Nope it isn’t. Best example wild copper hunter, was very hard to play and an aggro deck
"Men are stronger than women."
"Nope they aren't. Best example Olga Liashchuk, very strong and a woman"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard, Wild, and Classic player.
Losing to Sire Denathrius makes me not want to play this game anymore. The Sire Denathrius nerf makes me want to play this game again. Losing to Deathrattle Rogue makes me not want to play this game anymore. The Prince Renathal nerf makes me not want to play this game anymore.
I’d say that playing Implock and aggro Druid requires very little skill, especially Implock. There’s no strategy involved, Implock uses the exact same strategy in every game. It doesn’t matter what they play against, which makes me wonder how it can be fun in any way. It’s like playing chess and using the exact same strategy regardless of what the other player does, which an experienced player wouldn’t do. They adapt to the board. Implock requires no adaptation of any sort. It’s ok, but many players who reach legend on Implock wouldn’t be able to beat silver if they had to use a 40 cards deck which requires a more diverse gameplay. It’s ok. Let’s just not pretend that playing a Implock requires deep strategy, because it doesn’t.
Yeah suuure your 40 card minion pile shows what a complex deck is (beast hunter, ramp druid quest priest). Almost all viable decks have a set gameplan and wincon, that’s what makes them viable. Especially aggro mirrors are extremely decision heavy. For sure there are easy aggro decks, but there are also a lot of easy control decks
I’d say that playing Implock and aggro Druid requires very little skill, especially Implock. There’s no strategy involved, Implock uses the exact same strategy in every game. It doesn’t matter what they play against, which makes me wonder how it can be fun in any way. It’s like playing chess and using the exact same strategy regardless of what the other player does, which an experienced player wouldn’t do. They adapt to the board. Implock requires no adaptation of any sort. It’s ok, but many players who reach legend on Implock wouldn’t be able to beat silver if they had to use a 40 cards deck which requires a more diverse gameplay. It’s ok. Let’s just not pretend that playing a Implock requires deep strategy, because it doesn’t.
Yeah suuure your 40 card minion pile shows what a complex deck is (beast hunter, ramp druid quest priest). Almost all viable decks have a set gameplan and wincon, that’s what makes them viable. Especially aggro mirrors are extremely decision heavy. For sure there are easy aggro decks, but there are also a lot of easy control decks
You still dont answer any of the arguments about the complexity of aggro decks may its just that you know that you cant answer you can just hold the argument "long game decks are not complex either" and hope that it holds but not really because no one is saying that one is more complex and the other less complex. People just agre that Aggro decks are in general more easy to pilot.
I think the argument was : “Your opinion is invalid” followed by mock laughter. There’s nothing substantial there.
This being said, I’d say that the more cards you deck holds, the harder it is to pilot since there’s more variety and sticking to a single wincon is harder. I wouldn’t say pulling a ‘Brandon+Denathtrius” is deep strategy either however. It’s about as simple as running Implock. Slightly more complex is running tons of cards with rogue to get an 18 weapon + stealth minions on turn 5. If you do manage to counter attack however, you’ve won. Aggro don’t need to know how to deal with anything besides the early game since it doesn’t get any further than that, so yes, they are aimed at people who would struggle in longer games.
Edit: Quest Priest requires more skill than Implock as you can’t just systematically vomit spells randomly to finish the quest asap.
I’d say that playing Implock and aggro Druid requires very little skill, especially Implock. There’s no strategy involved, Implock uses the exact same strategy in every game. It doesn’t matter what they play against, which makes me wonder how it can be fun in any way. It’s like playing chess and using the exact same strategy regardless of what the other player does, which an experienced player wouldn’t do. They adapt to the board. Implock requires no adaptation of any sort. It’s ok, but many players who reach legend on Implock wouldn’t be able to beat silver if they had to use a 40 cards deck which requires a more diverse gameplay. It’s ok. Let’s just not pretend that playing a Implock requires deep strategy, because it doesn’t.
Yeah suuure your 40 card minion pile shows what a complex deck is (beast hunter, ramp druid quest priest). Almost all viable decks have a set gameplan and wincon, that’s what makes them viable. Especially aggro mirrors are extremely decision heavy. For sure there are easy aggro decks, but there are also a lot of easy control decks
You still dont answer any of the arguments about the complexity of aggro decks may its just that you know that you cant answer you can just hold the argument "long game decks are not complex either" and hope that it holds but not really because no one is saying that one is more complex and the other less complex. People just agre that Aggro decks are in general more easy to pilot.
If you need it spelled out: in many aggro decks every decision matters because you lose the game on the spot after a single mistake, especially in aggro mirrors and especially in wild. Maybe not at bronze but at diamond to legend for sure. And an argument does not become valid by claiming that „people just agree“. Just because a deck has a higher curve and plays for a longer game it does not mean that it’s more difficult to play. Wether or not a deck is difficult to play depends on the following: how many mistakes can you make while still being successful? And: How easy is it to make mistakes with the deck? Many aggro decks 1. don’t tolerate mistakes 2. are easy to play to platinum but hard to play to high ranks. The reason for this is that with a shorter game plan and a decent opponent there is no room for mistakes.
While off topic for this thread, I think one of the reasons that aggro decks are considered easier than control relates to the mulligan and the consistency of drawing low mana, playable cards in the early game. A bad mulligan for a control deck can be game losing (being too greedy, mulliganing for the wrong opponent deck style or just getting high cost cards). In contrast an aggro mulligan is nearly alway "get a 1 drop" which is easier to do due to the larger number of 1/2 drops included in the deck (im simplifiying, but you get the picture) and you're often not too concerned with which opponent you're playing against - that probably matters less than your own start (a bad mulligan still kills an aggro deck too - it's just much less likely to happen).
During the game the aggro gameplan is often fairly single minded and it's not really that cruicial which opponent you're playing. While historically aggro had to manage resources and play around board clears, current hearhtstone doesn't punish plays into board clears anywhere near as much (that and the fact that contrary to their name, most board clears do not, in fact, clear a board). Similarly, resources are much easier to come by, so you often don't need to hold things back in the same way as old (most aggro decks have very strong card draw engines now).
On the flip side, I think its really easy to look at an aggro gameplan and think there's nothing to it but to go face. In reality a good aggro player will be thinking about total damage in two or three turns and deciding when to trade and when to go face, knowing which "outs" they have left in the deck.
Finally (and brining it back to this thread), aggro decks can now use Denathrius as a big FU to the control player who has managed to stabilise. Sure, they're given up a slot for a card which can't be played until turn 10, but aggro games in the age of Renethal can easily stretch into this territory without running out of steam (look at imp-lock - multiple instant boards, multiple buffs etc.).
While off topic for this thread, I think one of the reasons that aggro decks are considered easier than control relates to the mulligan and the consistency of drawing low mana, playable cards in the early game. A bad mulligan for a control deck can be game losing (being too greedy, mulliganing for the wrong opponent deck style or just getting high cost cards). In contrast an aggro mulligan is nearly alway "get a 1 drop" which is easier to do due to the larger number of 1/2 drops included in the deck (im simplifiying, but you get the picture) and you're often not too concerned with which opponent you're playing against - that probably matters less than your own start (a bad mulligan still kills an aggro deck too - it's just much less likely to happen).
During the game the aggro gameplan is often fairly single minded and it's not really that cruicial which opponent you're playing. While historically aggro had to manage resources and play around board clears, current hearhtstone doesn't punish plays into board clears anywhere near as much (that and the fact that contrary to their name, most board clears do not, in fact, clear a board). Similarly, resources are much easier to come by, so you often don't need to hold things back in the same way as old (most aggro decks have very strong card draw engines now).
On the flip side, I think its really easy to look at an aggro gameplan and think there's nothing to it but to go face. In reality a good aggro player will be thinking about total damage in two or three turns and deciding when to trade and when to go face, knowing which "outs" they have left in the deck.
Finally (and brining it back to this thread), aggro decks can now use Denathrius as a big FU to the control player who has managed to stabilise. Sure, they're given up a slot for a card which can't be played until turn 10, but aggro games in the age of Renethal can easily stretch into this territory without running out of steam (look at imp-lock - multiple instant boards, multiple buffs etc.).
Many aggro decks 1. don’t tolerate mistakes 2. are easy to play to platinum but hard to play to high ranks. The reason for this is that with a shorter game plan and a decent opponent there is no room for mistakes.
Many control decks neither, take Big Priest on standard for example, you draw cards two early? you get both 8/8 on hand and now half of your deck is useless. You has to concede. You play "control mill druid" against mage, you keep all your accelerat spells and cards to bait counter spell: turns out the mage was actually mecha and now you will lose on turn 5. We can keep going with the examples both on standard, aggro decks have more safe gameplans because of denathrius covering their overcommit mistakes. Thats the point of the "aggro stuff" in this Thread that you are just avoiding because...you play wild and aggro is supposed to be hard in wild because of infinite healing weapon rogue and turn 4 big priest? - In Standard the most powerful decks are aggro and the ones with most play-rate are ALSO aggro. So regardless of how "not easy to play" aggro (zoo with some late game tools most of them) decks are on Standard they are obviusly the big winners of the format. Pure Long Game decks have really a HARD time dealing with all the free value of every single card.
Many aggro decks 1. don’t tolerate mistakes 2. are easy to play to platinum but hard to play to high ranks. The reason for this is that with a shorter game plan and a decent opponent there is no room for mistakes.
Many control decks neither, take Big Priest on standard for example, you draw cards two early? you get both 8/8 on hand and now half of your deck is useless. You has to concede. You play "control mill druid" against mage, you keep all your accelerat spells and cards to bait counter spell: turns out the mage was actually mecha and now you will lose on turn 5. We can keep going with the examples both on standard, aggro decks have more safe gameplans because of denathrius covering their overcommit mistakes. Thats the point of the "aggro stuff" in this Thread that you are just avoiding because...you play wild and aggro is supposed to be hard in wild because of infinite healing weapon rogue and turn 4 big priest? - In Standard the most powerful decks are aggro and the ones with most play-rate are ALSO aggro. So regardless of how "not easy to play" aggro (zoo with some late game tools most of them) decks are on Standard they are obviusly the big winners of the format. Pure Long Game decks have really a HARD time dealing with all the free value of every single card.
the funny thing is that in wild denathrius is way to slow for any aggressive deck. Same for things like the curse imp hybrid stuff, that’s also too slow. Infinite healing weapon isn’t a thing since years (way to slow) and big priest is not a deck it’s a coin flip
While off topic for this thread, I think one of the reasons that aggro decks are considered easier than control relates to the mulligan and the consistency of drawing low mana, playable cards in the early game. A bad mulligan for a control deck can be game losing (being too greedy, mulliganing for the wrong opponent deck style or just getting high cost cards). In contrast an aggro mulligan is nearly alway "get a 1 drop" which is easier to do due to the larger number of 1/2 drops included in the deck (im simplifiying, but you get the picture) and you're often not too concerned with which opponent you're playing against - that probably matters less than your own start (a bad mulligan still kills an aggro deck too - it's just much less likely to happen).
During the game the aggro gameplan is often fairly single minded and it's not really that cruicial which opponent you're playing. While historically aggro had to manage resources and play around board clears, current hearhtstone doesn't punish plays into board clears anywhere near as much (that and the fact that contrary to their name, most board clears do not, in fact, clear a board). Similarly, resources are much easier to come by, so you often don't need to hold things back in the same way as old (most aggro decks have very strong card draw engines now).
On the flip side, I think its really easy to look at an aggro gameplan and think there's nothing to it but to go face. In reality a good aggro player will be thinking about total damage in two or three turns and deciding when to trade and when to go face, knowing which "outs" they have left in the deck.
Finally (and brining it back to this thread), aggro decks can now use Denathrius as a big FU to the control player who has managed to stabilise. Sure, they're given up a slot for a card which can't be played until turn 10, but aggro games in the age of Renethal can easily stretch into this territory without running out of steam (look at imp-lock - multiple instant boards, multiple buffs etc.).
You make the point I am not able to formulate that well. At least in wild you have to play around certain aoes and you do care a lot which aggro deck you face since it decides whether you are the beat down or not
While off topic for this thread, I think one of the reasons that aggro decks are considered easier than control relates to the mulligan and the consistency of drawing low mana, playable cards in the early game. A bad mulligan for a control deck can be game losing (being too greedy, mulliganing for the wrong opponent deck style or just getting high cost cards). In contrast an aggro mulligan is nearly alway "get a 1 drop" which is easier to do due to the larger number of 1/2 drops included in the deck (im simplifiying, but you get the picture) and you're often not too concerned with which opponent you're playing against - that probably matters less than your own start (a bad mulligan still kills an aggro deck too - it's just much less likely to happen).
During the game the aggro gameplan is often fairly single minded and it's not really that cruicial which opponent you're playing. While historically aggro had to manage resources and play around board clears, current hearhtstone doesn't punish plays into board clears anywhere near as much (that and the fact that contrary to their name, most board clears do not, in fact, clear a board). Similarly, resources are much easier to come by, so you often don't need to hold things back in the same way as old (most aggro decks have very strong card draw engines now).
On the flip side, I think its really easy to look at an aggro gameplan and think there's nothing to it but to go face. In reality a good aggro player will be thinking about total damage in two or three turns and deciding when to trade and when to go face, knowing which "outs" they have left in the deck.
Finally (and brining it back to this thread), aggro decks can now use Denathrius as a big FU to the control player who has managed to stabilise. Sure, they're given up a slot for a card which can't be played until turn 10, but aggro games in the age of Renethal can easily stretch into this territory without running out of steam (look at imp-lock - multiple instant boards, multiple buffs etc.).
You make the point I am not able to formulate that well. At least in wild you have to play around certain aoes and you do care a lot which aggro deck you face since it decides whether you are the beat down or not
i think the problem a lot of people have, at least based on my own experience is against decks like implock. you go face every turn pretty much, because once you lose board, you have multiple aoes and a ton of damage through curses that the opponent cant really prevent or interact with as your outs. also super efficient card draw makes it hard to run them out of resources.
People in this thread is talking about S T A N D A R D not Wild, we get the idea everything is harder to play in wild (because everything is super broken in wildand decks dont work as they normally do because its Wild).
But them againt thats exactly the reason why Wild is not a good example of how the decks should work or anything at all. Thats is why a lot of players avoid wild even when they can stick with cards of the past they like. Because most of them become irrelevant or go into weird decks that you dont want to pilot. Can we go back to the topic? Because no one is telling something about how gross is the card that can nuke you from 30 to 0 on turn 10 just for playing on curve, go face most of the time and keep the board clear enough to dont die.
People in this thread is talking about S T A N D A R D not Wild, we get the idea everything is harder to play in wild (because everything is super broken in wildand decks dont work as they normally do because its Wild).
But them againt thats exactly the reason why Wild is not a good example of how the decks should work or anything at all. Thats is why a lot of players avoid wild even when they can stick with cards of the past they like. Because most of them become irrelevant or go into weird decks that you dont want to pilot. Can we go back to the topic? Because no one is telling something about how gross is the card that can nuke you from 30 to 0 on turn 10 just for playing on curve, go face most of the time and keep the board clear enough to dont die.
The card isn’t gross. Standard is gross because it’s slow enough to make minion pile decks viable and not offering any kind of lethality besides sire. That’s the main problem why so many games come down to denathrius.
as a side note: decks do work as they should in wild. They don’t work in standard as intended because otherwise it’s not understandable why a 10 mana card sees play in aggro or why a slow package of DOT curses sees play in aggro. That’s something new that wasn’t there before. Normally aggro decks cap out around 5 mana +/- 1
“You make the point I am not able to formulate that well. ” If you can’t formulate your arguments well, that’s in you, please do avoid comments like “since I have to spell it out for you” and “olol” comments, it’s up to you to develop your points in a convincing and eloquent fashion, not your readers. Just provide your argument and leave the nasty undertone, it really doesn’t do much to support your rationale and only ends up making you come across as a bit of a cunt.
To be fair, I’d say Implock is a special case in the aggroverse which makes it especially aggravating to face as it’s got almost everything:
Imps for aggro.
Curses for aoe and removal
card draw.
Denathtrius if the aggro fails
Aggro Druid doesn’t have time to run Sire and it doesn’t have efficient card draw, so when you’re done dealing with the initial wave or two, that’s it. In that sense, it’s a fair deck to face since it has a shortcoming and a downfall. Implock is relentless.
Damage that go face is something that a slippery slope for card games like this one and should have major limitations. Bran+Denathtrius is one egregious instance. Once DK kicks in and the game start revolving about sacrificing minions, people will start to come around and Sire will get nerfed eventually.
“You make the point I am not able to formulate that well. ” If you can’t formulate your arguments well, that’s in you, please do avoid comments like “since I have to spell it out for you” and “olol” comments, it’s up to you to develop your points in a convincing and eloquent fashion, not your readers. Just provide your argument and leave the nasty undertone, it really doesn’t do much to support your rationale and only ends up making you come across as a bit of a cunt.
To be fair, I’d say Implock is a special case in the aggroverse which makes it especially aggravating to face as it’s got almost everything:
Imps for aggro.
Curses for aoe and removal
card draw.
Denathtrius if the aggro fails
Aggro Druid doesn’t have time to run Sire and it doesn’t have efficient card draw, so when you’re done dealing with the initial wave or two, that’s it. In that sense, it’s a fair deck to face since it has a shortcoming and a downfall. Implock is relentless.
Damage that go face is something that a slippery slope for card games like this one and should have major limitations. Bran+Denathtrius is one egregious instance. Once DK kicks in and the game start revolving about sacrificing minions, people will start to come around and Sire will get nerfed eventually.
Hmm i get your points in the beginning, but there is no reason to be extra polite when people claim things like aggro=stupid, control player=superior person. Since that is offensive on its own.
That’s something new that wasn’t there before. Normally aggro decks cap out around 5 mana +/- 1
Ah...aggro still does that i starting to see why you dont get the problem here. The problem is not that aggro plays Sire its that they CAN put Sire in the deck, you know why? because they have 2 mana summon 3 or 4 1/1, 2 mana 1/3 that becomes a 5/3, a location that transfor any minion in a 7/7. They have a "tech" card that its a 3/4 add 2 damage to your opp hand that scales. Those are not slow cards those are too fast cards in a meta were the best AoE in the game that is not on a Mage deck is 5 mana destro cards with 3 attack, sometimes destroy cards with 6 or less attack. You leave a big minion on board? too bad i will pay other 2 mana to get another 4 imps, play other curse, buff all my demons +2/+2 - "I guess you should stick with mage, slow player"
"oh you still manage to clear that? guess i will resummon my imps with a +2/+2 and put a 6/6 on the board" - "YOU STILL MANAGE TO CLEAN THAT AFTeR TAKING aNOTHER BIG HIT? guess now that is turn 10 i will play my 10 mana dealt 40 damage to the face gg wp!"
And just to make it clear that last part is the problem. Wild have waaay worse and more stupidly unbalance decks on the top ranks. There is too little people in wild high ranks that when you start to climb you will find yourself with the only tryhards that keep playing 3 broken meta decks there. So in that sense there is not a better envoirment in wild right now is just that people dont play Wild enough to complain about that. When Wild was super popular people was asking for nerf every 3 threads and stuff like that.
That’s something new that wasn’t there before. Normally aggro decks cap out around 5 mana +/- 1
Ah...aggro still does that i starting to see why you dont get the problem here. The problem is not that aggro plays Sire its that they CAN put Sire in the deck, you know why? because they have 2 mana summon 3 or 4 1/1, 2 mana 1/3 that becomes a 5/3, a location that transfor any minion in a 7/7. They have a "tech" card that its a 3/4 add 2 damage to your opp hand that scales. Those are not slow cards those are too fast cards in a meta were the best AoE in the game that is not on a Mage deck is 5 mana destro cards with 3 attack, sometimes destroy cards with 6 or less attack. You leave a big minion on board? too bad i will pay other 2 mana to get another 4 imps, play other curse, buff all my demons +2/+2 - "I guess you should stick with mage, slow player"
"oh you still manage to clear that? guess i will resummon my imps with a +2/+2 and put a 6/6 on the board" - "YOU STILL MANAGE TO CLEAN THAT AFTeR TAKING aNOTHER BIG HIT? guess now that is turn 10 i will play my 10 mana dealt 40 damage to the face gg wp!"
And just to make it clear that last part is the problem. Wild have waaay worse and more stupidly unbalance decks on the top ranks. There is too little people in wild high ranks that when you start to climb you will find yourself with the only tryhards that keep playing 3 broken meta decks there. So in that sense there is not a better envoirment in wild right now is just that people dont play Wild enough to complain about that. When Wild was super popular people was asking for nerf every 3 threads and stuff like that.
No you don’t get the problem here: it’s not because of too good cards that aggro runs sire and curses, it’s because of a lack of good aggro cards.
I found a response (sort of) commenting Sire by the dev team:
”Let’s address the most notable exclusion from this patch - the Brann/Kael’thas/Denathrius combo. These three Neutral legendaries have been very effective across multiple classes and are already causing some frustration among players.
These cards are very much on our radar, and I think the odds that one or more of these cards eventually gets changed is high. That said, we felt it was premature to nerf marquee cards from the new expansion which are largely accomplishing their goals (they’re exciting, and they’re ending games). That said, we’re worried about the speed at which these cards are closing out games, and the play-against frustration that is clearly present here. We’re going to wait and see how they do in the new meta before making changes.”
Underlined for emphasis. My takeaway is that they’re aware of the frustration involved but, you know, it’s their MARQUEE cards… Seems like the driving force here is marketing, not dealing with “play-against frustration”.
”Hmm i get your points in the beginning, but there is no reason to be extra polite when people claim things like aggro=stupid, control player=superior person. Since that is offensive on its own.”
Only, what I said is that aggro decks were beginner decks. Being a beginner doesn’t mean being stupid from my take on things. I do think playing a 40 card deck requires more skill as it involves dealing with all stages of the game then playing a 30 cards aggro deck like Implock. You have smart people playing aggro decks and you also have people who wouldn’t be able to win in a deck which doesn’t involve rushing your opponent asap due to their inexperience. That’s my opinion. It really can’t be disproven, that’s something that you can either agree or disagree with.
Yeah, that the right way to put it Zizka. No one is taking shoots against no one for playing whatever they like to play. We are against a card that breaks the balance of the meta because its a too fastplan B thats really hard to play against and, in most cases, impossible.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
"Men are stronger than women."
"Nope they aren't. Best example Olga Liashchuk, very strong and a woman"
Standard, Wild, and Classic player.Losing to Sire Denathrius makes me not want to play this game anymore.The Sire Denathrius nerf makes me want to play this game again.
Losing to Deathrattle Rogue makes me not want to play this game anymore.
The Prince Renathal nerf makes me not want to play this game anymore.
Yeah suuure your 40 card minion pile shows what a complex deck is (beast hunter, ramp druid quest priest). Almost all viable decks have a set gameplan and wincon, that’s what makes them viable. Especially aggro mirrors are extremely decision heavy. For sure there are easy aggro decks, but there are also a lot of easy control decks
You still dont answer any of the arguments about the complexity of aggro decks may its just that you know that you cant answer you can just hold the argument "long game decks are not complex either" and hope that it holds but not really because no one is saying that one is more complex and the other less complex. People just agre that Aggro decks are in general more easy to pilot.
I think the argument was : “Your opinion is invalid” followed by mock laughter. There’s nothing substantial there.
This being said, I’d say that the more cards you deck holds, the harder it is to pilot since there’s more variety and sticking to a single wincon is harder.
I wouldn’t say pulling a ‘Brandon+Denathtrius” is deep strategy either however. It’s about as simple as running Implock. Slightly more complex is running tons of cards with rogue to get an 18 weapon + stealth minions on turn 5. If you do manage to counter attack however, you’ve won. Aggro don’t need to know how to deal with anything besides the early game since it doesn’t get any further than that, so yes, they are aimed at people who would struggle in longer games.
Edit: Quest Priest requires more skill than Implock as you can’t just systematically vomit spells randomly to finish the quest asap.
If you need it spelled out: in many aggro decks every decision matters because you lose the game on the spot after a single mistake, especially in aggro mirrors and especially in wild. Maybe not at bronze but at diamond to legend for sure. And an argument does not become valid by claiming that „people just agree“. Just because a deck has a higher curve and plays for a longer game it does not mean that it’s more difficult to play. Wether or not a deck is difficult to play depends on the following: how many mistakes can you make while still being successful? And: How easy is it to make mistakes with the deck?
Many aggro decks 1. don’t tolerate mistakes 2. are easy to play to platinum but hard to play to high ranks. The reason for this is that with a shorter game plan and a decent opponent there is no room for mistakes.
While off topic for this thread, I think one of the reasons that aggro decks are considered easier than control relates to the mulligan and the consistency of drawing low mana, playable cards in the early game. A bad mulligan for a control deck can be game losing (being too greedy, mulliganing for the wrong opponent deck style or just getting high cost cards). In contrast an aggro mulligan is nearly alway "get a 1 drop" which is easier to do due to the larger number of 1/2 drops included in the deck (im simplifiying, but you get the picture) and you're often not too concerned with which opponent you're playing against - that probably matters less than your own start (a bad mulligan still kills an aggro deck too - it's just much less likely to happen).
During the game the aggro gameplan is often fairly single minded and it's not really that cruicial which opponent you're playing. While historically aggro had to manage resources and play around board clears, current hearhtstone doesn't punish plays into board clears anywhere near as much (that and the fact that contrary to their name, most board clears do not, in fact, clear a board). Similarly, resources are much easier to come by, so you often don't need to hold things back in the same way as old (most aggro decks have very strong card draw engines now).
On the flip side, I think its really easy to look at an aggro gameplan and think there's nothing to it but to go face. In reality a good aggro player will be thinking about total damage in two or three turns and deciding when to trade and when to go face, knowing which "outs" they have left in the deck.
Finally (and brining it back to this thread), aggro decks can now use Denathrius as a big FU to the control player who has managed to stabilise. Sure, they're given up a slot for a card which can't be played until turn 10, but aggro games in the age of Renethal can easily stretch into this territory without running out of steam (look at imp-lock - multiple instant boards, multiple buffs etc.).
Finally a reasonable take.
Many control decks neither, take Big Priest on standard for example, you draw cards two early? you get both 8/8 on hand and now half of your deck is useless. You has to concede. You play "control mill druid" against mage, you keep all your accelerat spells and cards to bait counter spell: turns out the mage was actually mecha and now you will lose on turn 5. We can keep going with the examples both on standard, aggro decks have more safe gameplans because of denathrius covering their overcommit mistakes. Thats the point of the "aggro stuff" in this Thread that you are just avoiding because...you play wild and aggro is supposed to be hard in wild because of infinite healing weapon rogue and turn 4 big priest? - In Standard the most powerful decks are aggro and the ones with most play-rate are ALSO aggro. So regardless of how "not easy to play" aggro (zoo with some late game tools most of them) decks are on Standard they are obviusly the big winners of the format. Pure Long Game decks have really a HARD time dealing with all the free value of every single card.
You make the point I am not able to formulate that well.
At least in wild you have to play around certain aoes and you do care a lot which aggro deck you face since it decides whether you are the beat down or not
i think the problem a lot of people have, at least based on my own experience is against decks like implock. you go face every turn pretty much, because once you lose board, you have multiple aoes and a ton of damage through curses that the opponent cant really prevent or interact with as your outs. also super efficient card draw makes it hard to run them out of resources.
People in this thread is talking about S T A N D A R D not Wild, we get the idea everything is harder to play in wild (because everything is super broken in wild and decks dont work as they normally do because its Wild).
But them againt thats exactly the reason why Wild is not a good example of how the decks should work or anything at all. Thats is why a lot of players avoid wild even when they can stick with cards of the past they like. Because most of them become irrelevant or go into weird decks that you dont want to pilot. Can we go back to the topic? Because no one is telling something about how gross is the card that can nuke you from 30 to 0 on turn 10 just for playing on curve, go face most of the time and keep the board clear enough to dont die.
The card isn’t gross. Standard is gross because it’s slow enough to make minion pile decks viable and not offering any kind of lethality besides sire. That’s the main problem why so many games come down to denathrius.
as a side note: decks do work as they should in wild. They don’t work in standard as intended because otherwise it’s not understandable why a 10 mana card sees play in aggro or why a slow package of DOT curses sees play in aggro. That’s something new that wasn’t there before. Normally aggro decks cap out around 5 mana +/- 1
And people at least for the last 10 or so posts weren’t talking about a special format but about aggro/control in general
“You make the point I am not able to formulate that well. ”
If you can’t formulate your arguments well, that’s in you, please do avoid comments like “since I have to spell it out for you” and “olol” comments, it’s up to you to develop your points in a convincing and eloquent fashion, not your readers. Just provide your argument and leave the nasty undertone, it really doesn’t do much to support your rationale and only ends up making you come across as a bit of a cunt.
To be fair, I’d say Implock is a special case in the aggroverse which makes it especially aggravating to face as it’s got almost everything:
Aggro Druid doesn’t have time to run Sire and it doesn’t have efficient card draw, so when you’re done dealing with the initial wave or two, that’s it. In that sense, it’s a fair deck to face since it has a shortcoming and a downfall. Implock is relentless.
Damage that go face is something that a slippery slope for card games like this one and should have major limitations. Bran+Denathtrius is one egregious instance. Once DK kicks in and the game start revolving about sacrificing minions, people will start to come around and Sire will get nerfed eventually.
Hmm i get your points in the beginning, but there is no reason to be extra polite when people claim things like aggro=stupid, control player=superior person. Since that is offensive on its own.
Ah...aggro still does that i starting to see why you dont get the problem here. The problem is not that aggro plays Sire its that they CAN put Sire in the deck, you know why? because they have 2 mana summon 3 or 4 1/1, 2 mana 1/3 that becomes a 5/3, a location that transfor any minion in a 7/7. They have a "tech" card that its a 3/4 add 2 damage to your opp hand that scales. Those are not slow cards those are too fast cards in a meta were the best AoE in the game that is not on a Mage deck is 5 mana destro cards with 3 attack, sometimes destroy cards with 6 or less attack. You leave a big minion on board? too bad i will pay other 2 mana to get another 4 imps, play other curse, buff all my demons +2/+2 - "I guess you should stick with mage, slow player"
"oh you still manage to clear that? guess i will resummon my imps with a +2/+2 and put a 6/6 on the board" - "YOU STILL MANAGE TO CLEAN THAT AFTeR TAKING aNOTHER BIG HIT? guess now that is turn 10 i will play my 10 mana dealt 40 damage to the face gg wp!"
And just to make it clear that last part is the problem. Wild have waaay worse and more stupidly unbalance decks on the top ranks. There is too little people in wild high ranks that when you start to climb you will find yourself with the only tryhards that keep playing 3 broken meta decks there. So in that sense there is not a better envoirment in wild right now is just that people dont play Wild enough to complain about that. When Wild was super popular people was asking for nerf every 3 threads and stuff like that.
No you don’t get the problem here: it’s not because of too good cards that aggro runs sire and curses, it’s because of a lack of good aggro cards.
I found a response (sort of) commenting Sire by the dev team:
”Let’s address the most notable exclusion from this patch - the Brann/Kael’thas/Denathrius combo. These three Neutral legendaries have been very effective across multiple classes and are already causing some frustration among players.
These cards are very much on our radar, and I think the odds that one or more of these cards eventually gets changed is high. That said, we felt it was premature to nerf marquee cards from the new expansion which are largely accomplishing their goals (they’re exciting, and they’re ending games). That said, we’re worried about the speed at which these cards are closing out games, and the play-against frustration that is clearly present here. We’re going to wait and see how they do in the new meta before making changes.”
Underlined for emphasis. My takeaway is that they’re aware of the frustration involved but, you know, it’s their MARQUEE cards… Seems like the driving force here is marketing, not dealing with “play-against frustration”.
”Hmm i get your points in the beginning, but there is no reason to be extra polite when people claim things like aggro=stupid, control player=superior person. Since that is offensive on its own.”
Only, what I said is that aggro decks were beginner decks. Being a beginner doesn’t mean being stupid from my take on things. I do think playing a 40 card deck requires more skill as it involves dealing with all stages of the game then playing a 30 cards aggro deck like Implock. You have smart people playing aggro decks and you also have people who wouldn’t be able to win in a deck which doesn’t involve rushing your opponent asap due to their inexperience. That’s my opinion. It really can’t be disproven, that’s something that you can either agree or disagree with.
Yeah, that the right way to put it Zizka. No one is taking shoots against no one for playing whatever they like to play. We are against a card that breaks the balance of the meta because its a too fast plan B thats really hard to play against and, in most cases, impossible.