Are Aggro decks looked down upon this much in other card games like Magic or Yu Gi Oh? I played Magic very briefly but never heard anyone talk this negatively about fast decks. Why does the hearthstone community look down on them this much if other game don't (or maybe they do)?
The reason why it isn't much of an issue there is the Blocking system in both of those games. In Magic a player can choose to spend his creatures to block the attack of the opponents. In Yu-Gi-Oh you must be on a clear board to hit their face(card texts change this). This isn't in Hearthstone which is why people don't like it as much.
I barely know how MTG works,though there aren't any Aggro Decks in Yugioh (There are OTK decks but 90% of those either suck or have half of their deck killed by the banlist).... Anyway I'm not even sure there's some kind of game anymore,all you see are floodgates everywhere,the game has basically become "Draw "x" (i.e. Beloved MST) or concede" cause you can't just do anything and it'll just get worse when the next booster pack gets here....
Sorry I went a lil' off topic there but I'm pretty pissed that stupid Konami ruined one of my fav games.....
no OP, other ccgs actually made themselves to actually be competitive, blizzard has made hearthstone as a cash cow. If hearthstone didnt have the blizzard name behind it, we would not even be talking about it right now.
Hearthstone would probably be much better off in ranked if they randomly picked three "sets" and make all others banned each month.
Let's say January 2016 would be basic, Naxxramas and TGT.
Essentially each month this would be a random formula.
Basic Set
One Adventure Set
One Expansion Set
Done.
And how would that change anything?Someone would come up with the faster/best deck everyone would copy that deck and since the card pool is smaller you would have less cards to counter that deck. Banning sets is the solution to things like every deck running Piloted Shredder in the 4 mana slot, not aggro. BTW I don't think that aggro is a big issue anymore.
Actually the problem is not that there are aggro decks, even not that many people play it. The problem is that there is aggro for like 90% since hearthstone came out. I mean maybe just 1 or 2 weeks a year, there will be some kind of control meta but all in all, it is going to be aggro after all. This is what is just riddiculous and until blizzard fixes this (I mean come on, even in World of Warcraft, if there are crazy classes for an expansion, people still make mixed class groups) we will never have the fun this game should have. I also find it a bit disappointed that people playing aggro decks don't get annoyed after a coupöe of days. What is their goal? To hit legend? Then what? It is just disappointing and my motivation just goes until rank 5 every week (then I stop because I don't like to play against a million cancer shamans which is actually even worse than cancer hunter).
I haven't played Magic regularly since 6th Edition, but I played a lot of it up till then, and the decks that got most of the hate were truly non-interactive control decks like Stasis-Lock, which would literally keep you from playing any cards and locking all those on the board in the tap position. At least in my groups. I only ever played local tournaments, so maybe my sample is skewed, but around here Aggro was fine. Aggro decks like White Weenie Rush and Bad Moon decks were considered fine.
I also played an unholy amount of the Game of Thrones LLG, and aggro decks in that game were just laughed at as they didn't work well at all. Again, the most hated deck types were hard control that didn't let you play cards at all, or would clear your board immediately afterwards every turn.
The general rule of thumb for both was that if you get to play with your cards, you're going to leave a game happier than if you didn't. Which is part of why I don't understand all the aggro hate. They let you play your cards, they just force you to play on their terms. Which, coincidentally, is exactly what control does, but control does it via removal, whereas aggro does it with constant pressure.
"Red deck wins" is the generic name for fast red decks in Magic, and it is almost always close to top tier deck in Standard. It either wins by creatures or burn (or both). Sometimes it dominates, other times it is just second tier. The deck always keeps the rest of the format on its toes, but it does not really bother people.
The key difference is side boarding. There is usually some form of life gain or "red hosers" (cards that are specifically aimed at red cards), which you can put into the sideboard. So if you are getting annoyed by RDW, you have an anti-red sideboard suite. As a result, there is no need to get exasperated. If Hearthstone had a best-of-3 format with sideboards, face Hunter would be a tier 4 deck; it would only have a chance if everyone dropped the anti-aggro cards from their sideboards.
(In a casual setting, RDW is sometimes frowned upon, that at least was my impression from Magic Online. I haven't played Magic Online in a long time, however.)
In Magic, what people hate is discard and land destruction. (Land destruction eliminates the mana base of a player, so they end up with a hand full of cards that they cannot play.) In both cases, they prevent the player from playing their cards. (As noted above, stasis decks that locked down a player are similar.)
They had more powerful discard and land destruction I earlier sets, but the negative reaction has meant that they keep those strategies on a short leash.
as you can see, other card games nip things that players dont like in the bud, unfortunately since this is a money grab, they cant nip face decks in the bud, because its what most people are going to play.
As someone who doesn't play Yugioh: Every deck in Yugioh is an aggro deck. Games ending on turn 3 is nothing out of the ordinary. People complaining about Aggro here wouldn't survive in that OTK fiesta.
Are Aggro decks looked down upon this much in other card games like Magic or Yu Gi Oh? I played Magic very briefly but never heard anyone talk this negatively about fast decks. Why does the hearthstone community look down on them this much if other game don't (or maybe they do)?
I don't think aggro decks are looked down on. As you can see by playing ladder there's tonnes of them out there. There's just a vocal minority on the forums who bitch and moan about everything. For everyone who hates aggro there's probably another who hates control warrior, freezemage or paladin muloc decks.
If anything, people were far more annoyed at the ramp and control decks in MTG when I was playing. G/W devotion was obscene when Fate Reforged came out. 55 minute game 1s often ending in ties.
Deck archetypes weren't necessarily frowned upon due to sideboarding, something Hearthstone is severely lacking, although ladder games would be long as hell if we allowed sideboards. A single best of 3 in MTG was around 50 mins. Your average ladder game takes 11 mins.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Howdy! [cardimg=gold ]Card Name[ /cardimg] (no space)
If Hearthstone had a best-of-3 format with sideboards, face Hunter would be a tier 4 deck; it would only have a chance if everyone dropped the anti-aggro cards from their sideboards.
HS has a best of 3-5-7 match with different decks and no sideboards. Face hunter is already considered a worthless deck to bring in to tournaments. Hunters have been going midrange with some hybrids for nearly a year now consistently and have failed to control the meta since TGT at least. Until JUST recently, the fastest deck around was Tempo mage and that was far from a consistent contender. Shaman has finally showed up as an aggro/hybrid deck but right now it's being considered a 'druid' type deck: with the right cards it beats anything but it dies horribly if not. Last time I heard that 'praise' from druid it faded from the tournament meta soon afterwards. I'm not sure shaman isn't going to get the same fate.
Aggro is NOT a top deck in HS and usually never is. Combo and Control are the top decks, with Midrange following up since it counters Control. Aggro is popular because Ranked doesn't reward win rates. It rewards games played. You are better off playing more games and losing more than playing slower games and winning more. Thus an aggro deck is a slightly above average win rate will outperform a control deck with a great win rate on ranked. That and control is expnesive while aggro is cheap.
HS general public needs a tournament mode to warrant a best-of series with multiple decks. It doesn't need sideboards to stop aggro, nor does it need a revamp or a blocking system.
HS doesn't make aggro dominate. RANKED makes aggro dominate.
If Hearthstone had a best-of-3 format with sideboards, face Hunter would be a tier 4 deck; it would only have a chance if everyone dropped the anti-aggro cards from their sideboards.
HS has a best of 3-5-7 match with different decks and no sideboards. Face hunter is already considered a worthless deck to bring in to tournaments. Hunters have been going midrange with some hybrids for nearly a year now consistently and have failed to control the meta since TGT at least. Until JUST recently, the fastest deck around was Tempo mage and that was far from a consistent contender. Shaman has finally showed up as an aggro/hybrid deck but right now it's being considered a 'druid' type deck: with the right cards it beats anything but it dies horribly if not. Last time I heard that 'praise' from druid it faded from the tournament meta soon afterwards. I'm not sure shaman isn't going to get the same fate.
Aggro is NOT a top deck in HS and usually never is. Combo and Control are the top decks, with Midrange following up since it counters Control. Aggro is popular because Ranked doesn't reward win rates. It rewards games played. You are better off playing more games and losing more than playing slower games and winning more. Thus an aggro deck is a slightly above average win rate will outperform a control deck with a great win rate on ranked. That and control is expnesive while aggro is cheap.
HS general public needs a tournament mode to warrant a best-of series with multiple decks. It doesn't need sideboards to stop aggro, nor does it need a revamp or a blocking system.
HS doesn't make aggro dominate. RANKED makes aggro dominate.
unless you are willing to concede how flawed this game already is, tournament mode shouldnt need you to play more than 1 deck.
In MTG, decks rotate every 3 months due to new expansions, and beyond that the set rotate every half a year (?) or so. Therefore, there is no dominant deck that will remain in the meta for too long.
Plus, with the amount of counterspells, out of turn interactions, and removals, aggro decks can hardly keep up with most midrange and control decks.
Also, when u lose in MTG, u can easily blame mana screw and chuck it aside as bad luck.
Another reason is that MTG is mainly dominated by the paper version, which means less games played overall, so you don't feel that u are playing a lot of the same decks. In HS, games happen so fast that you are able to play over 20 games in a day, so the repetitiveness is more apparent.
I wonder if it has something to do with the sheer quantity of games you play in hearthstone compared to other card games. In hearthstone you can play for an hour and squeeze 10+ games in. if you run into a ton of aggro decks and keep getting beat, it can feel rough. The in person aspect of the other games mentioned slows things down so unless you play a ton, you'll probably not get that sense of repetitiveness.
Blizzard made hearthstone too simple, they tried to make it easy thinking it would be a casual game and it's one of the biggest games in the competitive scene. They didn't realize that by giving all the power to the attacker (i.e. the attacker decides what trades into what) they made the game much more aggro centered. That's why there are some games where you stabilize and get board control and you feel you're in that "winning position" and a guy just plays chargers for two turns and you lose, I think that's what frustrates players the most.
The netdecking also makes the game not that fun for some people, after running into the same hunter deck for 5 matches and getting BM'd every single time people just get angry. Again because Hearthstone is too simple, there isn't a lot of space for "fun and crazy decks". As someone who loves deckbuilding with some different things in MTG, this is something that this game lacks the most for me. If you aren't running an "optimized" list, you're more likely to get steamrolled.
"Red deck wins" is the generic name for fast red decks in Magic, and it is almost always close to top tier deck in Standard. It either wins by creatures or burn (or both). Sometimes it dominates, other times it is just second tier. The deck always keeps the rest of the format on its toes, but it does not really bother people.
The key difference is side boarding. There is usually some form of life gain or "red hosers" (cards that are specifically aimed at red cards), which you can put into the sideboard. So if you are getting annoyed by RDW, you have an anti-red sideboard suite. As a result, there is no need to get exasperated. If Hearthstone had a best-of-3 format with sideboards, face Hunter would be a tier 4 deck; it would only have a chance if everyone dropped the anti-aggro cards from their sideboards.
(In a casual setting, RDW is sometimes frowned upon, that at least was my impression from Magic Online. I haven't played Magic Online in a long time, however.)
I think every form of variety is good to the meta... So why going so hard against aggro... I hate loosing against a face hunter, but I do enjoy beating them even more :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My mother was a Murlock, so what ?
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Are Aggro decks looked down upon this much in other card games like Magic or Yu Gi Oh? I played Magic very briefly but never heard anyone talk this negatively about fast decks. Why does the hearthstone community look down on them this much if other game don't (or maybe they do)?
The reason why it isn't much of an issue there is the Blocking system in both of those games. In Magic a player can choose to spend his creatures to block the attack of the opponents. In Yu-Gi-Oh you must be on a clear board to hit their face(card texts change this). This isn't in Hearthstone which is why people don't like it as much.
I barely know how MTG works,though there aren't any Aggro Decks in Yugioh (There are OTK decks but 90% of those either suck or have half of their deck killed by the banlist).... Anyway I'm not even sure there's some kind of game anymore,all you see are floodgates everywhere,the game has basically become "Draw "x" (i.e. Beloved MST) or concede" cause you can't just do anything and it'll just get worse when the next booster pack gets here....
Sorry I went a lil' off topic there but I'm pretty pissed that stupid Konami ruined one of my fav games.....
"この 先は 暗い 夜道 だけが も 知らない それでも信じて 進むんだ 星が その道 を 少し でも 照らしてくをるのを"
Hearthstone would probably be much better off in ranked if they randomly picked three "sets" and make all others banned each month.
Let's say January 2016 would be basic, Naxxramas and TGT.
Essentially each month this would be a random formula.
Basic Set
One Adventure Set
One Expansion Set
Done.
no OP, other ccgs actually made themselves to actually be competitive, blizzard has made hearthstone as a cash cow. If hearthstone didnt have the blizzard name behind it, we would not even be talking about it right now.
Banning sets is the solution to things like every deck running Piloted Shredder in the 4 mana slot, not aggro.
BTW I don't think that aggro is a big issue anymore.
Actually the problem is not that there are aggro decks, even not that many people play it. The problem is that there is aggro for like 90% since hearthstone came out. I mean maybe just 1 or 2 weeks a year, there will be some kind of control meta but all in all, it is going to be aggro after all. This is what is just riddiculous and until blizzard fixes this (I mean come on, even in World of Warcraft, if there are crazy classes for an expansion, people still make mixed class groups) we will never have the fun this game should have. I also find it a bit disappointed that people playing aggro decks don't get annoyed after a coupöe of days. What is their goal? To hit legend? Then what? It is just disappointing and my motivation just goes until rank 5 every week (then I stop because I don't like to play against a million cancer shamans which is actually even worse than cancer hunter).
Just remember the good times!
I haven't played Magic regularly since 6th Edition, but I played a lot of it up till then, and the decks that got most of the hate were truly non-interactive control decks like Stasis-Lock, which would literally keep you from playing any cards and locking all those on the board in the tap position. At least in my groups. I only ever played local tournaments, so maybe my sample is skewed, but around here Aggro was fine. Aggro decks like White Weenie Rush and Bad Moon decks were considered fine.
I also played an unholy amount of the Game of Thrones LLG, and aggro decks in that game were just laughed at as they didn't work well at all. Again, the most hated deck types were hard control that didn't let you play cards at all, or would clear your board immediately afterwards every turn.
The general rule of thumb for both was that if you get to play with your cards, you're going to leave a game happier than if you didn't. Which is part of why I don't understand all the aggro hate. They let you play your cards, they just force you to play on their terms. Which, coincidentally, is exactly what control does, but control does it via removal, whereas aggro does it with constant pressure.
Trying Real Hard To Keep Hunter Relevant
"Red deck wins" is the generic name for fast red decks in Magic, and it is almost always close to top tier deck in Standard. It either wins by creatures or burn (or both). Sometimes it dominates, other times it is just second tier. The deck always keeps the rest of the format on its toes, but it does not really bother people.
The key difference is side boarding. There is usually some form of life gain or "red hosers" (cards that are specifically aimed at red cards), which you can put into the sideboard. So if you are getting annoyed by RDW, you have an anti-red sideboard suite. As a result, there is no need to get exasperated. If Hearthstone had a best-of-3 format with sideboards, face Hunter would be a tier 4 deck; it would only have a chance if everyone dropped the anti-aggro cards from their sideboards.
(In a casual setting, RDW is sometimes frowned upon, that at least was my impression from Magic Online. I haven't played Magic Online in a long time, however.)
In Magic, what people hate is discard and land destruction. (Land destruction eliminates the mana base of a player, so they end up with a hand full of cards that they cannot play.) In both cases, they prevent the player from playing their cards. (As noted above, stasis decks that locked down a player are similar.)
They had more powerful discard and land destruction I earlier sets, but the negative reaction has meant that they keep those strategies on a short leash.
as you can see, other card games nip things that players dont like in the bud, unfortunately since this is a money grab, they cant nip face decks in the bud, because its what most people are going to play.
As someone who doesn't play Yugioh: Every deck in Yugioh is an aggro deck. Games ending on turn 3 is nothing out of the ordinary. People complaining about Aggro here wouldn't survive in that OTK fiesta.
Make the Card: The biggest thread on the site!
My mandibles which are capable of pressing down and tearing, my talons which are known to intercept and hold.
If anything, people were far more annoyed at the ramp and control decks in MTG when I was playing. G/W devotion was obscene when Fate Reforged came out. 55 minute game 1s often ending in ties.
Deck archetypes weren't necessarily frowned upon due to sideboarding, something Hearthstone is severely lacking, although ladder games would be long as hell if we allowed sideboards. A single best of 3 in MTG was around 50 mins. Your average ladder game takes 11 mins.
Howdy! [cardimg=gold ]Card Name[ /cardimg] (no space)
Hey, how's it going?
What's poppin,' player?
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
In MTG, decks rotate every 3 months due to new expansions, and beyond that the set rotate every half a year (?) or so. Therefore, there is no dominant deck that will remain in the meta for too long.
Plus, with the amount of counterspells, out of turn interactions, and removals, aggro decks can hardly keep up with most midrange and control decks.
Also, when u lose in MTG, u can easily blame mana screw and chuck it aside as bad luck.
Another reason is that MTG is mainly dominated by the paper version, which means less games played overall, so you don't feel that u are playing a lot of the same decks. In HS, games happen so fast that you are able to play over 20 games in a day, so the repetitiveness is more apparent.
"Put your face in the light!" - Tirion Fordring
I wonder if it has something to do with the sheer quantity of games you play in hearthstone compared to other card games. In hearthstone you can play for an hour and squeeze 10+ games in. if you run into a ton of aggro decks and keep getting beat, it can feel rough. The in person aspect of the other games mentioned slows things down so unless you play a ton, you'll probably not get that sense of repetitiveness.
Blizzard made hearthstone too simple, they tried to make it easy thinking it would be a casual game and it's one of the biggest games in the competitive scene. They didn't realize that by giving all the power to the attacker (i.e. the attacker decides what trades into what) they made the game much more aggro centered. That's why there are some games where you stabilize and get board control and you feel you're in that "winning position" and a guy just plays chargers for two turns and you lose, I think that's what frustrates players the most.
The netdecking also makes the game not that fun for some people, after running into the same hunter deck for 5 matches and getting BM'd every single time people just get angry. Again because Hearthstone is too simple, there isn't a lot of space for "fun and crazy decks". As someone who loves deckbuilding with some different things in MTG, this is something that this game lacks the most for me. If you aren't running an "optimized" list, you're more likely to get steamrolled.
My mother was a Murlock, so what ?