When Renathal was released I was really excited about the gameplay possibilities it opened up to. I approached it as a new possible blend of Reno/Singleton decks, where you were offered new challaneges about building up a 40 cards list. After a little while though everyone (that is, those 5/6 deckbuilders out there, subsequently followed by the thousands netdeckers) figured out shockingly tight (IMO) decklists and that was it.
So the sight of Renathal at the beginning of each game led me to the memory of those horrible days back in Witchwood etc, where you knew from the get-go exactly the deck you were about to go against, when Baku or Genn profiles showed up.
Right now it's like this:
Renathal hunter? > Quest Hunter
Renathal Priest? > Quest priest
Renathal rogue? > Thief rogue
Renathal DH? > Relics DH
Renathal Druid? > Dentahrius/Topior bulls**t
Renathal mage? > Ping skeleton mage
Renathal warlock? > Curse warlock
Rentathal warrior, paladin, shaman? > Thief rogue
Such a wasted opportunity. But hey, I guess it's this game's community. It'll never change. I just think it's really sad.
I think you wanted to say that once the meta is settled, you are able to tell which deck lists you are playing against.
You don't need Genn/Baku, Renathal or a crystal ball for that. It happens every expansion, in every game and every other context, that superior things are adopted and end up in dominant positions. It's a fundamental element of evolution.
It requires a mutation, nerf/buffs or a new expansion to disturb the equilibrium and start the struggle for top dog again. Until it settles again.
No, I meant that whereas Baku and Genn decklists were kind of forced to become extremely tight (due to the two cards' restrictions), Renathal seemed to be naturally headed for the opposite direction, promoting more variety and new horizons in deckbuilding. Yet it didn't.
The problem with Baku/Genn was they were making the gameplay based on the hero power and made the deck completely reliant on it. There were no diversity.
Renethal might be in a lot of decks too but it doesn't hurt the variety actually. They are still their own decks with a certain theme, they just used renethal to have 40 cards or 40 health.
The funny thing is that relic dh is better without renathal.
and what everyone forgets: there are a lot of people (like myself) who don’t really care if the deck is better without renathal. They (we) just like playing 9 more cards for fun.
renathal is (outside of high legend) played in a lot of decks just because its fun to play with 40 cards.
If you don't believe me search for a particular archetype on HS replay and see how many unique decks there are with similar win rates. You'll find there's loads. But they basically play the same, have the same win conditions and the same core cards but swap out one non-essential OK card for another non-essential OK card, so their win rates are similar too.
Ok, so we're talking about decks being different purely on a cosmetic level, right? So you're proving my point. Against each archetype, when you loose, you always get obliterated by the same cards, never by the unexpected inclusion. So it basically feels like you're constantly loosing to the same deck. I mean, I get it, many of those have even multiple win conditions. Take Skeleton mage, for example: you may die to the hands of Denathrius, to those of Keltuzad, to Mordresh's or to magister's hero power. But we're talking about the core cards of the archetype. That particular archetype is meant to be able to nuke you from multiple angles, all made possible by the ability to include 9 more cards into your deck. There's no chance you get (intentionally) lethaled by some odd pyroblast inclusion, right?
I mean, don't get me wrong, this applies even way more to non-renathal decks. Beast hunter, imp warlock, miracle rogue, aggro druid, murloc shaman, naga priest... And don't get me started on the few remnants of the sunken city meta (mech mage, mech paladin) or even pirate warrior... All rigourosly locked and sealed, set on autopilot.
Dude that's just natural, people figure out which cards perform well and which ones just flop, and once people know this they just use those cards and then it seems like every deck is the same.
But it does promote more variety. If Renathal didn't exist then so many of those decks wouldn't even be playable. It's not like Reno decks had a lot of variety back in the day either, they were pretty much identical aside from a couple of tech cards. However they did play out very differently from game to game because you drew very different cards every game.
Renathal hasn't been like Genn and Baku. Maybe he's not fine or good for the game, but whatever he does, it isn't in the same way that Genn and Baku did it. The Stormwind Quests have been somewhat, but what made Genn and Baku really different was the way it wasn't just a settled meta with their decks, but very predictable turns, due to the strength of the hero powers. The Odd/Even decks always played their early turns in roughly the same ways, with very little variety. Quests wound up being quite similar, with the immense power of the rewards to just win games, and clear fastest ways to accomplish the rewards.
More than Renathal there are a few other causes. We now have a much faster-ossifying metagame. Analytics have made nearly every deck into functionally a netdeck. The power inflation has crowded out room for variety, as decks need to be razor-honed to compete with the high power level of recent Hearthstone. Decks crystalize into their best forms more quickly, with less originality and experimentation. The move towards active win conditions and away from grind has exacerbated the problems of a polarized meta and decks hard-countering others.
Meanwhile, the biggest thing Renathal has changed isn't increasing the turn-by-turn predictability of decks, but a massive sledgehammer to aggro. I know for years folks have been hoping that the upcomming expansion would finally be the one to kill aggro, but now that it's happened, perhaps it hasn't been a good thing. I kinda didn't think it'd happen, but all it took was +10 health for 0 mana.
I wouldn't say Renathal has created a Genn/Baku situation. The root cause of this problem is quite different. Both the odd/even cards were created as a new archetype and Blizz thought the restrictions would make them niche, but what ended up happening is it became impossible for blizz to print new cards for the next year because they constantly had to balance around how gamebreaking a few of them were (odd paladin especially).
The reason Renathal is becoming mass played is because of how bad power creep has gotten and how renathal is the only defense from a lot of the mass damage currently in game, especially early aggro. I think one of the major things that they could do is print GOOD taunt cards. It feels like taunt minions have fallen behind the creep, and everything except taunt minions are getting broken effects. More, better taunt minions would be able to absorb more damage, giving less reason for renathal.
I guess I'm not following your argument. I thought this thread was about how he was bad for the game, but you seem to be concluding here that the problems you've identified happen way less in Renethal decks.
So you DO like Renethal you just wish people would play more home-brew decks that aren't variations of strong archetypes? Murloc Demon Hunter, beast Paladin, big spell warrior, relic priest, that sort of thing?
Yeah, I'm not sure either. Now it reads as if the issue are archetypes? Like yes, decks build around archetypes with the goal of winning the game?
Like even the types you mentioned would come down to "I lost to the same Murloc package!" and I don't see what the solution would be. Autocomplete kitchen sink?
If you don't believe me search for a particular archetype on HS replay and see how many unique decks there are with similar win rates. You'll find there's loads. But they basically play the same, have the same win conditions and the same core cards but swap out one non-essential OK card for another non-essential OK card, so their win rates are similar too.
Ok, so we're talking about decks being different purely on a cosmetic level, right? So you're proving my point. Against each archetype, when you loose, you always get obliterated by the same cards, never by the unexpected inclusion. So it basically feels like you're constantly loosing to the same deck. I mean, I get it, many of those have even multiple win conditions. Take Skeleton mage, for example: you may die to the hands of Denathrius, to those of Keltuzad, to Mordresh's or to magister's hero power. But we're talking about the core cards of the archetype. That particular archetype is meant to be able to nuke you from multiple angles, all made possible by the ability to include 9 more cards into your deck. There's no chance you get (intentionally) lethaled by some odd pyroblast inclusion, right?
I mean, don't get me wrong, this applies even way more to non-renathal decks. Beast hunter, imp warlock, miracle rogue, aggro druid, murloc shaman, naga priest... And don't get me started on the few remnants of the sunken city meta (mech mage, mech paladin) or even pirate warrior... All rigourosly locked and sealed, set on autopilot.
I'm sorry, but this little rant you have going against Rental makes no sense.
You won't see people Pyro lasting your face because it's not optimal.
It doesn't matter if you have a 10/20/30/40...100 card deck. If players have 9 extra slots of cards then they will add the top 9 optimal cards. The math has been mostly done, Pyroblast ist not in that top 9.
The problem is the community, I saw this in world of warcraft too. People rather optimize the numbers and play excel spreadsheet simulator instead of actually caring about the game.
I play him in some decks because I'm vehemently against aggro. So that extra health and the ability to cram in more control cards is worth it.
Genn a bit and Baku especially made a guaranteed sustained power spike at the beginning of the game. Renathal gives you a bit more health at the expense of a less consistent deck. Many of the top decks right now skip renathal, which means they opt to eat a turn 0 pyroblast for better consistency, when matched against renathal. I think OP is just salty, meta is diverse, but the design and nerf philosophy has been disappointing. Especially since we are in a phase where aggro is premium because we’ve nerfed everything that isn’t a cheap minion or buff spell.
If you don't believe me search for a particular archetype on HS replay and see how many unique decks there are with similar win rates. You'll find there's loads. But they basically play the same, have the same win conditions and the same core cards but swap out one non-essential OK card for another non-essential OK card, so their win rates are similar too.
Ok, so we're talking about decks being different purely on a cosmetic level, right? So you're proving my point. Against each archetype, when you loose, you always get obliterated by the same cards, never by the unexpected inclusion. So it basically feels like you're constantly loosing to the same deck. I mean, I get it, many of those have even multiple win conditions. Take Skeleton mage, for example: you may die to the hands of Denathrius, to those of Keltuzad, to Mordresh's or to magister's hero power. But we're talking about the core cards of the archetype. That particular archetype is meant to be able to nuke you from multiple angles, all made possible by the ability to include 9 more cards into your deck. There's no chance you get (intentionally) lethaled by some odd pyroblast inclusion, right?
I mean, don't get me wrong, this applies even way more to non-renathal decks. Beast hunter, imp warlock, miracle rogue, aggro druid, murloc shaman, naga priest... And don't get me started on the few remnants of the sunken city meta (mech mage, mech paladin) or even pirate warrior... All rigourosly locked and sealed, set on autopilot.
The problem is the community, I saw this in world of warcraft too. People rather optimize the numbers and play excel spreadsheet simulator instead of actually caring about the game.
The thing that wonders me the most about Renathal, which is imo way to overlooked, is the fact that it raised effectively the cost of some of the futurely upcoming decks which benefits from +10 cards by +/- 25% for the next 2 years. GG Blizz
edit: Shadowlands wasnt only bad for WoW how it seems.
Renathal is no new Baku and Genn. Renathal is not even aggro killer (Bless Priest, Naga Priest, Face Hunter, Implock all in tier 1). It's just another heavily overused neutral card that makes naive control players think they have a chance to survive. And that's why we have Hunter as the best class in standard right now with no other being even close.
No, I meant that whereas Baku and Genn decklists were kind of forced to become extremely tight (due to the two cards' restrictions), Renathal seemed to be naturally headed for the opposite direction, promoting more variety and new horizons in deckbuilding. Yet it didn't.
Every deck you mentioned can be played with/without Renathal. That's in itself one of the most extreme deck variations that you can have for an archetype. Also, most of the decks are worse options than what the class has to offer.
I guess they can just buff him so hard that every deck is a Renathal deck. Your problem would be solved then
I think Renethal is actually a good card. In a lot of cases, adding an extra 10 cards ruins a deck because you are less likely to draw into the pieces you need. I think it's a fair trade off for 10 extra health.
Definitely not anywhere near as oppressive as "odd/even" decks were. They completely dominated for the entire time they were in the game. They didn't leave any room for new decks because they were simply the most powerful option.
I don't think Renethal is even in the same ballpark.
When Renathal was released I was really excited about the gameplay possibilities it opened up to. I approached it as a new possible blend of Reno/Singleton decks, where you were offered new challaneges about building up a 40 cards list. After a little while though everyone (that is, those 5/6 deckbuilders out there, subsequently followed by the thousands netdeckers) figured out shockingly tight (IMO) decklists and that was it.
So the sight of Renathal at the beginning of each game led me to the memory of those horrible days back in Witchwood etc, where you knew from the get-go exactly the deck you were about to go against, when Baku or Genn profiles showed up.
Right now it's like this:
Renathal hunter? > Quest Hunter
Renathal Priest? > Quest priest
Renathal rogue? > Thief rogue
Renathal DH? > Relics DH
Renathal Druid? > Dentahrius/Topior bulls**t
Renathal mage? > Ping skeleton mage
Renathal warlock? > Curse warlock
Rentathal warrior, paladin, shaman? > Thief rogue
Such a wasted opportunity. But hey, I guess it's this game's community. It'll never change. I just think it's really sad.
I think you wanted to say that once the meta is settled, you are able to tell which deck lists you are playing against.
You don't need Genn/Baku, Renathal or a crystal ball for that. It happens every expansion, in every game and every other context, that superior things are adopted and end up in dominant positions. It's a fundamental element of evolution.
It requires a mutation, nerf/buffs or a new expansion to disturb the equilibrium and start the struggle for top dog again. Until it settles again.
No, I meant that whereas Baku and Genn decklists were kind of forced to become extremely tight (due to the two cards' restrictions), Renathal seemed to be naturally headed for the opposite direction, promoting more variety and new horizons in deckbuilding. Yet it didn't.
The problem with Baku/Genn was they were making the gameplay based on the hero power and made the deck completely reliant on it. There were no diversity.
Renethal might be in a lot of decks too but it doesn't hurt the variety actually. They are still their own decks with a certain theme, they just used renethal to have 40 cards or 40 health.
Are you serious? Are you seeing a tonne of variations in the mentioned decks??? We must be playing an entirely different game, I guess, then...
Oh yeah. Right. Plenty of fun, crazy, low-tier memey decks in there. Yeah. Definitely. Sorry. My bad.
The funny thing is that relic dh is better without renathal.
and what everyone forgets: there are a lot of people (like myself) who don’t really care if the deck is better without renathal. They (we) just like playing 9 more cards for fun.
renathal is (outside of high legend) played in a lot of decks just because its fun to play with 40 cards.
Ok, so we're talking about decks being different purely on a cosmetic level, right? So you're proving my point. Against each archetype, when you loose, you always get obliterated by the same cards, never by the unexpected inclusion. So it basically feels like you're constantly loosing to the same deck. I mean, I get it, many of those have even multiple win conditions. Take Skeleton mage, for example: you may die to the hands of Denathrius, to those of Keltuzad, to Mordresh's or to magister's hero power. But we're talking about the core cards of the archetype. That particular archetype is meant to be able to nuke you from multiple angles, all made possible by the ability to include 9 more cards into your deck. There's no chance you get (intentionally) lethaled by some odd pyroblast inclusion, right?
I mean, don't get me wrong, this applies even way more to non-renathal decks. Beast hunter, imp warlock, miracle rogue, aggro druid, murloc shaman, naga priest... And don't get me started on the few remnants of the sunken city meta (mech mage, mech paladin) or even pirate warrior... All rigourosly locked and sealed, set on autopilot.
Dude that's just natural, people figure out which cards perform well and which ones just flop, and once people know this they just use those cards and then it seems like every deck is the same.
But it does promote more variety. If Renathal didn't exist then so many of those decks wouldn't even be playable. It's not like Reno decks had a lot of variety back in the day either, they were pretty much identical aside from a couple of tech cards. However they did play out very differently from game to game because you drew very different cards every game.
Renathal hasn't been like Genn and Baku. Maybe he's not fine or good for the game, but whatever he does, it isn't in the same way that Genn and Baku did it. The Stormwind Quests have been somewhat, but what made Genn and Baku really different was the way it wasn't just a settled meta with their decks, but very predictable turns, due to the strength of the hero powers. The Odd/Even decks always played their early turns in roughly the same ways, with very little variety. Quests wound up being quite similar, with the immense power of the rewards to just win games, and clear fastest ways to accomplish the rewards.
More than Renathal there are a few other causes. We now have a much faster-ossifying metagame. Analytics have made nearly every deck into functionally a netdeck. The power inflation has crowded out room for variety, as decks need to be razor-honed to compete with the high power level of recent Hearthstone. Decks crystalize into their best forms more quickly, with less originality and experimentation. The move towards active win conditions and away from grind has exacerbated the problems of a polarized meta and decks hard-countering others.
Meanwhile, the biggest thing Renathal has changed isn't increasing the turn-by-turn predictability of decks, but a massive sledgehammer to aggro. I know for years folks have been hoping that the upcomming expansion would finally be the one to kill aggro, but now that it's happened, perhaps it hasn't been a good thing. I kinda didn't think it'd happen, but all it took was +10 health for 0 mana.
I wouldn't say Renathal has created a Genn/Baku situation. The root cause of this problem is quite different. Both the odd/even cards were created as a new archetype and Blizz thought the restrictions would make them niche, but what ended up happening is it became impossible for blizz to print new cards for the next year because they constantly had to balance around how gamebreaking a few of them were (odd paladin especially).
The reason Renathal is becoming mass played is because of how bad power creep has gotten and how renathal is the only defense from a lot of the mass damage currently in game, especially early aggro. I think one of the major things that they could do is print GOOD taunt cards. It feels like taunt minions have fallen behind the creep, and everything except taunt minions are getting broken effects. More, better taunt minions would be able to absorb more damage, giving less reason for renathal.
Yeah, I'm not sure either. Now it reads as if the issue are archetypes? Like yes, decks build around archetypes with the goal of winning the game?
Like even the types you mentioned would come down to "I lost to the same Murloc package!" and I don't see what the solution would be. Autocomplete kitchen sink?
I'm sorry, but this little rant you have going against Rental makes no sense.
You won't see people Pyro lasting your face because it's not optimal.
It doesn't matter if you have a 10/20/30/40...100 card deck. If players have 9 extra slots of cards then they will add the top 9 optimal cards. The math has been mostly done, Pyroblast ist not in that top 9.
The problem is the community, I saw this in world of warcraft too. People rather optimize the numbers and play excel spreadsheet simulator instead of actually caring about the game.
I play him in some decks because I'm vehemently against aggro. So that extra health and the ability to cram in more control cards is worth it.
Genn a bit and Baku especially made a guaranteed sustained power spike at the beginning of the game. Renathal gives you a bit more health at the expense of a less consistent deck. Many of the top decks right now skip renathal, which means they opt to eat a turn 0 pyroblast for better consistency, when matched against renathal. I think OP is just salty, meta is diverse, but the design and nerf philosophy has been disappointing. Especially since we are in a phase where aggro is premium because we’ve nerfed everything that isn’t a cheap minion or buff spell.
That. Period.
The thing that wonders me the most about Renathal, which is imo way to overlooked, is the fact that it raised effectively the cost of some of the futurely upcoming decks which benefits from +10 cards by +/- 25% for the next 2 years. GG Blizz
edit: Shadowlands wasnt only bad for WoW how it seems.
Renathal is no new Baku and Genn. Renathal is not even aggro killer (Bless Priest, Naga Priest, Face Hunter, Implock all in tier 1). It's just another heavily overused neutral card that makes naive control players think they have a chance to survive. And that's why we have Hunter as the best class in standard right now with no other being even close.
Every deck you mentioned can be played with/without Renathal. That's in itself one of the most extreme deck variations that you can have for an archetype. Also, most of the decks are worse options than what the class has to offer.
I guess they can just buff him so hard that every deck is a Renathal deck. Your problem would be solved then
I think Renethal is actually a good card. In a lot of cases, adding an extra 10 cards ruins a deck because you are less likely to draw into the pieces you need. I think it's a fair trade off for 10 extra health.
Definitely not anywhere near as oppressive as "odd/even" decks were. They completely dominated for the entire time they were in the game. They didn't leave any room for new decks because they were simply the most powerful option.
I don't think Renethal is even in the same ballpark.
I play big beast reno hunter in wild with like 20 legendaries. The winrate might not be the best but it is fun and wins more then expected.