I still like this meta better than the last but come on with this diversity crap. It's still the "every class has that one deck" with a few rare exceptions sprinkled in between. However, I'm hoping this expansion is just the beginning of better things to come. With 3 a year, I'm thinking we really will see a very diverse meta in the future.
It isn't. People just like to rationalize their own opinions. For instance, they'll take one deck from one class, and claim there are 3 different variations of it by merely swapping out a card or two, and then claim that is diversity. They'll proceed to list a bunch of other decks that virtually don't see any play, but I guess they saw them on youtube once, or on a list somewhere, so that counts to them. What's more, in another thread that is criticizing the state of the meta (not directed at diversity) these same people will proceed to argue that the meta hasn't stabilized yet, and to be patient. They want it both ways.
I didn't play the last meta, but I hear it sucked. I'm not sure why being slightly better than crap is praiseworthy. I also suspect a lot of that slightly is just the new-car-smell effect that will wear off for many within a few weeks.
Yeah, I'm seeing warriors (two variations, yippy), mages, rogues, pally and hunters along with the occasional priest player bashing his head against a wall. I guess that's variation. Then again, quest mage/warrior are basically the same thing, stall for a long time-clear board/freeze board over and over-hit face with fireballs until dead. Pirate, hunter, rogue are basically the same thing in that you will get hit with a ton of early game aggression and you have about 8 cards to win or lose the game with. Pally turns every minion you play into a 1/1. So yeah, I guess there is variation just not much going in inside those varied games.
Better than having deck types defined by pirates vs jades vs reno like in karazhan just one of each faction saw play it was shaman vs renolock vs pirates
There are also still a slew of less frequent decks, and on top of that, the frequent decks feel less unstoppable than in previous metas, making this meta a lot nicer on deck builders.
MSoG meta had about 4 viable decks that were virtually unstoppable by home brew or lower tier decks, and entering matchmaking felt like a glorified game of RPS. This is a huge improvement after months of that garbage.
I will say the reason I like this meta better than last is because the cards are a little more fun to use and the randomness has dropped significantly. So IMO, they are on the right track. That's why I'm betting the next expansions bring the actual diversity people are looking for.
At a high enough level you are only going to see a handful of decks. Not unique to this meta or this game, and not likely to ever change - I mean some deck has to be the best. I play against a wide variety of opponents on my F2P account at rank 18-20. I would liken it to triathlon - you can train, you can eat fancy food, but the one variable you have any control over is your bike. Guess what a top-tier bike costs?
The problem is that every class has one net deck, you can varry a little bit, but they will always they the same. I really try to experiment with druid and warlock, cause i think they have more potential then people give credit to. The problem is that rogue and taunt warrior punish every type if control deck and aggro doesnt have much varience.
I still like this meta better than the last but come on with this diversity crap. It's still the "every class has that one deck" with a few rare exceptions sprinkled in between. However, I'm hoping this expansion is just the beginning of better things to come. With 3 a year, I'm thinking we really will see a very diverse meta in the future.
7 Quest Mages? I see 10 freeze and/or secret mage for each quest mage, how it is possible?
Quest rogue and warrior I agree, see a lot of them.
I still like this meta better than the last but come on with this diversity crap. It's still the "every class has that one deck" with a few rare exceptions sprinkled in between. However, I'm hoping this expansion is just the beginning of better things to come. With 3 a year, I'm thinking we really will see a very diverse meta in the future.
7 Quest Mages? I see 10 freeze and/or secret mage for each quest mage, how it is possible?
Quest rogue and warrior I agree, see a lot of them.
I'm not bullshitting dude. Every Mage for the last 2 days has been Quest.
Huh. I felt like I played a pretty even amount of miracle and quest rogues going from 10 to 5. Pirates and quest warriors were pretty balanced, too. Those four were the most common for me along with Hunter, but midrange pally, elemental shaman, and purify priest were all well represented, too. I actually didn't run into all that many mages. Maybe that changes above rank 5...
Looking at the Vicious Syndicate report, at the most competitive ranks (rank 5-1), Pirate Warrior, Taunt Warrior, Quest Rogue, Miracle Rogue, and Midrange Hunter each account for a pretty equal share of about 60% of the meta... However, each other class other than Warlock has a healthy 7-10% share of the meta, and multiple decks represented.
So we have a Control, Aggro, Midgame combo, Later game combo and Midrange deck being played the most, and plenty of representation of every class other than warlock, which still has a decently strong deck in Zoolock. Aggro, midrange, control, combo, variations on old decks, completely new decks, pretty much everything other than Mill decks have a decent representation.
This seems like a pretty healthy meta to me, and that sometimes you're just going to encounter a lot of certain decks by dumb luck.
What is it with people and thinking that anecdotal evidence is at all meaningful. Data says this but since I don't experience it that way, screw the data.
Here's are a few choice quotes from the gold standard in the Hearthstone data analysis with 140,000 games to base their info from, not just 25:
"The Meta at legend is actually very diverse"
"[Mage] is currently extremely diverse and seems to possess a lot of potential beyond one playstyle"
"[Paladins are] also boasting quite a bit of diversity"
I still like this meta better than the last but come on with this diversity crap. It's still the "every class has that one deck" with a few rare exceptions sprinkled in between. However, I'm hoping this expansion is just the beginning of better things to come. With 3 a year, I'm thinking we really will see a very diverse meta in the future.
You played 25 games without running into freeze mage, midrange hunter, pirate warrior or any of the overplayed paladin decks?
Last 25 games:
11 Taunt Warriors
7 Quest Mages
4 Quest Rogues
3 Silence Priests
I still like this meta better than the last but come on with this diversity crap. It's still the "every class has that one deck" with a few rare exceptions sprinkled in between. However, I'm hoping this expansion is just the beginning of better things to come. With 3 a year, I'm thinking we really will see a very diverse meta in the future.
It isn't. People just like to rationalize their own opinions. For instance, they'll take one deck from one class, and claim there are 3 different variations of it by merely swapping out a card or two, and then claim that is diversity. They'll proceed to list a bunch of other decks that virtually don't see any play, but I guess they saw them on youtube once, or on a list somewhere, so that counts to them. What's more, in another thread that is criticizing the state of the meta (not directed at diversity) these same people will proceed to argue that the meta hasn't stabilized yet, and to be patient. They want it both ways.
I didn't play the last meta, but I hear it sucked. I'm not sure why being slightly better than crap is praiseworthy. I also suspect a lot of that slightly is just the new-car-smell effect that will wear off for many within a few weeks.
Yeah, I'm seeing warriors (two variations, yippy), mages, rogues, pally and hunters along with the occasional priest player bashing his head against a wall. I guess that's variation. Then again, quest mage/warrior are basically the same thing, stall for a long time-clear board/freeze board over and over-hit face with fireballs until dead. Pirate, hunter, rogue are basically the same thing in that you will get hit with a ton of early game aggression and you have about 8 cards to win or lose the game with. Pally turns every minion you play into a 1/1. So yeah, I guess there is variation just not much going in inside those varied games.
Better than having deck types defined by pirates vs jades vs reno like in karazhan just one of each faction saw play it was shaman vs renolock vs pirates
I've seen a big increase in diversity! Don't track my stats sadly, but frequently come across:
Taunt Warrior, Pirate Warrior, Aggro Mage, Hemet Mage, Quest Mage, Quest Rogue, Miracle Rogue, Midrange Hunter, Handbuff elemental Pally, Elemental Shaman and Value/Miracle Priest.
There are also still a slew of less frequent decks, and on top of that, the frequent decks feel less unstoppable than in previous metas, making this meta a lot nicer on deck builders.
MSoG meta had about 4 viable decks that were virtually unstoppable by home brew or lower tier decks, and entering matchmaking felt like a glorified game of RPS. This is a huge improvement after months of that garbage.
I will say the reason I like this meta better than last is because the cards are a little more fun to use and the randomness has dropped significantly. So IMO, they are on the right track. That's why I'm betting the next expansions bring the actual diversity people are looking for.
At a high enough level you are only going to see a handful of decks. Not unique to this meta or this game, and not likely to ever change - I mean some deck has to be the best. I play against a wide variety of opponents on my F2P account at rank 18-20. I would liken it to triathlon - you can train, you can eat fancy food, but the one variable you have any control over is your bike. Guess what a top-tier bike costs?
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
The problem is that every class has one net deck, you can varry a little bit, but they will always they the same. I really try to experiment with druid and warlock, cause i think they have more potential then people give credit to. The problem is that rogue and taunt warrior punish every type if control deck and aggro doesnt have much varience.
Golden Heroes in order:
Mage, Warlock, Priest, Shaman, Warrior, Rogue, Paladin
Taunt Warrior is going to be this meta's cancer.
Huh. I felt like I played a pretty even amount of miracle and quest rogues going from 10 to 5. Pirates and quest warriors were pretty balanced, too. Those four were the most common for me along with Hunter, but midrange pally, elemental shaman, and purify priest were all well represented, too. I actually didn't run into all that many mages. Maybe that changes above rank 5...
How on Earth did you match up against 7 quest mages, I didn't think people still played it
OP makes a thread about a lack of diversity and admits that he's faced a deck 7 times that most other people thought was no longer being played.
:thinking:
Well, at least we can confirm Quest Warrior is, indeed, Tier 1.
Looking at the Vicious Syndicate report, at the most competitive ranks (rank 5-1), Pirate Warrior, Taunt Warrior, Quest Rogue, Miracle Rogue, and Midrange Hunter each account for a pretty equal share of about 60% of the meta... However, each other class other than Warlock has a healthy 7-10% share of the meta, and multiple decks represented.
So we have a Control, Aggro, Midgame combo, Later game combo and Midrange deck being played the most, and plenty of representation of every class other than warlock, which still has a decently strong deck in Zoolock. Aggro, midrange, control, combo, variations on old decks, completely new decks, pretty much everything other than Mill decks have a decent representation.
This seems like a pretty healthy meta to me, and that sometimes you're just going to encounter a lot of certain decks by dumb luck.
What is it with people and thinking that anecdotal evidence is at all meaningful. Data says this but since I don't experience it that way, screw the data.
Here's are a few choice quotes from the gold standard in the Hearthstone data analysis with 140,000 games to base their info from, not just 25:
"The Meta at legend is actually very diverse"
"[Mage] is currently extremely diverse and seems to possess a lot of potential beyond one playstyle"
"[Paladins are] also boasting quite a bit of diversity"
"Priest shows nice deck diversity"
http://www.vicioussyndicate.com/vs-data-reaper-report-44/
There you go buddy. Read up and get educated. Here endeth the lesson.
Member of Fever Clan | Battle tag: sparkis#1748 | Discord: sparkis#5613
Only warlock players can complain about this meta.
Not a complain but I really like the "no duplicates" decks get something, Kazakus card is too young to be exiled to Wild.