Aggro are much more skillful. Because the window of opportunity to win is much smaller for aggro decks, it's much more punishing when someone misplays. Control decks only worry about the board. Aggro decks have to make decisions whether board control or face damage is more valuable.
you cant really say one deck type is more skillfull then the other, some decks are just easy or hard to play. Ex. prirate warrior is pretty simple to play but so is jade druid and zoo lock is a hard deck to master but so is controll paladin
Removal and answers are expensive in HS, if you can consistently build a big threat early - you'll win a lot of games very easily with a very strong deck. Having simple decks that are among the best (and usually the best) decks in the game appeals to people, and what appeals sells - so HS has stuck with it.
Consider that old control decks are still able to hold their own versus modern control decks (not necessarily favored, but decent enough), but new aggro decks will lay them flat with almost no struggle... and you'll also see that this is the design direction of HS.
You can always trust the untrustworthy because you can always trust that they will be untrustworthy. Its the trustworthy you can’t trust. – Captain Jack Sparrow!
@brilliant_gnome; Classic Control should actually be better vs Aggro than the more modern lists (because they're sacrificing slots for more removal/stall and that's literally all you have to do against Aggro), the meta just isn't flat enough to really allow them to thrive outside of those matchups. I'd be interested to know which "old" Control lists are able to hold their own against the current Midrange and Control variants, since those are genuinely why there are such diminishing returns on running a Control list without a win Condition.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Articles I suggest every player reads to improve at the game;
I play some aggro decks because I find them interesting, such as the Disco Murlock in my signature, or Wild Zoolock (although it might be more of a midrange deck). I also had a (bad) Aggro Rogue for daily quests a long time ago.
I play a fair bit mid-season, and my way down to rank 10 I often switch to aggro decks. There are just to many players at those ranks that play nothing but greed, and it's just annoying as hell to play against with a more nuanced deck.
I reckon many of those are the chief complainers here. People that stuff a third of their deck with 8+ cards, and then feel like aggro is unfair.
Because the game caters to aggro decks and prints cards that punish anyone silly enough to want to play control. Hence why the game has become worse and worse since jade idol and now crystal rogue.
That's pretty much the answer.
People play fast decks because it's very frustrating and not fun to lose on turn four because your deck is built on late-game threats you don't have time to play because you can't fight off the early-game rush.
Because the game caters to aggro decks and prints cards that punish anyone silly enough to want to play control. Hence why the game has become worse and worse since jade idol and now crystal rogue.
That's pretty much the answer.
People play fast decks because it's very frustrating and not fun to lose on turn four because your deck is built on late-game threats you don't have time to play because you can't fight off the early-game rush.
I understand it may be tiresome to read 12 pages of posts, can't really blame if you didn't. Not to mention other threads that touch this same topic...
But if you did, you might have discovered that the reasons are hardly that trivial. Several people have explained them at length already, multiple times. Frankly I'm too tired to repeat all that once again, but felt compelled to say at least this.
I switch to aggro decks when I see too many quest rougues or Jade Druids because these decks are pissing me off. And I hate when people play tech cards like Secret Eater or when I see a hunter who runs 2 Murloc Eaters. Have fun with these tech cards again Pirate Warrior or Aggro Druid you piece of sh..
Also after I lose to a ridiculous yogg i switch to aggro - because these yogg decks won't survive till turn 10 a lot of times.
the goal of the ladder is to rank up. Play aggro when you have to, play control when you have to and play midrange when you have to.
I dont know what your goal is, but my goal is to have fun, and i dont have fun if play dumb aggro face decks. But most of the people dont care about fun, its all about winning... :(
the goal of the ladder is to rank up. Play aggro when you have to, play control when you have to and play midrange when you have to.
I dont know what your goal is, but my goal is to have fun, and i dont have fun if play dumb aggro face decks. But most of the people dont care about fun, its all about winning... :(
He did say "the goal of the ladder", not goal in general. Ladder is competitive by definition.
Because the game caters to aggro decks and prints cards that punish anyone silly enough to want to play control. Hence why the game has become worse and worse since jade idol and now crystal rogue.
That's pretty much the answer.
People play fast decks because it's very frustrating and not fun to lose on turn four because your deck is built on late-game threats you don't have time to play because you can't fight off the early-game rush.
I understand it may be tiresome to read 12 pages of posts, can't really blame if you didn't. Not to mention other threads that touch this same topic...
But if you did, you might have discovered that the reasons are hardly that trivial. Several people have explained them at length already, multiple times. Frankly I'm too tired to repeat all that once again, but felt compelled to say at least this.
I don't know if you're ever going to convince anyone who lists the reason they're losing to aggro is that their deck is "built on late-game threats you don't have time to play", because in most cases that really just translates to greed being punished. Not that there's anything wrong with greedy decks (I love greedy Shaman builds), but if Aggro is punishing your slow deck you're not building a list to beat Aggro.
I think there are decks that are a little too explosive (Aggro Druid and Quest Rogue, specifically) and could use some adjustments to make them slower, but for the most part players with that kind of thinking should really just swap to Gwent and move on with their life. Aggro isn't some inherently evil thing, but if fast decks are legitimately tilting they should just go play a game where all decks move at the same relatively glacial speeds.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Articles I suggest every player reads to improve at the game;
Removal and answers are expensive in HS, if you can consistently build a big threat early - you'll win a lot of games very easily with a very strong deck. Having simple decks that are among the best (and usually the best) decks in the game appeals to people, and what appeals sells - so HS has stuck with it.
Consider that old control decks are still able to hold their own versus modern control decks (not necessarily favored, but decent enough), but new aggro decks will lay them flat with almost no struggle... and you'll also see that this is the design direction of HS.
You can always trust the untrustworthy because you can always trust that they will be untrustworthy. Its the trustworthy you can’t trust.
– Captain Jack Sparrow!
@brilliant_gnome; Classic Control should actually be better vs Aggro than the more modern lists (because they're sacrificing slots for more removal/stall and that's literally all you have to do against Aggro), the meta just isn't flat enough to really allow them to thrive outside of those matchups. I'd be interested to know which "old" Control lists are able to hold their own against the current Midrange and Control variants, since those are genuinely why there are such diminishing returns on running a Control list without a win Condition.
Articles I suggest every player reads to improve at the game;
MTG/Hearthstone biases to avoid
Reframing negative Hearthstone experiences to improve at the game
Who's the Beatdown?
I play some aggro decks because I find them interesting, such as the Disco Murlock in my signature, or Wild Zoolock (although it might be more of a midrange deck). I also had a (bad) Aggro Rogue for daily quests a long time ago.
I play a fair bit mid-season, and my way down to rank 10 I often switch to aggro decks. There are just to many players at those ranks that play nothing but greed, and it's just annoying as hell to play against with a more nuanced deck.
I reckon many of those are the chief complainers here. People that stuff a third of their deck with 8+ cards, and then feel like aggro is unfair.
I switch to aggro decks when I see too many quest rougues or Jade Druids because these decks are pissing me off. And I hate when people play tech cards like Secret Eater or when I see a hunter who runs 2 Murloc Eaters. Have fun with these tech cards again Pirate Warrior or Aggro Druid you piece of sh..
Also after I lose to a ridiculous yogg i switch to aggro - because these yogg decks won't survive till turn 10 a lot of times.
the goal of the ladder is to rank up. Play aggro when you have to, play control when you have to and play midrange when you have to.
AR
Articles I suggest every player reads to improve at the game;
MTG/Hearthstone biases to avoid
Reframing negative Hearthstone experiences to improve at the game
Who's the Beatdown?