I haven't played HS for like 16 months, comes back, goes from rank 25 to 7 in like 4 days, and now in the past 3 days I've gone from rank 7 to 15, legit losing everything in the world. I've been legend every season I've played.
This one is basically have the best starting hand and a little bit of luck and you win. GG. Literally no skill in this game anymore with all the new cards
This game never had skill anyway. Hitting legend requires time and luck.
Back then it actually mattered which cards you played. Ofc it's luckstone when it comes down to topdecking, but with the new meta, playing priest/warrior/shaman you basically just drop whatever you can from your hand and you win. Literally.
I haven't played HS for like 16 months, comes back, goes from rank 25 to 7 in like 4 days, and now in the past 3 days I've gone from rank 7 to 15, legit losing everything in the world. I've been legend every season I've played.
This one is basically have the best starting hand and a little bit of luck and you win. GG. Literally no skill in this game anymore with all the new cards
Maybe it's because you haven't played for 16 months? Sorry if that sounds stupid, I'm just brainstorming.
Took me about 2 days of playing to know all the new cards. I used to play top100 legend back in first few seasons, so no I'm not stupid. I know how to counter decks. I mostly play antimeta shaman, reno mage or reno lock right now, and the only way you win this game is if you don't have a useless trash hand, and reno/any clear is drawable
I am enjoying this meta a lot more than the midrange shaman meta in Karazhan. At least it does not want to make me punch myself. It is all a matter of opinion. Some people will agree with you, some people won't. I remember undertaker hunter after naxx and that meta sucked! This meta is not that bad as far as I am concerned.
Just because you can't reach legend anymore does not mean the meta is trash. There are multiple classes with top tier decks and all with very similar win rates, now compare that to secret pally (A deck that was so easy to play people got to legend with bots) or right after WotOG when Aggro shaman was in a tier of its own. The meta is not that bad.
If Hunter and Paladin has at least 1 viable deck each, this would be the best meta ever.
If we're speaking of diversity of decks yes, mechanic and health-wise fuck no. Entire mechanics and archetypes made irrelevant, aggro never been so strong, only Reno viable as legit control deck... terrible.
Aggro has been this strong. But I am talking about archetypes: you have aggro, midrange, combo and control all viable and seen at high legend. Only reno? Well, control Shaman is viable and it's not a Reno deck. But what's wrong iwth Reno control? You can play Warlock, Mage or Priest - all viable, especially Lock and Mage.
Meta is great in terms of class diversification- don't often see the same class 5 times straight (although of course it's always possible *looking at shaman players*) and you see a range of 6-7 classes.
HOWEVER this meta sucks in terms of match ups. Anything you play can auto-lose to a bad match up even if you draw well.
I like a meta where most match ups are 50-50 or close to it. Then no matter who you face you at least have a chance at winning.
I would say it's tied for the worst meta ever. Undertaker, grim patron, and mysterious challenger were just as lacking in skill level as pirates are now.
As there is no OP Deck it should genereally be harder for some players to reach Legend. Overall the meta is very healthy and only the true Legends with lots of time will reach top, as skill and luck have huge impact (How often u play against counters/How good u actually are). For me the next set can wait a while before it gets released. But there will always be someone complaining :C
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I haven't played HS for like 16 months, comes back, goes from rank 25 to 7 in like 4 days, and now in the past 3 days I've gone from rank 7 to 15, legit losing everything in the world. I've been legend every season I've played.
This one is basically have the best starting hand and a little bit of luck and you win. GG. Literally no skill in this game anymore with all the new cards
This game never had skill anyway. Hitting legend requires time and luck.
Valar Morghulis
I wouldn't say its the worst meta. It might be the toughest meta though.
I am enjoying this meta a lot more than the midrange shaman meta in Karazhan. At least it does not want to make me punch myself. It is all a matter of opinion. Some people will agree with you, some people won't. I remember undertaker hunter after naxx and that meta sucked! This meta is not that bad as far as I am concerned.
Just because you can't reach legend anymore does not mean the meta is trash. There are multiple classes with top tier decks and all with very similar win rates, now compare that to secret pally (A deck that was so easy to play people got to legend with bots) or right after WotOG when Aggro shaman was in a tier of its own. The meta is not that bad.
If Hunter and Paladin has at least 1 viable deck each, this would be the best meta ever.
No, they really don't. Which is why nobody plays them.
According to the dev's Q&A today, there is a unicorn Pally out there with a very succesful winrate.
Aggro has been this strong. But I am talking about archetypes: you have aggro, midrange, combo and control all viable and seen at high legend. Only reno? Well, control Shaman is viable and it's not a Reno deck. But what's wrong iwth Reno control? You can play Warlock, Mage or Priest - all viable, especially Lock and Mage.
Articles I suggest every player reads to improve at the game;
MTG/Hearthstone biases to avoid
Reframing negative Hearthstone experiences to improve at the game
Who's the Beatdown?
Meta is great in terms of class diversification- don't often see the same class 5 times straight (although of course it's always possible *looking at shaman players*) and you see a range of 6-7 classes.
HOWEVER this meta sucks in terms of match ups. Anything you play can auto-lose to a bad match up even if you draw well.
I like a meta where most match ups are 50-50 or close to it. Then no matter who you face you at least have a chance at winning.
Still not sure if I hate Hearthstone...or love it.
I would say it's tied for the worst meta ever. Undertaker, grim patron, and mysterious challenger were just as lacking in skill level as pirates are now.
Another I hate this meta salt thread. You should take this inside, to the salt thread I mean
Articles I suggest every player reads to improve at the game;
MTG/Hearthstone biases to avoid
Reframing negative Hearthstone experiences to improve at the game
Who's the Beatdown?
I started to play after gvg came out, so i never saw pre nerf undertaker, to me patron warrior meta is still the worst experience i had in this game.
need take time to make new pic and signature using the new cards.
As there is no OP Deck it should genereally be harder for some players to reach Legend. Overall the meta is very healthy and only the true Legends with lots of time will reach top, as skill and luck have huge impact (How often u play against counters/How good u actually are). For me the next set can wait a while before it gets released. But there will always be someone complaining :C