Hearthpwn

Quote from user-26847294 >>

Hearthstone favors aggro compared to other TCGs. The fact that the attacker chooses the defender makes you able to continously go face, then end games quickly. Combined with the fact that aggro decks are usually cheap and rather simple to play makes them attactive to especially player with limited resources like f2p players and players with minimal time to spend on the game. 

Do you think or reread what you write?  'Hearthstone favors aggro compared to other TCGs' If that is the case it is a developers card design choice, NOT game design. Wonder why in the world you even think that they print cards just at random, with no reason at all, as long as it is question-aggressive and let the community sort out the decks. Do you really think developers are that stupid? 

The fact that HS is a question game doesn't explain why answers are deliberately insufficient. That is also a card design choice. It also doesn't explain why questions should be enhanced by Burn, Buffs, Chargers, Summon, Weapons and Discover cards (BBCSWD).

That HS is a question game is just an interpretation for its aggressive state. You could also argue that it needs more balance between questions and answers.

The top of meta is decided by the player base. People discover what is strong, then play that. Then people discover effective counters and starts to play that.

Who said that? Some game developers on youtube? If I say that the meta is not decided but executed, that is not a conspiracy theory but a reasonable assumption that you and all the fanboys alike might not favor, but point to card designers thinking what kind of meta they want to be constructed for various beneficial reasons (identifying possible nerfs, enhancing pack selling, marketing etc.) Do you really think designers are that stupid that they really don't assess or want to know how that meta will develop up front and don't want to steer that?

Worth noting is also the fact that the meta has not always been dominated by aggro (Druid and Cubelock meta).

Right on, true but other meta share the same polarized win condition mechanic: Kill you as fast as possible vs. If you fail you are dead by default.

Is it really so difficult to slow down the game, raise, the skill floor, diversify win conditions, let skill decided the game?

 It has absolutly nothing to do with card design at all. You could remove all aggressive tools and people would still play the fastsest deck, it makes grinding more efficient.

I don't believe the devs are dumb at all nor do I think they just print cards at random. Assuming they did would be blatantly ignorant. We see new mechanics and synergies every expansion which also looks to implement existing cards to be as effective as possible. That's not just random printing of cards. But fact still stands that an expansion is finished months before it is released meaning that Blizzard doesn't have a "100%-idea" which meta they release it into. I even posted a link earlier explaining this. I don't disagree with the fact that Blizzard needs the meta to benefit them for the very reasons you list and obviously they want to steer towards that meta. In fact I even already said so when we compared Blizzard to Commodus. So I can see you agree with me on that front.

The meta is executed indeed. Executed on a decision made by the players; they want to win. How do you win? Kill your opponent before he kills you; 'as fast as possible' to use your own words. Players discover some decks does this better than others and thus they play those decks. Then some time into an expansion an another effective deck can be discovered by the players which shakes up the meta, this was the case with cubelock. In this meta aggro was less effective due to the defensive tools most of players ran in Cubelock, so it was faster to climb while not playing aggro.

The meta was shaped by the players decision to win and you win by killing your opponent. That is game design. People play whatever they have discoverd to be efficient in the current meta cause, that is the easiest way of winning. So the meta is shaped by the players to best take advantage of the way the game is designed.

You are making this more complicated than it is. 

Edit: On a side note, Blizzard has clearly tuned down the amount of aggression being pushed into the game. Just look at the almost non-existing amount og Charge cards and synergy Blizzard has put in the game resently, while pushing a great amount of rush cards.

Quote from C_A_W >>

Top paladin decks are Odd Paladin, Even Paladin, Uther OTK Paladin. These decks are totally different from each other and share only few cards between each other. None of these decks feel oppressive or bad to lose, OTK paladin can be a little oppressive against Control decks but it's fine. 

So yes, Paladin has a many different decks at tier 1 but these decks are very different and are easily counterable. I don't see any reason to nerf Paladin.  

The reason is potential problem in future if Paladin become OP T5 wont be able to nerf him because Paladin has Odd and Even comptetive decks .

Quote from YourPrivateNightmare >>

another day another lunatic thread.

I wonder if one could program a bot that uaotmatically detects salt based on pattern recognition, because IT'S ALWAYS THE SAME.

 This is not Salt thread its An objective discussion for the game sake but IDIOTS cant see that .

Quote from GrimPaladin >>

You can't expect Blizzard to simply nerf the whole archtype, because if they do, a lot of people will be pissed off, and it's really hard to try to balance it out. Level Up! was a really important card in the deck, so hitting that was still a very good move. Nerfs will come eventually, and if you really hate the deck that much, run a deck that can counter it, but prepare to get run over by anything that isn't Paladin. 

Also stop making these threads. They're totally unnecessary.

 I play a homebrew on Ladder and Odd Paladin is the Least of my concern .......

Quote from Murl0c_Slayer >> 

The reason is potential problem in future if Paladin become OP T5 wont be able to nerf him because Paladin has Odd and Even comptetive decks .

 This is not Salt thread its An objective discussion for the game sake but IDIOTS cant see that .

Honestly I don't see the increased mana cost nerf would be that huge of a issue. It happened before with Call to Arms being increased to 5 mana and it not being ran in odd paladin, but I don't think either decks would want to run cards in the other deck if they were to cost more, with the exception of very few cards like Sunkeeper Tarim. The two decks just have such drastically different playstyles that I do not think that would be a huge issue. Even if there was a card that would be too strong if swapped decks, they can just change other numbers on the cards, such as attack or health.

And yeah, I feel like the original post was a bit salty but now that you expanded your thoughts, I don't see it that way anymore. If anything, the thread was completely hijacked for a while so hopefully it can get back on topic.

Quote from Echo_ >>

Quote from Murl0c_Slayer >> 

The reason is potential problem in future if Paladin become OP T5 wont be able to nerf him because Paladin has Odd and Even comptetive decks .

 This is not Salt thread its An objective discussion for the game sake but IDIOTS cant see that .

Honestly I don't see the increased mana cost nerf would be that huge of a issue. It happened before with Call to Arms being increased to 5 mana and it not being ran in odd paladin, but I don't think either decks would want to run cards in the other deck if they were to cost more, with the exception of very few cards like Sunkeeper Tarim. The two decks just have such drastically different playstyles that I do not think that would be a huge issue. Even if there was a card that would be too strong if swapped decks, they can just change other numbers on the cards, such as attack or health.

And yeah, I feel like the original post was a bit salty but now that you expanded your thoughts, I don't see it that way anymore. If anything, the thread was completely hijacked for a while so hopefully it can get back on topic.

 I appreciate your effort to turn back the thread to original topic ,you look like a kind person and im sorry i only meant (YourPrivateNightmare)  by Idiots because he always wait to attack me with his posts dunno why either he hate me or hes just like that  .

on the topic i have some 2 points  why its bad to have both Odd and Even decks in one class :

1) This situation alone of having Odd and Even Decks limits The Cards Design .

2) If there was a need to Nerf in future it will be difficult . 

Quote from Murl0c_Slayer >>

Quote from Echo_ >>

Quote from Murl0c_Slayer >> 

The reason is potential problem in future if Paladin become OP T5 wont be able to nerf him because Paladin has Odd and Even comptetive decks .

 This is not Salt thread its An objective discussion for the game sake but IDIOTS cant see that .

Honestly I don't see the increased mana cost nerf would be that huge of a issue. It happened before with Call to Arms being increased to 5 mana and it not being ran in odd paladin, but I don't think either decks would want to run cards in the other deck if they were to cost more, with the exception of very few cards like Sunkeeper Tarim. The two decks just have such drastically different playstyles that I do not think that would be a huge issue. Even if there was a card that would be too strong if swapped decks, they can just change other numbers on the cards, such as attack or health.

And yeah, I feel like the original post was a bit salty but now that you expanded your thoughts, I don't see it that way anymore. If anything, the thread was completely hijacked for a while so hopefully it can get back on topic.

 I appreciate your effort to turn back the thread to original topic ,you look like a kind person and im sorry i only meant (YourPrivateNightmare)  by Idiots because he always wait to attack me with his posts dunno why either he hate me or hes just like that  .

 

Most likely because your posts are nonsensical and plain wrong more often than not. It gets really annoying when someone who is this clueless pretends to know how the game works.

Case in point: this very thread; " The only Class that had competitive Odd and Even Decks is Paladin !! and Thats mean Paladin is Immune to any Nerf related to cards mana cost !! "

Because Call to Arms sees so much play in Odd paladin, right?

Because Level Up! sees so much play in Even paladin, right?

Yup, totally immune to mana cost related nerfs guys! 

The reason is potential problem in future if Paladin become OP T5 wont be able to nerf him because Paladin has Odd and Even comptetive decks .

They have nerfed both Odd and Even Paladin in past without affecting the other. I don't see why they can't do similar nerfs in future, if required.