Aggro decks are the strongest thing right now and they really need to be nerfed. Shamans and hunters are the biggest offenders. Now you might say Hunter plays "midrange". Yeah no stop lying and protecting it. Its an aggro deck. If the deck can setup a board and kill with burst before turn 5 its aggro end of story. The same problem is with shaman. Now you might say. Well all archetypes need to be viable. This is true and the one archetype that isnt viable right now? Oh yeah thats control! Control decks right now are just so clunky and awkward because we have weak taunts to work with. Heals that eat most of our mana and leave no board presence. Board clears that cost a lot of mana and might not even clear the board. Aggro honestly feels like its suffocating part of the game. I love playing all types of decks combo/control/midrange/tempo. But not aggro because its braindead and gives no choice.
The big issue with aggro is the minions are to effective with abilites and synergies. Also the spells for these classes are way too flexible. 1 mana deal 3 damage? That is insane early game. That kills nearly every 1-3 drop in the game. Plus it allows for a totem golem 3/4 worth of stats. How is that fair to face on turn 3? Its not and there is no coming back from it. Or how about tuskarr totemic that spawns a flametongue or totem golem. You instantly lose right then and there. Thats not fun and the game shouldnt be designed like this. For every strong aggro card there should be a strong removal or taunt card. Or increase the amount of health that every player gets by 20. That way aggro is completely unviable. That would be good too.
I myself dislike aggro and never play that style of decks, but that being said I do believe it should have its place in the game. All archetypes should be present and equally viable, that's what makes the game healthy and interesting.
The problem, in my opinion, is not with aggro decks being broken, but with (1) lack of proper options and tools that make it seem so; and (2) Blizzard not being able to properly estimate impacts on the meta game through their testing.
Just another day (I was playing Wild for a bit) I was thinking about how many Secret Paladins I got to face in a row (not that it bothered me as a Control Priest) and how I constantly see a lot of people running Eater of Secrets to counter it. And a thought crossed my mind - why was that card published so long after TGT? The reason I thought that is because I remember Ben Brode himself telling how Blizzard like to give players the options to come up with a solution to the problem rather than nerfing cards (unless absolutely necessary). So my question is: why not actually live up to your words and do that and release counters to certain cards as they come out? Don't get me wrong, I am not here to complain about Secret Paladin but to say that I believe it's proper when both sides get the option to play whatever they like, but at a risk of facing a counter to it. Isn't that balanced?
I myself dislike aggro and never play that style of decks, but that being said I do believe it should have its place in the game. All archetypes should be present and equally viable, that's what makes the game healthy and interesting.
The problem, in my opinion, is not with aggro decks being broken, but with (1) lack of proper options and tools that make it seem so; and (2) Blizzard not being able to properly estimate impacts on the meta game through their testing.
Just another day (I was playing Wild for a bit) I was thinking about how many Secret Paladins I got to face in a row (not that it bothered me as a Control Priest) and how I constantly see a lot of people running Eater of Secrets to counter it. And a thought crossed my mind - why was that card published so long after TGT? The reason I thought that is because I remember how Ben Brode himself was telling how Blizzard like to give players the options rather than nerfing whatever seems to be strong. So my question is: why not actually do that and release counters to certain cards as they come up? Don't get me wrong, I am not here to complain about Secret Paladin but to say that I believe it's proper when both sides get the option to play whatever they like, but at a risk of facing a counter to it. Isn't that balanced?
Yep, Aggro indeed should have a place in the game, but as you said, when you get NO tools to counter them, like Belcher or Healbot or Deathlord then it just becomes a stale meta where every game is decided by turn 3-4 because you didn't get win axe or early game.
Lol op, your opinion = "honest truth"? It's like me saying that playing control (aka p2w decks) is boring because all you do is stall until your opponent falls asleep.
The game was designed to make aggro decks work. If you don't like aggro decks you don't like the game. They designed it in a way so you can attack face at any time.
That's an honest truth.
Try a card game like yugioh where you have to interact with everything on board.
FFS, aggro is not killing control decks. Ridiculously powerful midrange decks and the RNG clown fiesta of Yogg decks are. If you play control and can't beat aggro, you are either not very good or have a greedy deck. Any half decent warrior paladin or priest deck should shut shaman and zoo down hard. Hunter, Dragon warrior, tempo mage and yogg druid are another story.
Lol op, your opinion = "honest truth"? It's like me saying that playing control (aka p2w decks) is boring because all you do is stall until your opponent falls asleep.
By the same person who started multiple whine threads in the past few days. It should just be merged with this thread:
But how can you enjoy to play Midrange if it's apparently not a deck type. Apparently according to you it's actually aggro. Unless you feel like redefining what aggro means, what you're calling aggro actually looks more like what I'd call Midrange. An aggressive deck that's mana curve doesn't stop at 3 or 4 mana and ignores board and goes face is what I call aggro. An aggressive deck that actually runs multiple cards above 6 mana and attempt to always clear the board is what I'd call Midrange.
Aggro decks are the strongest thing right now and they really need to be nerfed. Shamans and hunters are the biggest offenders. Now you might say Hunter plays "midrange". Yeah no stop lying and protecting it. Its an aggro deck. If the deck can setup a board and kill with burst before turn 5 its aggro end of story.
The big issue with aggro is the minions are to effective with abilites and synergies. Also the spells for these classes are way too flexible. 1 mana deal 3 damage?
Aggro is an issue not because it has tempo, but because they also have value. Tempo = head-start, value = speed. If control can't out-value aggro, they can't catch up, and Aggro will win. Flexibility is nice, but when you're ahead, you shouldn't be playing a reactive game...
...Also, I've gotten turn 5 lethal with a N'Zoth pally deck. I really don't think that makes it aggro.
Today in my free brawl pack I got Barongeddon, then I had a cup of fresh green tea. As a result of that, I think Priest is OP because my keyboard is not a mechanical one. I hope Blizzard will address this issue.
An aggressive deck that's mana curve doesn't stop at 3 or 4 mana and ignores board and goes face is what I call aggro. An aggressive deck that actually runs multiple cards above 6 mana and attempt to always clear the board is what I'd call Midrange.
Nope my dear,aggro has a spectrum of decks:face which is that you described,fload (zoo) and tempoish(dragon warrior/the more aggresive versions of hunter decks).
By your definition face=aggro,and midrange anything other than control,combo or mill.
While many times is hard to define 100% correctly what a deck is,a semi correct appoach is to see when a deck is planning to dominate the game.If a deck plans to win hard by turns 1-4 then is most likely an aggro deck even if it has some late finishers(ex:call of skill,rag in dragon warrior).If a deck dominates the game at turns 4-7 then is a midrange and so on...
Also i said dominates not just plays a card,of course true midrange decks have 1 drops and 2 drops but they are there to mostly to support their winning conditions that cost 4-7 mana and so on.
It's hard to take people seriously when they think the current shaman and hunter represent aggro. People apparently forgot what aggro is. Not everyone is going to play stall - get over it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
The honest truth is that people don't even know the difference between aggro and midrange anymore.
lol, true. I don't know when this happened, but it feels like there's this confusion about aggro vs. midrange every time either of the archetypes is mentioned.
Today in my free brawl pack I got Barongeddon, then I had a cup of fresh green tea. As a result of that, I think Priest is OP because my keyboard is not a mechanical one. I hope Blizzard will address this issue.
Really? Aggro Shaman does not represent aggro? The deck that is literallynamed AGGRO Shaman to you does not represent aggro.
There is a problem. It is not as strong as Face Hunter or Secret Paladin but it is in standard.
I know Aggro Shaman is a HUGE problem we should not get over because it makes up 37% of the decks below rank 5. 37% that is HUGE problem. That means this deck is way, WAY unbalanced compared to the other decks in the meta.
In Standard, according to Tempo Storm.
Tier 1 There are 0 Control Decks of 5
Tier 2 There are 3 Control decks of 9 (representing only two classes)
Tier 3 There are, and I am being generous with Freeze Mage, 3 Control decks of 12
Its not that, not everyone wants to play stall-get over it, It is that you CAN NOT CURRENTLY IN HEARTHSTONE PLAY A CONTROL DECK AT TOP TIERS!
There is a problem. It is not as strong as Face Hunter or Secret Paladin but it is in standard.
I know Aggro Shaman is a HUGE problem we should not get over because it makes up 37% of the decks below rank 5. 37% that is HUGE problem. That means this deck is way, WAY unbalanced compared to the other decks in the meta.
In Standard, according to Tempo Storm.
Tier 1 There are 0 Control Decks of 5
Tier 2 There are 3 Control decks of 9 (representing only two classes)
Tier 3 There are, and I am being generous with Freeze Mage, 3 Control decks of 12
Its not that, not everyone wants to play stall-get over it, It is that you CAN NOT CURRENTLY IN HEARTHSTONE PLAY A CONTROL DECK AT TOP TIERS!
Aggro Shaman is 8-9% of the meta at any rank. Where do you get your stats, guys? At the salt mine? There are only two consistent aggro archetypes: Aggro Shaman and Zoo/Disco Warlock. The meta is midrange.
There is a problem. It is not as strong as Face Hunter or Secret Paladin but it is in standard.
I know Aggro Shaman is a HUGE problem we should not get over because it makes up 37% of the decks below rank 5. 37% that is HUGE problem. That means this deck is way, WAY unbalanced compared to the other decks in the meta.
In Standard, according to Tempo Storm.
Tier 1 There are 0 Control Decks of 5
Tier 2 There are 3 Control decks of 9 (representing only two classes)
Tier 3 There are, and I am being generous with Freeze Mage, 3 Control decks of 12
Its not that, not everyone wants to play stall-get over it, It is that you CAN NOT CURRENTLY IN HEARTHSTONE PLAY A CONTROL DECK AT TOP TIERS!
Aggro Shaman is 8-9% of the meta at any rank. Where do you get your stats, guys? At the salt mine? There are only two consistent aggro archetypes: Aggro Shaman and Zoo/Disco Warlock. The meta is midrange.
This, and by the way Freeze mage is NOT a control deck.
I'd rather have aggro to keep some decks in check. If we lose aggro then we'll have all games lasting longer than turn 10 and being decided by Yogg-Saron, is that what you really want? Be careful what you wish for.
Aggro decks are the strongest thing right now and they really need to be nerfed. Shamans and hunters are the biggest offenders. Now you might say Hunter plays "midrange". Yeah no stop lying and protecting it. Its an aggro deck. If the deck can setup a board and kill with burst before turn 5 its aggro end of story. The same problem is with shaman. Now you might say. Well all archetypes need to be viable. This is true and the one archetype that isnt viable right now? Oh yeah thats control! Control decks right now are just so clunky and awkward because we have weak taunts to work with. Heals that eat most of our mana and leave no board presence. Board clears that cost a lot of mana and might not even clear the board. Aggro honestly feels like its suffocating part of the game. I love playing all types of decks combo/control/midrange/tempo. But not aggro because its braindead and gives no choice.
The big issue with aggro is the minions are to effective with abilites and synergies. Also the spells for these classes are way too flexible. 1 mana deal 3 damage? That is insane early game. That kills nearly every 1-3 drop in the game. Plus it allows for a totem golem 3/4 worth of stats. How is that fair to face on turn 3? Its not and there is no coming back from it. Or how about tuskarr totemic that spawns a flametongue or totem golem. You instantly lose right then and there. Thats not fun and the game shouldnt be designed like this. For every strong aggro card there should be a strong removal or taunt card. Or increase the amount of health that every player gets by 20. That way aggro is completely unviable. That would be good too.
I myself dislike aggro and never play that style of decks, but that being said I do believe it should have its place in the game. All archetypes should be present and equally viable, that's what makes the game healthy and interesting.
The problem, in my opinion, is not with aggro decks being broken, but with (1) lack of proper options and tools that make it seem so; and (2) Blizzard not being able to properly estimate impacts on the meta game through their testing.
Just another day (I was playing Wild for a bit) I was thinking about how many Secret Paladins I got to face in a row (not that it bothered me as a Control Priest) and how I constantly see a lot of people running Eater of Secrets to counter it. And a thought crossed my mind - why was that card published so long after TGT? The reason I thought that is because I remember Ben Brode himself telling how Blizzard like to give players the options to come up with a solution to the problem rather than nerfing cards (unless absolutely necessary). So my question is: why not actually live up to your words and do that and release counters to certain cards as they come out? Don't get me wrong, I am not here to complain about Secret Paladin but to say that I believe it's proper when both sides get the option to play whatever they like, but at a risk of facing a counter to it. Isn't that balanced?
Lol op, your opinion = "honest truth"? It's like me saying that playing control (aka p2w decks) is boring because all you do is stall until your opponent falls asleep.
!!!!!
The game was designed to make aggro decks work. If you don't like aggro decks you don't like the game. They designed it in a way so you can attack face at any time.
That's an honest truth.
Try a card game like yugioh where you have to interact with everything on board.
FFS, aggro is not killing control decks. Ridiculously powerful midrange decks and the RNG clown fiesta of Yogg decks are. If you play control and can't beat aggro, you are either not very good or have a greedy deck. Any half decent warrior paladin or priest deck should shut shaman and zoo down hard. Hunter, Dragon warrior, tempo mage and yogg druid are another story.
People who refuses to play aggro out of principle are even worse than people who play exclusively aggro.
One should seek to become a complete player and play all archetypes, including ones that he despises for whatever irrational reasons.
But how can you enjoy to play Midrange if it's apparently not a deck type. Apparently according to you it's actually aggro. Unless you feel like redefining what aggro means, what you're calling aggro actually looks more like what I'd call Midrange. An aggressive deck that's mana curve doesn't stop at 3 or 4 mana and ignores board and goes face is what I call aggro. An aggressive deck that actually runs multiple cards above 6 mana and attempt to always clear the board is what I'd call Midrange.
Aggro is an issue not because it has tempo, but because they also have value. Tempo = head-start, value = speed. If control can't out-value aggro, they can't catch up, and Aggro will win. Flexibility is nice, but when you're ahead, you shouldn't be playing a reactive game...
...Also, I've gotten turn 5 lethal with a N'Zoth pally deck. I really don't think that makes it aggro.
#gNOmeferatu
I fully aggree with you, and you backed up your argument properly, but prepare to face aggro apologists.
Fuck cubelock
OP, you seemed to have not covered an important topic in your post that I think shouldn't be brushed over
http://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/general-discussion/28947-group-therapy-need-to-blow-off-steam-mega-salty?page=1235#c25730
The best way to solve problems is to create more problems until you are dead
^ that is correct
Retired Hearthstone Columnist
It's hard to take people seriously when they think the current shaman and hunter represent aggro. People apparently forgot what aggro is. Not everyone is going to play stall - get over it.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
The honest truth is that people don't even know the difference between aggro and midrange anymore.
#gNOmeferatu
Really? Aggro Shaman does not represent aggro? The deck that is literally named AGGRO Shaman to you does not represent aggro.
There is a problem. It is not as strong as Face Hunter or Secret Paladin but it is in standard.
I know Aggro Shaman is a HUGE problem we should not get over because it makes up 37% of the decks below rank 5. 37% that is HUGE problem. That means this deck is way, WAY unbalanced compared to the other decks in the meta.
In Standard, according to Tempo Storm.
Tier 1
There are 0 Control Decks of 5
Tier 2
There are 3 Control decks of 9 (representing only two classes)
Tier 3
There are, and I am being generous with Freeze Mage, 3 Control decks of 12
Its not that, not everyone wants to play stall-get over it, It is that you CAN NOT CURRENTLY IN HEARTHSTONE PLAY A CONTROL DECK AT TOP TIERS!
English is not my native language, so, with a high probability, mistakes were made.
I'd rather have aggro to keep some decks in check. If we lose aggro then we'll have all games lasting longer than turn 10 and being decided by Yogg-Saron, is that what you really want? Be careful what you wish for.
Current Deck: [Moon-Arcane Medivh]
Watch me play and follow me on Twitch