Hearthpwn

These new changes should be interesting.  It might make it less grindy for a change, but there's still a glaring issue on the ladder and that's constantly facing the same class over and over.  It becomes tedious and annoying...and let's face it it's almost never a good class matchup for you.  Today I face 3 paladins in a row followed by 6 priests in a row and then 2 more paladins...in a warlock meta which is actually a good matchup for me.  The breakdown was 3 murloc paladins (bad patchup), 4 spitefull priests (bad matchup), 2 big priests (good matchup), and a token paladin (bad matchup).  This kind of stuff is just obnoxious and makes the game less fun.  If they made it so you didn't face the same class twice in a row that might alleviate some of the grindiness and maybe even add a little variety to the ladder.  After all a lot of decent decks suffer from one or 2 bad matchups and are completely pushed out because of the possibility of facing them over and over.  Take that away and we might see new stuff climbing the ladder.  Just a thought, anyone have a better idea?

i swear, there are only children on this site :(

If most of those matchups are a bad matchup anyway, how does it matter in what order you face them?

If everyone is playing Paladins and Priests, pick a deck that is favoured against at least one of them, tech against popular decks. It sure sucks to meet several bad matchups in a row but if the playing field is predictable, it's easier to rank up.

Class-based restrictions wouldn't do much because often a single class has multiple decks with very different matchup spreads (such as aggro paladin/nzoth paladin), while several classes may use identical neutral package and play similarly with the same good/bad matchups (pirates/bonemare/creepers before nerfs).

Meta salt thread disguised as a ladder changes thread. Nothing to see here folks.

Quote from Drknow >>

Meta salt thread disguised as a ladder changes thread. Nothing to see here folks.

Quote from WorriedCheez >>

 

Quote from Drknow >>

Meta salt thread disguised as a ladder changes thread. Nothing to see here folks.

 Thats not helpful to the discussion. Dont like it, dont read it.

 

Priest/warlock/priest/warlock/priest/mage/priest/paladin/warlock/paladin...

This would not really change much. The problem is that Warrior and Shaman are locked out of standard atm, and rogue and hunter are forced to play gimmick decks.

It would be better if ladder actually worked to be honest! :)

Quote from Drknow >>

Meta salt thread disguised as a ladder changes thread. Nothing to see here folks.

Quote from Aegis24 >>

These new changes should be interesting.  It might make it less grindy for a change, but there's still a glaring issue on the ladder and that's constantly facing the same class over and over.  It becomes tedious and annoying...and let's face it it's almost never a good class matchup for you.  Today I face 3 paladins in a row followed by 6 priests in a row and then 2 more paladins...in a warlock meta which is actually a good matchup for me.  The breakdown was 3 murloc paladins (bad patchup), 4 spitefull priests (bad matchup), 2 big priests (good matchup), and a token paladin (bad matchup).  This kind of stuff is just obnoxious and makes the game less fun.  If they made it so you didn't face the same class twice in a row that might alleviate some of the grindiness and maybe even add a little variety to the ladder.  After all a lot of decent decks suffer from one or 2 bad matchups and are completely pushed out because of the possibility of facing them over and over.  Take that away and we might see new stuff climbing the ladder.  Just a thought, anyone have a better idea?

Quote from Zilean >>

 

Quote from Aegis24 >>

These new changes should be interesting.  It might make it less grindy for a change, but there's still a glaring issue on the ladder and that's constantly facing the same class over and over.  It becomes tedious and annoying...and let's face it it's almost never a good class matchup for you.  Today I face 3 paladins in a row followed by 6 priests in a row and then 2 more paladins...in a warlock meta which is actually a good matchup for me.  The breakdown was 3 murloc paladins (bad patchup), 4 spitefull priests (bad matchup), 2 big priests (good matchup), and a token paladin (bad matchup).  This kind of stuff is just obnoxious and makes the game less fun.  If they made it so you didn't face the same class twice in a row that might alleviate some of the grindiness and maybe even add a little variety to the ladder.  After all a lot of decent decks suffer from one or 2 bad matchups and are completely pushed out because of the possibility of facing them over and over.  Take that away and we might see new stuff climbing the ladder.  Just a thought, anyone have a better idea?

 

 You're a really bad warlock player. Like, really bad. Paladin is a bad match-up for you?....Holy damn, link me your deck. Let me put in 2 defile, 2 hellfire, 2 voidlords, 2 lackey, and bloodreaver. Really pathetic you think paladin is a bad match up for you when i lose against cancerous fucking warlock cubelock all the time when i queue up with token paladin. tl;dr you'rea  disgrace to warlock unions. 

Quote from Aegis24 >>

 

Quote from Zilean >>

 

Quote from Aegis24 >>

These new changes should be interesting.  It might make it less grindy for a change, but there's still a glaring issue on the ladder and that's constantly facing the same class over and over.  It becomes tedious and annoying...and let's face it it's almost never a good class matchup for you.  Today I face 3 paladins in a row followed by 6 priests in a row and then 2 more paladins...in a warlock meta which is actually a good matchup for me.  The breakdown was 3 murloc paladins (bad patchup), 4 spitefull priests (bad matchup), 2 big priests (good matchup), and a token paladin (bad matchup).  This kind of stuff is just obnoxious and makes the game less fun.  If they made it so you didn't face the same class twice in a row that might alleviate some of the grindiness and maybe even add a little variety to the ladder.  After all a lot of decent decks suffer from one or 2 bad matchups and are completely pushed out because of the possibility of facing them over and over.  Take that away and we might see new stuff climbing the ladder.  Just a thought, anyone have a better idea?

 

 You're a really bad warlock player. Like, really bad. Paladin is a bad match-up for you?....Holy damn, link me your deck. Let me put in 2 defile, 2 hellfire, 2 voidlords, 2 lackey, and bloodreaver. Really pathetic you think paladin is a bad match up for you when i lose against cancerous fucking warlock cubelock all the time when i queue up with token paladin. tl;dr you'rea  disgrace to warlock unions. 

 Dude, what the hell are you talking about?  The only warlock deck I run is Discard Handlock and thats ONLY in casual.  I'm missing like 4-5 key cards to run a competitive warlock deck.  Where on earth did you get the idea I play warlock from that thread?

Yeah to clarify before anyone else loses their mind, I run secret mage on the ladder

Most of these 'Change the ladder' types of threads seem to keep coming back to the fact that you see the same decks on ladder all of the time because players play the most consistent decks instead of casual decks on ladder. 

So in other words, players who want to change ladder are simply trying to force the natural effects of a min/maxxed meta from not occurring (which isn't possible).

Quote from Yandai >>

Your "Warlock-Meta" doesnt even exist. Priest and Paladin are played exactely as much and Mage is only a very small amount of percentages behind those three.

A 50% chance doesnt mean heads-tales-heads-tales... the human brain likes to think of it like that and people tend to see conspiracies and what not because of that in almost everything. But that doesnt mean that fixing the chances would lessen the grind or improve the player experience. It only would generate new problems.

Quote from Aegis24 >>

 

Quote from Yandai >>

Your "Warlock-Meta" doesnt even exist. Priest and Paladin are played exactely as much and Mage is only a very small amount of percentages behind those three.

A 50% chance doesnt mean heads-tales-heads-tales... the human brain likes to think of it like that and people tend to see conspiracies and what not because of that in almost everything. But that doesnt mean that fixing the chances would lessen the grind or improve the player experience. It only would generate new problems.

What is with everyone completely zooming past the main point here.  regardless your analogy is flawed.  It's not 50/50.  it's 1/7 (7 competitive classes) and since we're talking 6 games in a row thats 1/(7^6) or 1/117649 assuming all classes are equally played.  That's as close as I can get without blizzard's actual data.  My point was there's no good reason I should face the same class 6 times in a row, regardless of who that class is.

Quote from Aegis24 >>

 

Quote from Yandai >>

Your "Warlock-Meta" doesnt even exist. Priest and Paladin are played exactely as much and Mage is only a very small amount of percentages behind those three.

A 50% chance doesnt mean heads-tales-heads-tales... the human brain likes to think of it like that and people tend to see conspiracies and what not because of that in almost everything. But that doesnt mean that fixing the chances would lessen the grind or improve the player experience. It only would generate new problems.

What is with everyone completely zooming past the main point here.  regardless your analogy is flawed.  It's not 50/50.  it's 1/7 (7 competitive classes) and since we're talking 6 games in a row thats 1/(7^6) or 1/117649 assuming all classes are equally played.  That's as close as I can get without blizzard's actual data.  My point was there's no good reason I should face the same class 6 times in a row, regardless of who that class is.

I would say no, because I dont think that the problem is that you face same class all the time. I dont disagree that their is some repetative in the game, because you think that you face same deck all the time, but the problem is in card design. And not so much, that there aren’t ptr or they are imbalanced. We just need to see shifting cards to standard more oftenly. Either as patches or HoF or something like that. Actually this is the purpose of expansion, but maybe every month should be some patch with minor changes and it will be much more fresh, than some restrictions. 

OP has a point.  I play mage, I get all hard counter decks.  I switch to warlock, all hard counter decks.  I play rogue, all hard counter decks.  I have several decks that are strong on ge ladder, but they all weak to something, and that something is all I face when I switch decks.  I played 10 games in a row as a Paladin, and faced all warlocks.  So I switched to mill rogue as it counters warlock (a sign I’m adjusting to this micrometa bullshit people talk about). Then I face all aggro paladin, the one counter to my deck 5x in a row.  

Its obnoxious, and to say Blizzard isn’t doing this is obsurd.