Hearthpwn

Watch Kripp's videos about the difference between consistency in aggro and control decks.

Or if you can't be arsed - aggro doesn't need great cards to function, control does.

Remember Tunnel Trogg into Totem Golem? It does need little cards to experience a hard to counter aggro deck. And I generally quit hoping for a controlish meta. I mean look at aggro druid or how fast Shaman or Murloc Palas are building a lethal board. 

I am just curious how many lifesteal cards are included. Some Quest builds could use more healing. I am really curious for the Priest Deathknight. Deathrattles plus Quest could form an interesting deck. 

And I am looking forward what this expansion offers in general. We lost many cards in Spring with the new themed year. It is the first time in history two big expansions back to back hit the pool (speaking of standard ofc). 

Firstly, it's spelled "Aggro," secondly, I'm thankful that there isn't a ton of Aggro out there. The real games of hearthstone are well thought out, long games. Nobody cares or remembers the 2 minute games where you innervate out a fledgeling then coin the next one out the next turn and hit your windfurys and end the game. 

Aggro is healthy to keep midrange decks in check (and super greedy control decks), but seeing it dwindle in popularity will certainly reward the skilled and methodical players, and will stop the urge for people to just que pirate warrior over and over until you hit a win streak. 

Im not saying that Aggro is brainless, it's not. But it's certainly not as skill piloted as a control or midrange deck. 

Why do so many people act like control vs aggro is like good guys vs bad guys. Its not. Aggro is a healthy part of the game. You aren't a saint for only playing control decks.

Quote from Stormbringer36 >>

Why do so many people act like control vs aggro is like good guys vs bad guys. Its not. Aggro is a healthy part of the game. You aren't a saint for only playing control decks.

Quote from Stormbringer36>>

Why do so many people act like control vs aggro is like good guys vs bad guys. Its not. Aggro is a healthy part of the game. You aren't a saint for only playing control decks  

Agreed. Lots of players would quit if the ladder was 15 minute matches every game. However, getting smacked in the face by a pirate warrior game after game is not fun either. There needs to be a balance

While I don't like aggro decks, they are a really important part of the game,  good aggro decks are what keeps control viable, without aggro, mid-range would dominate the meta (Mid-range shaman era comes to mind). It's the natural order of the game. Aggro counters Mid-range, Mid-range counters Control and Control counters Aggro. 

Quote from DaRealFlamingo >>

Quote from Stormbringer36>>

Why do so many people act like control vs aggro is like good guys vs bad guys. Its not. Aggro is a healthy part of the game. You aren't a saint for only playing control decks  

Agreed. Lots of players would quit if the ladder was 15 minute matches every game. However, getting smacked in the face by a pirate warrior game after game is not fun either. There needs to be a balance

Aggro is really healthy for the current meta. And its actually good to meet a couple of aggro players from time to time, if it was control vs control all the time, the game would become way to boring. For me it's actually more fun to play against aggro then against uninteractive mage decks or braindead end game decks like jade druid or taunt warrior. They just need to be careful with aggro cards, especially escalating 1 drops.

I honestly believe that if blizzard gave stars based on game-length, everyone would be happy. The people that want to play Aggro still could, and midrange and control players would feel more rewarded for thinking things through an playing longer games. If you earned 1 star for a 8- turn game, 2 stars for 9-16 turn games, and 3 stars for games lasting more than 16 turns, I feel a lot of Aggro players wouldn't feel they "have" to play Aggro in their limited time on this game to ladder. People would all, and could all, play what they want! And that's not a bad thing at all. 

We haven't even seen half of the set yet and good aggro cards aren't always obvious. Some like Vicious Fledgling need to be seen in action before we can judge them. I highly doubt we won't see any aggro in the set. I do hope to see a return of control warrior. It was one of my favorite decks. The Warrior death knight could be tank up 2.0 and it would be awesome. Would be happy to see pirate warrior die for it. It has been around far too long. 

Patches will be nerfed? No.

After one or maybe two weeks players trying to make new decks and fails badly the ladder just ignore the majority of new cards (like TGT) and play the cursed, disgraceful, unfun, retarded pirate decks again, again and again...

If you don't fix the broken aggro cards is useless release fair cards to other types of decks.

Quote from Goliathar1 >>

I honestly believe that if blizzard gave stars based on game-length, everyone would be happy. The people that want to play Aggro still could, and midrange and control players would feel more rewarded for thinking things through an playing longer games. If you earned 1 star for a 8- turn game, 2 stars for 9-16 turn games, and 3 stars for games lasting more than 16 turns, I feel a lot of Aggro players wouldn't feel they "have" to play Aggro in their limited time on this game to ladder. People would all, and could all, play what they want! And that's not a bad thing at all. 

I like your idea, because it solves the problem of laddering with a control or even mill deck, i.e. it is much harder to do in a reasonable amount of time. However I think at this proportions it would make agro decks feel like they should just try to bm for a few turns because why not, they can probably win in two turns. 12 for two stars and 20 for three sounds better to me. Not sure if that makes sence though. Maybe just scrap the 3 stars and stick with 2.

Can't help but laugh at delusional people who think that if aggro dies, control meta will arise.

Quote from Goliathar1 >>

I honestly believe that if blizzard gave stars based on game-length, everyone would be happy. The people that want to play Aggro still could, and midrange and control players would feel more rewarded for thinking things through an playing longer games. If you earned 1 star for a 8- turn game, 2 stars for 9-16 turn games, and 3 stars for games lasting more than 16 turns, I feel a lot of Aggro players wouldn't feel they "have" to play Aggro in their limited time on this game to ladder. People would all, and could all, play what they want! And that's not a bad thing at all. 

Aggro cards usually come in the dump.  Small-Time Buccaneer was revealed a week before the expansion hit and everyone just glossed over it like it was nothing.  You can't even really be sure that none of the cards revealed so far won't help out aggro decks since Vicious Fledgling was revealed early and people said it wouldn't see any Constructed play, and they were proven wrong.

So it's definitely too early to make that assumption.  Blizzard likes to reveal more unique and interesting cards early anyway.

Quote from coolcool1999 >>

Quote from Goliathar1 >>

I honestly believe that if blizzard gave stars based on game-length, everyone would be happy. The people that want to play Aggro still could, and midrange and control players would feel more rewarded for thinking things through an playing longer games. If you earned 1 star for a 8- turn game, 2 stars for 9-16 turn games, and 3 stars for games lasting more than 16 turns, I feel a lot of Aggro players wouldn't feel they "have" to play Aggro in their limited time on this game to ladder. People would all, and could all, play what they want! And that's not a bad thing at all. 

 

I like your idea, because it solves the problem of laddering with a control or even mill deck, i.e. it is much harder to do in a reasonable amount of time. However I think at this proportions it would make agro decks feel like they should just try to bm for a few turns because why not, they can probably win in two turns. 12 for two stars and 20 for three sounds better to me. Not sure if that makes sence though. Maybe just scrap the 3 stars and stick with 2.

we've seen like 20 cards man, c'mon

Looking forward to playing some great aggro, especially just after release.  The sheep load their decks with theme cards and seem to forget that taunt and removal are a thing.  Wolves then enjoy the feast, including the salty tears here on the boards.  "Whaaa, how do I stop people from just going face?" - Taunt.  "Whaaa, they just puked out a board and ran me down before I could play my crappy 9-drop DK hero, how to fix?" - Removal.  Just keep in mind that while you are sitting down to have fun with your Johnny build, Spike is there salivating over the prospect of an easy meal.

Quote from WillowMelody >>

Quote from coolcool1999 >>

After looking over the small but diverse pool of cards shown to us so far one thing stands out to me. There isn't a single card that I would define as an agro card. Frankly the most agro cards are a 4/3 that doesn't want to be killed and a 3 mana combo card. Wile not all the cards are good none seem to be at all helpful to fast decks. Most of the best cards we have seen (imho), Sindragosa, whirlwind weapon, and Profesor Putrucide are only start being useful in midrange and are much better in control. I personally am a control player but have nothing against a fun agro deck. Anyone else think this is an interesting trend?

Edit: I would like to add that I don't think agro is going to die. The classic set The game of Hearthstone is frankly so agro centric that that will never happen. I'm just saying that as of now there seem to be no cards that would fit in current agro decks or make new ones. Also agro is an important part of that game that just doesn't happen to appeal to me. I enjoy playing the occasional unique agro deck, its just that I like my decks bizarre and complex, two things hard to find that in an agro deck.

 FTFY.

In all seriousness, aggro is a necessary part of the game. It won't ever go away, and that's a good thing. It doesn't need all that much support. I believe Patches the Pirate was one of the later cards revealed, and it boosted up the current top aggro deck, Pirate Warrior. Not even hard anti pirate and anti weapon synergy has managed to stop it from being Tier 1. There'll be more aggro support, whether they intend to or not, and I'm glad for it. I don't want a game where only greedy control mirrors that last twenty minutes each exist. That's boring as hell.

Just give it time. We'll see cards that support aggro.