Hearthpwn

Hear me out for a second. Read this with an open mind.

Peoole play control because they like to have the safety of being able to react to everything. "Oh my opponent just got a 6 4/4s? Brawl. Oh my opponent just got a 16/16 and a 17/17 jades? Whirlwind, execute, 8 damage hero power!"

Aggro on the other hand takes the position of having to predict what your opponent does. You have to decide when it's best to clear, extend your board, or buff your minions.

Now, certain control play styles take a lot of skill-- miracle rogue, priest, for example-- but honestly if you really, truely think playing control is hard and aggro is brain dead, try switching it up. Don't play your safety net control decks and try something else for a change.  You'll find having to predict what your opponent is going to do is much more challenging than looking at your sheet and seeing "opponent did x, I should do y." It takes decision out of the game. And if you realize this and play control, that's fine. Just don't bash other decks. Because you're the one playing the easy deck.

Stay woke.

Have you ever played control vs control ?

Aggro: should i hit face or should i hit face? 

Playing aggro to the highest level requires more skill than people give it credit for, but that only changed with Un'goro, as the relative power level of aggro decks has dropped a percentage or two - And that is the way it should be! The deck archetypes that offer the fastest win conditions should in no way be the most powerful decks overall.

Because the relative power level of aggro has dropped slightly this is forcing slightly more considered situations where better players get the opportunity to shine. The meta has vastly improved, and this is good for the gameplay of players of all archetypes.

I disagree with the fact "aggro harder than control", NO (see previous answers here).

But i agree with the fact than playing Taunt Warrior is way more easy than typical control decks (Taunt, Taunt, Taunt, Taunt, Brawl, Taunt, Taunt, Hero Power, Taunt...).

It's this simple: Aggro vs control and aggro vs aggro are brainless for both sides, since opening hands dictate the game. Control vs control, or control vs some types of midrange is as close as you can get in hearthstone to "skillful" matchups.

Edit: And also as someone mentioned, in Control matchups you have way more turns, so there is much more room for outplaying people.

 So you're telling me that when you pit Control Warrior against Pirate Warrior, you deem the control variant to be the easier deck to play? 

Seriously? Or Zoo-lock VS Handlock? OR Aggro-din VS Control paladin? You seem to be basing this solely off your opponents having good removal at critical times in the game AKA safety of being to react to everything, but what about good trades/managing resources/preserving life total?

Sure, aggro isn't brain dead, but control ain't "easy" either. 

Just Trolling...

How about you for a change switch from your aggro murclockadin or pirate warrior to a priest or other control deck and decide if your statement is pure bullshit?

I stopped reading when I read "net control decks". 

I do find some truth in the title though, for me it's harder to play a vomitdeck as oppossed to a reactive deck simply because I enjoy it much less. The part i disagree with is control being easy mode, besides curvequestwarrior which is fairly straigthforward. 

Quote from Mister_Smith >>

Okay let's just do a serious reply. 

The main reason for control being harder to play or requiring more skill than aggro is because there is more decision making involved in playing control decks. The more decision making there is the more room for error you got and small errors often pile up and cause you to loose the match in Hearthstone. 

That is in a nutshell why Control decks require more skill. 

Aggro decks are much simpler in their structure and their concept. An aggro deck has the rather simple goal of dishing out as much damage as quick as possible. Nearly all of the cards in an aggro deck are simply means to achieve this one goal. There are very few cards in any aggro deck that serve a different purpose than that. 

Not only does this very simple structure help with draw consistency - one of the main reasons aggro is so good - but it also takes away a lot of the decision making of every turn. A simple goal and a deck only designed to reach that simple goal results in a deck that does not require you to make hard decisions. It is generally easier to decide which move is the right one as opposed to control decks in which the variety of options and answers at your disposal make it harder to always choose the correct action.

I stopped reading when I read "net control decks".

i stopped reading after the title.  fucking lol.

This topic is written by Pirate warrior player, right?

Yeah. I mostly play control btw. I just find aggro a little harder. Maybe not more decisions, but the decisions are a lot more important and game changing.  As control most decisions don'tbite you in the ass unless you're near legend.

Also Taunt v Taunt is a decision based matchup, I'll give you that. It's when they play other decks that it becomes boring 

Didn't I make this thread a year ago?

Quote from Ch1cha >>

Pirate Warrior deemed a hard deck to pilot, what a time to be alive. In aggro you only have 1 decision to make each turn: do I make the favorable trade? If not, go face. You don't have to worry about anything, either you have it or you don't. You often just win because of the mulligan and not because you actually made game deciding choices unlike controll where you see through the majority of your opponents deck. You say you have to take your opponent next turn into consideration, in controll you have to think about the Tirion/Rag/Sunkeeper etc. etc. that might come eventually and still have the resources to deal with them.

I actually have golden priest, shaman, and Druid. I've played a little rogue, mage, and about 20 games of taun warrior this season. 

Aggro druid and control priest are the two harder decks. Pirate wasrrior is more brain dead than the typical aggro deck of the past.

I think the OP is confusing face decks and mid range decks like zoo and hunter.

Quote from AreUaFish >>

Quote from lovejohnny >>

I think the OP is confusing face decks and mid range decks like zoo and hunter.

 Ah yes, Zoo and Midrange decks, where you die at turn 7 instead of turn 5. 

I agree that people shit on aggro too much and give control too much credit.

The main issue I have is that you can do super well with aggro even if you suck at the game. Sometimes you just play on curve and win for drawing a good hand. I see all these fucking awful players who trade incorrectly, miss lethal, don't play around anything, incorrect ordering etc, get to to high ranks. Bugs me.

A better way of putting it is that aggro is easy to pick up, unlike control but both take a lot of skill to master.