Hearthpwn

Of course not. Games will nearly always go into fatigue, and face hunter(and even zoolock) are gradually getting out of meta. I don't have much problem with aggro decks, combo decks are getting cancerous. Maybe there should be cards like "this card must be targeted by spells first".

Quote from HearthstoneLegend410 >>

Of course not. Games will nearly always go into fatigue, and face hunter(and even zoolock) are gradually getting out of meta. I don't have much problem with aggro decks, combo decks are getting cancerous. Maybe there should be cards like "this card must be targeted by spells first".

I feel this is relevant

Quote from BlueMinotaur >>

Quote from iandakar >>

Quote from solunsford >>

I wouldn't go nearly so far as to say that aggro should be non-existent.  I would say that it's been overly prevalent/dominant for far too long and it doesn't make the game any better.  I think there's a place for an aggressive deck, but they really have no cards that they can draw that don't further their strategy and I'm not sure how you solve that.  It would seem to me that non aggressive decks don't have that benefit and have to draw the right cards in order to counter an aggro strategy.  

So in short, yeah I think aggro decks are heavily favored in this game, and I do wish that there was more of a competitive place for control on the ladder.  Get rid of as in "not an option?"  Nah.

 That issue isn't based on the mechanics of the game.  It's because for most of the people in HS the game is Ranked, and Ranked heavily benefits aggro.  Even if can create a control deck that beats aggro regularly (and yes they have, and may currently, existed) the slow crawl that control decks make in their games makes them less worthwhile in ranking up.  Thus even if an aggro deck has a lower win rate, it's better to play that than to play control decks.

Combine it with the fact that many people, especially at the lower ranks, play poor enough decks/poor enough ability that ANY decent deck can chew through to legendary when carried properly (thus the basis behind F2P decks), there's no benefit to choosing slow decks over fast ones.  That's the basis behind why aggro has ALWAYS dominated the ladder, even when non-aggro decks dominate in tournaments and the tier lists.

If you want to be able to play HS without endless aggro all around you, you'll want a mode that doesn't result in more games= more benefits.  

Well said. Totally agree. Playing control/combo from rank 17 to legend is just too time consuming. We have our own lives to live. I usually play aggro/midrange from rank 17 to 5 and switch to control/combo in my grind from rank 5 to legend.

Quote from needmoredesu >>

Well, actually lots of players say things looking on the current cards and the current meta. With this change, aggro cards can be more poverfull, some defender-invasive keywords being added, temporary buffs that allow to go face added, more token hate cards being added etc.

It's not like "what deck will rule the game if we made this change", but "will this change add more depth to the game, with cards being balanced around it". And I think it will.

Aggro doesn't mean face. Aggro will be able to kill greedy players, because those wouldn't play 1-2 turn minions, and aggro be way ahead on the board (like with Trogg -> totem opening).

Combo decks will not be dead, because combo is not only minion based. And it will allow board-generating combos to be viable.

I think it's pretty decent how it is now.  HOWEVER, we could really use some better cards to combat low cost vomit.

Give me options that I may tech against it if I wish.  Right now there just aren't many good anti-tempo tech cards.  The best anti-tempo is just having more tempo yourself, and that isn't really anti-tempo if you get my drift.

So, no to drastic rule changes, but, yes to give us better tech cards.