Hearthpwn

Quote from TheWamts >>

Quote from Kaladin >>

aggro is boring for anyone but aggro

midrange is boring for anyone but midrange

combo is boring for anyone but combo

Is this meant to be a discussion or just a salt post?

 That's not how midrange works. Midrange entirely relies on two-sided interaction.

Entirely eh?  1-drop on 1, 2-drop on 2, 3-drop on 3....real interactive. 

Rush warrior really

Quote from Isrin22 >>

You face a lot of control decks because they are answers for all these brainless hunter decks. :P

 No they aren't, Deathstalker outvalues any Control deck eventually (except old Kingsbane, but too bad).

You’re welcome. 

Quote from Bluelights >>

Quote from Carfusso >>

Quote from Bluelights >>

Quote from Carfusso >>

Quote from Bluelights >>

Quote from macaco_digital >>

Best feeling in this game is playing a control deck and smash a no brain cancer deck. 

 No, the best feeling is queueing into an Odd Warrior with Exodia Paladin or Exodia Mage

 So you like not playing the game i see,then why are you here,go play some online solitaire

 That's the way to play against the very "interactive Rope -> hero power -> Pass Odd warrior". I think all archtypes are needed for the game to keep a healthy balance. But odd warrior is such a stupidly polarising deck, before hand you know if you are going to win that 40 minute game, just depending on what deck you queue into them. And there is nothing more fun to me than punish that deck for being so passive.

 That's All well and good exept...you're wrong:

Odd Warrior Can (although I admit it's unlikely) lose to any aggro deck through insane draws from the aggro or bad play from him (also rexxar Is a card),you Can Also win/lose vs any kind of (decent) midrange or control deck (Just run skulking geist and you'll see what i mean)

On the other hand ANY true otk/inevitability deck (any exodia,prenerf togwaggle druid,any mecha'thun,prenerf kingsbane/quest rogue and stuff like that) completely destroys control as an archetype (there are exeptions for the more midrangey or burst oriented control decks but that's the only ones) with Little to no counterplay

So now you tell me: what's polarising,what's uninteractive?

 Odd Warrior, data actually showed odd warrior was even more polarising than Quest Rogue, a deck control players were raging about how polarising it is. (Now this was in the boomsday meta before the Giggling Inventor nerf, but I doubt much changed since the meta did not change all to much except that we bow to our Hunter overlords now) 

https://www.vicioussyndicate.com/meta-polarity-and-its-impact-on-hearthstone/

Odd Warrior does not only lose to combo decks about 75% of the time, they lose to anything that isn't an Aggro or Tempo deck more than they win.  All of this while having a similar winrate against a lot of Aggro or Tempo decks, that infinite damage/or game ending OTK's have against them. If these numbers don't scream polarisation then I don't know anymore. This doesn't mean other decks can't be polarising, but it shows Odd Warrior is if not the greatest offender, one of the greatest offenders. 

https://hsreplay.net/archetypes/223/odd-warrior#tab=matchups

Polarisation in turn leads to uninteractiveness. Now I think this is more a feeling people have with decks they just don't like playing against, and in a sense all if not most decks are uninteractive, as in Hearthstone you can do very little to distrubt your opponents gameplan. They just do what their deck is designed to do and win or lose that way. Against Aggro, Odd Warrior will always stack up armour and remove the board when it gets to big after like 5 turns, and aggro will just go face as it is actually the only way to beat them, and Odd Warrior rarely plays something on the board, especially early on. And Combo decks will always just draw their deck against a deck like Odd Warrior, as it simply does not put out too much meaningful pressure. The games that actually show a form of interactivity is decks of archtypes that are either the same or relatively close to eachother. 

 

Quote from Bluelights >>

Quote from Carfusso >>

Quote from Bluelights >>

Quote from Carfusso >>

Quote from Bluelights >>

Quote from macaco_digital >>

Best feeling in this game is playing a control deck and smash a no brain cancer deck. 

 No, the best feeling is queueing into an Odd Warrior with Exodia Paladin or Exodia Mage

 So you like not playing the game i see,then why are you here,go play some online solitaire

 That's the way to play against the very "interactive Rope -> hero power -> Pass Odd warrior". I think all archtypes are needed for the game to keep a healthy balance. But odd warrior is such a stupidly polarising deck, before hand you know if you are going to win that 40 minute game, just depending on what deck you queue into them. And there is nothing more fun to me than punish that deck for being so passive.

 That's All well and good exept...you're wrong:

Odd Warrior Can (although I admit it's unlikely) lose to any aggro deck through insane draws from the aggro or bad play from him (also rexxar Is a card),you Can Also win/lose vs any kind of (decent) midrange or control deck (Just run skulking geist and you'll see what i mean)

On the other hand ANY true otk/inevitability deck (any exodia,prenerf togwaggle druid,any mecha'thun,prenerf kingsbane/quest rogue and stuff like that) completely destroys control as an archetype (there are exeptions for the more midrangey or burst oriented control decks but that's the only ones) with Little to no counterplay

So now you tell me: what's polarising,what's uninteractive?

 Odd Warrior, data actually showed odd warrior was even more polarising than Quest Rogue, a deck control players were raging about how polarising it is. (Now this was in the boomsday meta before the Giggling Inventor nerf, but I doubt much changed since the meta did not change all to much except that we bow to our Hunter overlords now) 

https://www.vicioussyndicate.com/meta-polarity-and-its-impact-on-hearthstone/

Odd Warrior does not only lose to combo decks about 75% of the time, they lose to anything that isn't an Aggro or Tempo deck more than they win.  All of this while having a similar winrate against a lot of Aggro or Tempo decks, that infinite damage/or game ending OTK's have against them. If these numbers don't scream polarisation then I don't know anymore. This doesn't mean other decks can't be polarising, but it shows Odd Warrior is if not the greatest offender, one of the greatest offenders. 

https://hsreplay.net/archetypes/223/odd-warrior#tab=matchups

Polarisation in turn leads to uninteractiveness. Now I think this is more a feeling people have with decks they just don't like playing against, and in a sense all if not most decks are uninteractive, as in Hearthstone you can do very little to distrubt your opponents gameplan. They just do what their deck is designed to do and win or lose that way. Against Aggro, Odd Warrior will always stack up armour and remove the board when it gets to big after like 5 turns, and aggro will just go face as it is actually the only way to beat them, and Odd Warrior rarely plays something on the board, especially early on. And Combo decks will always just draw their deck against a deck like Odd Warrior, as it simply does not put out too much meaningful pressure. The games that actually show a form of interactivity is decks of archtypes that are either the same or relatively close to eachother. 

 Fair enough,still i think it's the lesser of 2 evils,i mean,when i Build a deck i want to play the cards i put in It, All of them, not the First 10 or so i happen to draw,otherwise why were the others in the deck? Therefore having some deck prolongueing the game (WITHOUT going infinite) Is still healthier than decks that win/lose super fast and healthier than others that simply powerdraw and win or get SMORC'd and lose

Quote from Carfusso >>

 Fair enough,still i think it's the lesser of 2 evils,i mean,when i Build a deck i want to play the cards i put in It, All of them, not the First 10 or so i happen to draw,otherwise why were the others in the deck? Therefore having some deck prolongueing the game (WITHOUT going infinite) Is still healthier than decks that win/lose super fast and healthier than others that simply powerdraw and win or get SMORC'd and lose

 Doesn't Powerdraw mean you end up playing all the cards in your deck?