce guy. He conceded before I could play the quest though.

[Pantalaimon]

Just beat a Quest Rogue on my Priest. Mind Visioned him turn 1, got the quest, played it. Got lucky on my Thoughtsteal and got a Youthful Brewmaster and the 2/3 combo bounce guy. He conceded before I could play the quest though.

Lol and if that guy didn't think priests sstealing your stuff could get anymore annoying to go up against xD

I'd feel glad knowing that I probably caused someone to break a computer with that match.

[Mormolyce]

Forced myself to go back to my Quest Rogue to finish a pirate quest. Climbed 5 ranks before completing it. Kek.

Only thing that beat me was basic bitch Hunter which got lucky and killed me on turn 5.

[Mythbredor]

I don't really see and issue with the rogue quest (but it seems we've already come to that conclusion in this thread) but I'm going to voice my opinion anyway. It's "coinflip" deck in most cases, if you draw extremely well you win if you don't, well you don't. With so much aggro in the meta and midrange it's getting ran over. Examples of this is pirate warrior, murloc paladin, and midrange hunter. Something that surprised me is that my winrate against Quest Rogue was actually pretty low with Aggro Murloc Paladin, ended up being roughly 50/50. However my hunter had a favored but still surprisingly low winrate against it. It's definitely incredibly frustrating to play against tho.

Here are my winrates if anyone is interested. Current season from 16-4 so far been taking it relatively slow meta, is super frustrating to play against.

[Doomislav]

Just beat a Quest Rogue on my Priest. Mind Visioned him turn 1, got the quest, played it. Got lucky on my Thoughtsteal and got a Youthful Brewmaster and the 2/3 combo bounce guy. He conceded before I could play the quest though.

LOL poor rogue player got trolled. Those card steal priest decks are like that - I had an idea to "make a deck that uses all the opponents minions against him" when I first started playing. The only thing that deck turned out to be good for was making people mad...

[Schalde]

Its not about the rogue being OP for me it more the way you lose to these kind of decks. you just sit there were you decent opening opening hand and mulligan, and cant do a jack shit about it.. just see the rogue having his quest completed at round 3 and next round the board is full of 5-5.......concede

[Nutri]

Found the quest annoying as f*ck first few times I played against it. Then I realized any simple agro deck (lock/hunter in my case) can easily beat it unless you're really unlucky and he completes his quest at turn 4 and has some chargers/murlocks to play. But even then you can beat it.

In turn I'm more annoyed by the priest quest while playing said agro decks. Compromises...

[Raiju]

Found the quest annoying as f*ck first few times I played against it. Then I realized any simple agro deck (lock/hunter in my case) can easily beat it unless you're really unlucky and he completes his quest at turn 4 and has some chargers/murlocks to play. But even then you can beat it.

In turn I'm more annoyed by the priest quest while playing said agro decks. Compromises...

Surely that's not an issue since so few will play priest quest given it forces them to make such a subpar deck vs.. nearly everyone.