Hearthpwn

Quote from emkarab >>

Well, was ignoring context of complaints about DK just to show some sarcasm very productive?

 As I demonstrated earlier, I didn't ignore anything.
But In any case, if you do have a discussable point to make, I'll be here.

Quote from emkarab >>

Whatever, I hope today's patch will enable more diversity as I want to puke seeing all the content creators going only DK and DH all the time.

 Kibler and Trump have done a large amount of content recently that doesn't involve DKs, in case you are looking for something to watch.
And Mark McKz is always worth a watch for something different to the normal meta and for ideas.

Quote from emkarab >>

 Well sure, but you said people are complaining about too much diversity, which was just silly and ignoring context of meta.

 Well, no, what I actually said was:

Quote from Scorpyon >>

I will admit this is the first time I have seen someone complaining that there is too MUCH diversity in a class and that a class can play any of the three archetypes.

 I was very specifically talking about a single class and complaints about it, not about complaints about the meta as a whole or whether the meta was diverse. I don't believe it was ignoring anything since it related to exactly what was said by the original poster, (as I later pointed out).

But was there a specific point you were actually trying to make, or is this simply arguing for argument's sake? (Which I get, but it's not very productive). I only ask since I'd prefer not to engage in simple quibbling personally.

Quote from ZoReee >>

Quote from Scorpyon >>

You talk about that as though it's somehow a bad thing? 
It's the opposite, though. You shouldn't normally be able to know exactly what deck you are going to face just by the opponent's class. It requires players to actually develop and use the skill of adapting to the deck they are playing.
Unfortunately for a long time, we never really had that optimum goal of having to learn what deck the opponent is playing until recently. There have been brief glimpses of it now and then, like say with Druid, where you weren't sure if was Aggro Druid or a long term Control deck. And those make for greater gameplay.

Otherwise we are back to the stale metas of Classic Hearthstone where classes like Huner (for example) were only ever to play Face decks, etc). Deathknight is hopefully the start of multiple classes that can really diversify their viable deck options and make the game much more enjoyable overall.

 Out of the respect of you moderating this forum I wont go further than saying this... That you think for a second the meta is healthy is actually moronic or you just don't play hearthstone. I'd like to assume its the ladder but lets be honest, the meta is always shit, but this time its shit with an extra bit of whip cream on it. This game is already dying like a brick, it has no where near the participation or ingenuity it did half a decade ago, its just kind of sad to watch now. you'd think getting to legend would be fun, but throwing fun decks at 30 death knight matches because they're all chasing their legend rank for the month is beyond the stupidest crap ever, it forces you to intentionally pick against them or pick something that has half a chance against them. yes there are other decks that "work" but there are no other decks that flat out win. This is literally secret pally levels of stupidity from grand tournament, turn 6 drop christmas tree and win game.

 Aside from the fact I didn't talk about the state or health of this current meta once, since we've degraded to insulting language, that's where I leave this conversation. 
Thanks.

Quote from emkarab >>

This is NOT DIVERSE meta. Period.

I don't believe anyone said this was a "diverse meta", only that the Deathknight CLASS had diversity in it's deck options - which it clearly does, going by the OP's comment. There's a pretty big difference in those two things. 
In fact, I even went so far as to be specific in this point:

Quote from Scorpyon >>

Deathknight is hopefully the start of multiple classes that can really diversify their viable deck options and make the game much more enjoyable overall.

You talk about that as though it's somehow a bad thing? 
It's the opposite, though. You shouldn't normally be able to know exactly what deck you are going to face just by the opponent's class. It requires players to actually develop and use the skill of adapting to the deck they are playing.
Unfortunately for a long time, we never really had that optimum goal of having to learn what deck the opponent is playing until recently. There have been brief glimpses of it now and then, like say with Druid, where you weren't sure if was Aggro Druid or a long term Control deck. And those make for greater gameplay.

Otherwise we are back to the stale metas of Classic Hearthstone where classes like Huner (for example) were only ever to play Face decks, etc). Deathknight is hopefully the start of multiple classes that can really diversify their viable deck options and make the game much more enjoyable overall.

Quote from emkarab >>

Quote from Scorpyon >>

I will admit this is the first time I have seen someone complaining that there is too MUCH diversity in a class and that a class can play any of the three archetypes.
Considering it's something the community has been asking for for years, there is definitely a measure of irony here. 

I must admit it is the next level of blindness to see this as a complaining about diversity.

 Hmmm... "next level blindness"?

Quote from uluth >>

...I do take issue in the fact that they have three prevalent meta decks - two of which are tier 1 - that can either be aggro, control, or combo.  

Just going to leave that there then. 
That's pretty much a clear complaint about a class having too much diversity. 

Quote from ZoReee >>

Quote from Scorpyon >>

I will admit this is the first time I have seen someone complaining that there is too MUCH diversity in a class and that a class can play any of the three archetypes.
Considering it's something the community has been asking for for years, there is definitely a measure of irony here. 

 Yes variety in Multiple viable archtypes in multiple viable classes, There should not be a 50% match rate against a single class

 It's possible I misunderstand your meaning, but the absolute goal of balance in Hearthstone is for there to be a 50% win-chance between any and all classes. That would represent the pinnacle of game balance.

I believe Mark McKz showcased this OTK combo some while back. You might be able to look it up on YouTube to get an idea of how it is pulled off. I don't have the link to hand, but a search would probably do it.

I will admit this is the first time I have seen someone complaining that there is too MUCH diversity in a class and that a class can play any of the three archetypes.
Considering it's something the community has been asking for for years, there is definitely a measure of irony here. 

If you are salty, we have a thread to post on about that. 
Locked.

I think you know our rules about resurrecting old threads by now, especially one nearly two years old.
By all means create a new discussion on this if you wish to discuss the issue.

Locked.

Please dont create pointless threads of this nature, especially ones clearly without any intent for creating a useful and productive discussion.

Locked.

Quote from sanchogrande >>

As others have pointed out, it’s the discover. I’d love to see that mechanic retired since it is often problematic. But it would be enough to just change some discover cards to “discover a card that did not start in your deck”.

Alternatively, the could just try to price discover more appropriately. A two drop with discover should be a 1/1. Make people suffer a tempo loss in exchange for the ability to get another Patchwerk. Make people consider trade offs in deck building.

 I think there is a key and notable difference between discovering a COPY of a card in your deck, to discovering A CARD in your deck (which pulls that specific card) and also discovering a card that could be "any" card of a given type- as in, a blood rune card, etc.

These are not all equal in strength or value, in my opinion - and I personally dont think the discover mechanic is that big a deal when compared to a number of other powerful or problematic things in the game at present.

These are all fair and reasonable points, and in an ideal world we would be able to (perhaps) specify the types of decks we woud like to see more / less in the game as a whole (to encourage more diverse gameplay).

However, in a game as competitive as Hearthstone, many players naturally want to win - since winning provides the requisite dopamine burst in the brain / Winning makes you feel good - and the shortest route to that feeling is to find a method or deck that works consistently. This is why people look for good decks. It's not about being right or wrong, it's just the psychological nature of it. 

Lastly, (and in addition to the above), some people simply dont find as much fun and enjoyment in deck building, or find it frustrating, or even just suck at it. And that's also ok. 
As for me personally, I do like to homebrew it up now and then mostly due to the aforementioned boredom I get playing the same deck for too long. But that's just me. Everyone is different, and everyone has to find their fun somehow. :-) 

Please refrain from direct personal attacks on other users. This sort of thing is not tolerated here. 
Play nice, please. 
Thank you.