Just like the title says, do you think the "gimmick" decks should be stopped, and if so, how could it be done?
It seems that we are seeing one gimmick deck after another. Barnes Priest, Keleseth Rogue, DMH Warrior, Exodia Mage, ect.
I just can't believe that this is what the game developers want the game to be ... exploitation of a card, or cards, to create an essentially unstoppable win condition. Some of these, like Exodia Mage, or DMH Warrior, I can somewhat understand because they do require you to survive for quite a long time to set up the win ... but Barnes exploits, and now Keleseth exploits are just, in my opinion, detrimental to the game. They are nothing more than "draw this card, or these cards, and win".
And the worst part is ... how can it be stopped, without just completely retooling the almost the entire game?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland I wanna write her, name in the sky I wanna free fall, out into nothin' Gonna leave this, world for awhile
Eh, none of them bother me too much. People will always come up with the way to "exploit" the game: ie. to find the most powerful strategy they can. If it's not this card it's that one, so what? If all cards were more or less the same, all classes would play the same... where's fun in that?
How do you stop them? You build the deck that does well against strategy you find most annoying. I played against 1 exodia mage yesterday (only one, so even if I lost it would be totally fine) and I used Dirty Rat to pull their Apprentice, killed it, and proceeded to obliterate their face. So, if they "exploited" something, I did too and found the strategy that destroys their win condition. Seems fine to me.
barring big priest, none of these seem terrible gimmicky, and take at least little a bit of skill to pilot. turn 1 coin/keleseth/shadowstep/keleseth is some major high-rolling, but the deck doesn't rely on that combo and pretty rarely actually gets it. DMH and exodia are fairly difficult and have hard and soft counters.
Every deck you mentioned is pretty cool to me, with the exception of Big Priest. The pay off for Barnes on turn 4 is too great leading to easy revival of 9 and 10 mana cards for the remainder of the game - and it won't be long as you'll be blown away. Win rates with this deck don't matter, it's just blatantly unfair and feels really bad to lose to. Also, the deck is auto-pilot in terms of difficulty making it even more frustrating.
Keleseth decks on whole are fine, it's by no means an insta-loss if they have it turn 2 and it empowers mid-range decks that had been seriously struggling, exodia mage has obvious weaknesses, DMH warrior has an extremely high skill ceiling....
Every deck you mentioned is pretty cool to me, with the exception of Big Priest. The pay off for Barnes on turn 4 is too great leading to easy revival of 9 and 10 mana cards for the remainder of the game - and it won't be long as you'll be blown away. Win rates with this deck don't matter, it's just blatantly unfair and feels really bad to lose to. Also, the deck is auto-pilot in terms of difficulty making it even more frustrating.
Keleseth decks on whole are fine, it's by no means an insta-loss if they have it turn 2 and it empowers mid-range decks that had been seriously struggling, exodia mage has obvious weaknesses, DMH warrior has an extremely high skill ceiling....
Keleseth, played 1 time (as I believe was intended) isn't an issue. When it is played repeatedly is where it becomes a problem.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland I wanna write her, name in the sky I wanna free fall, out into nothin' Gonna leave this, world for awhile
Every deck you mentioned is pretty cool to me, with the exception of Big Priest. The pay off for Barnes on turn 4 is too great leading to easy revival of 9 and 10 mana cards for the remainder of the game - and it won't be long as you'll be blown away. Win rates with this deck don't matter, it's just blatantly unfair and feels really bad to lose to. Also, the deck is auto-pilot in terms of difficulty making it even more frustrating.
Keleseth decks on whole are fine, it's by no means an insta-loss if they have it turn 2 and it empowers mid-range decks that had been seriously struggling, exodia mage has obvious weaknesses, DMH warrior has an extremely high skill ceiling....
Keleseth, played 1 time (as I believe was intended) isn't an issue. When it is played repeatedly is where it becomes a problem.
But if you never draw Keleseth then the whole deck is just sub-par. That's why you'll never get a top tier win rate out of it.
I'm pretty sure Blizzard intended it to be this way. Blizzard loves RNG (go read/watch some of their developer insights). They've just made it more subtle compared to the previous expansions (remember Unstable Portal?).
Blizzard loves RNG because it allows bad players to occasionally win against good players, and gives players an excuse whenever they lose. As much as we hate to admit it, this business model is working very well for Blizzard: most of Hearthstone's revenue is coming from the Casual scene, not the Competitive scene.
Maybe my translation was wrong but I always thought gimmick are the decks that have some fun, cool interaction/combo to pull off and are meant to have fun with not to play them competitively. If those decks whoop a$$ they're not gimmick but good meta decks. A gimmick deck cannot be unstoppable. So I really dont get the point of the topic.
There's always gonna be exploited combos, might as well get used to it. I feel like you're loose in your description of a gimmick deck. A gimmick deck is like Renounce Warlock. Big Priest is kind of a gimmick deck but really it's just high rolling to the max. It's still just a tier 2 deck at best
I don't mind Keleseth Rogue. But Big Priest, Exodia Mage and DMH Warrior are definitely the most annoying and the least interactive decks I've ever played against. I hate them so much that a even a Jade Druid or Secret Paladin meta would feel better.
I'd nerf those 3 decks until they become unplayable.
But I don't know why, people don't seem to mind them because "those decks take skill" (no, they don't) or "at least the games last more than 7 turns" (89 turns, 1 hour game! Zzzzz).
Every deck you mentioned is pretty cool to me, with the exception of Big Priest. The pay off for Barnes on turn 4 is too great leading to easy revival of 9 and 10 mana cards for the remainder of the game - and it won't be long as you'll be blown away. Win rates with this deck don't matter, it's just blatantly unfair and feels really bad to lose to. Also, the deck is auto-pilot in terms of difficulty making it even more frustrating.
Keleseth decks on whole are fine, it's by no means an insta-loss if they have it turn 2 and it empowers mid-range decks that had been seriously struggling, exodia mage has obvious weaknesses, DMH warrior has an extremely high skill ceiling....
Keleseth, played 1 time (as I believe was intended) isn't an issue. When it is played repeatedly is where it becomes a problem.
But if you never draw Keleseth then the whole deck is just sub-par. That's why you'll never get a top tier win rate out of it.
Lol, except for the warlock and rogue version... AmIright?
Ummmm I don't get it. By Gimmick Decks do you mean achitypes. If you want to really examine the history of decks you can find a gimmick in pretty much all of them. Freeze Mage, Patron Warrior, Mill Rouge, Secret Paladin, Jade Druid, Undertaker Hunter... etc. Seriously just because something works doesn't make it a Gimmick. The Meta can get stale at times but decks will come and go. Finding counters and stuff that I enjoy playing makes it fun for me. Calm down and switch to wild or casual or arena.
TI don't really agree with you on a gimmick. keleseth Rogue isn't a gimmick deck. It is a pretty good deck that gets a lot better if it pulls the right card at the right time. Pretty much every deck has that, just not as extreme
Same with DMH warrior, it is a control warrior with a specific win condition. Much like the old Control Warriors that relied on Tank Up to survive damage and fatigue and then golden monkey to win at the end. It is also probably the hardest competitive deck to play well with very difficult decision making determini what to cycle based on what your opponent has left.
To me a gimmick deck is one built entirely around one mechanic. If you have a priest with just Barnes, a big minion and a bunch of resurrect, and cards entirely to facilitate that it is a gimmick deck. If you add a Barnes/resurrect package to a regular deck it isn't a gimmick deck.
Maybe my translation was wrong but I always thought gimmick are the decks that have some fun, cool interaction/combo to pull off and are meant to have fun with not to play them competitively. If those decks whoop a$$ they're not gimmick but good meta decks. A gimmick deck cannot be unstoppable. So I really dont get the point of the topic.
What I mean by gimmick deck is a deck that uses an exploit of a card, or combo to create essentially an auto win condition. I specifically singled out Exodia Mage and DMH Warrior as "questionable", since while they use a similar type of exploit, it occurs so late in the game that I feel it is less of an exploit, and just more of a very powerful combo. The two decks that i can think of right now would be Barnes priest, and Keleseth Rogue.
The "gimmick" is that Barnes giving you a 1/1 copy of a minion isn't the problem, but when that minion can be resurrected 3 or 4 times, it exploits what Barnes was intended to do. The same goes for Keleseth ... Playing him once, and getting a +1/+1 to all minions is fine ... but playing him 2 or 3 times, especially if that happens early in the game, is again exploiting the ability of the card into doing much more than it was designed to do.
I know these types of decks seem to pop up a lot in HS (I have only played since Un'Goro, but have read plenty about other, similar OP ability combos in past expansions). Maybe the term "gimmick" isn't correct .. I just picked it because it seems to fit.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland I wanna write her, name in the sky I wanna free fall, out into nothin' Gonna leave this, world for awhile
I think the only bad thing that can be said is that the deck is kind of high rolly, which I don't particularly like. The overall win percentage is fairly good, but I just don't like the highroll nature.
Every deck you mentioned is pretty cool to me, with the exception of Big Priest. The pay off for Barnes on turn 4 is too great leading to easy revival of 9 and 10 mana cards for the remainder of the game - and it won't be long as you'll be blown away. Win rates with this deck don't matter, it's just blatantly unfair and feels really bad to lose to. Also, the deck is auto-pilot in terms of difficulty making it even more frustrating.
Keleseth decks on whole are fine, it's by no means an insta-loss if they have it turn 2 and it empowers mid-range decks that had been seriously struggling, exodia mage has obvious weaknesses, DMH warrior has an extremely high skill ceiling....
Keleseth, played 1 time (as I believe was intended) isn't an issue. When it is played repeatedly is where it becomes a problem.
But if you never draw Keleseth then the whole deck is just sub-par. That's why you'll never get a top tier win rate out of it.
Which (not to derail my own thread) brings up, one again, just how "random" the draw and mulligan actually are in the game. I still do not believe it is pure RNG.
I will use my Hunter deck as an example, just because I probably pay more attention to my opening hand on it more than any other. In that deck, I have 3 1 cost minions ... so 1/10th of the total deck. But, I would estimate that I draw one of those 3 minions at least 75% of the time. Statistically that seems like it should be impossible. (Maybe someone who is way better at math than I am could actually figure out the probability of drawing "Card X by Turn Y".)
I am not saying that the game gives you Keleseth specifically, but I do believe there is some algorithm in place that gives lower mana cards a higher chance to be drawn early, and higher cost cards to come late. This would be a logical way of explaining why you are very likely to have Keleseth by T2, and Barnes by T4.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland I wanna write her, name in the sky I wanna free fall, out into nothin' Gonna leave this, world for awhile
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Just like the title says, do you think the "gimmick" decks should be stopped, and if so, how could it be done?
It seems that we are seeing one gimmick deck after another. Barnes Priest, Keleseth Rogue, DMH Warrior, Exodia Mage, ect.
I just can't believe that this is what the game developers want the game to be ... exploitation of a card, or cards, to create an essentially unstoppable win condition. Some of these, like Exodia Mage, or DMH Warrior, I can somewhat understand because they do require you to survive for quite a long time to set up the win ... but Barnes exploits, and now Keleseth exploits are just, in my opinion, detrimental to the game. They are nothing more than "draw this card, or these cards, and win".
And the worst part is ... how can it be stopped, without just completely retooling the almost the entire game?
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland
I wanna write her, name in the sky
I wanna free fall, out into nothin'
Gonna leave this, world for awhile
Just chill out the gimmick decks are never going to be teir 1 so you don't have to worry or fix them
As long as cards have texts, cards will be exploited.
As long as games have fixed rules, gamers will try to find ways to bend them.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
They don't belong *except for dmh warrior* they nearly are always frustrating to play against.
Eh, none of them bother me too much. People will always come up with the way to "exploit" the game: ie. to find the most powerful strategy they can. If it's not this card it's that one, so what? If all cards were more or less the same, all classes would play the same... where's fun in that?
How do you stop them? You build the deck that does well against strategy you find most annoying. I played against 1 exodia mage yesterday (only one, so even if I lost it would be totally fine) and I used Dirty Rat to pull their Apprentice, killed it, and proceeded to obliterate their face. So, if they "exploited" something, I did too and found the strategy that destroys their win condition. Seems fine to me.
barring big priest, none of these seem terrible gimmicky, and take at least little a bit of skill to pilot. turn 1 coin/keleseth/shadowstep/keleseth is some major high-rolling, but the deck doesn't rely on that combo and pretty rarely actually gets it. DMH and exodia are fairly difficult and have hard and soft counters.
Every deck you mentioned is pretty cool to me, with the exception of Big Priest. The pay off for Barnes on turn 4 is too great leading to easy revival of 9 and 10 mana cards for the remainder of the game - and it won't be long as you'll be blown away. Win rates with this deck don't matter, it's just blatantly unfair and feels really bad to lose to. Also, the deck is auto-pilot in terms of difficulty making it even more frustrating.
Keleseth decks on whole are fine, it's by no means an insta-loss if they have it turn 2 and it empowers mid-range decks that had been seriously struggling, exodia mage has obvious weaknesses, DMH warrior has an extremely high skill ceiling....
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland
I wanna write her, name in the sky
I wanna free fall, out into nothin'
Gonna leave this, world for awhile
Yet even with the dream openner a rogue still lost to me playing control Pali yesterday... So weird.
I'm pretty sure Blizzard intended it to be this way. Blizzard loves RNG (go read/watch some of their developer insights). They've just made it more subtle compared to the previous expansions (remember Unstable Portal?).
Blizzard loves RNG because it allows bad players to occasionally win against good players, and gives players an excuse whenever they lose. As much as we hate to admit it, this business model is working very well for Blizzard: most of Hearthstone's revenue is coming from the Casual scene, not the Competitive scene.
Maybe my translation was wrong but I always thought gimmick are the decks that have some fun, cool interaction/combo to pull off and are meant to have fun with not to play them competitively. If those decks whoop a$$ they're not gimmick but good meta decks. A gimmick deck cannot be unstoppable. So I really dont get the point of the topic.
There's always gonna be exploited combos, might as well get used to it. I feel like you're loose in your description of a gimmick deck. A gimmick deck is like Renounce Warlock. Big Priest is kind of a gimmick deck but really it's just high rolling to the max. It's still just a tier 2 deck at best
I don't mind Keleseth Rogue. But Big Priest, Exodia Mage and DMH Warrior are definitely the most annoying and the least interactive decks I've ever played against. I hate them so much that a even a Jade Druid or Secret Paladin meta would feel better.
I'd nerf those 3 decks until they become unplayable.
But I don't know why, people don't seem to mind them because "those decks take skill" (no, they don't) or "at least the games last more than 7 turns" (89 turns, 1 hour game! Zzzzz).
Ummmm I don't get it. By Gimmick Decks do you mean achitypes. If you want to really examine the history of decks you can find a gimmick in pretty much all of them. Freeze Mage, Patron Warrior, Mill Rouge, Secret Paladin, Jade Druid, Undertaker Hunter... etc. Seriously just because something works doesn't make it a Gimmick. The Meta can get stale at times but decks will come and go. Finding counters and stuff that I enjoy playing makes it fun for me. Calm down and switch to wild or casual or arena.
TI don't really agree with you on a gimmick. keleseth Rogue isn't a gimmick deck. It is a pretty good deck that gets a lot better if it pulls the right card at the right time. Pretty much every deck has that, just not as extreme
Same with DMH warrior, it is a control warrior with a specific win condition. Much like the old Control Warriors that relied on Tank Up to survive damage and fatigue and then golden monkey to win at the end. It is also probably the hardest competitive deck to play well with very difficult decision making determini what to cycle based on what your opponent has left.
To me a gimmick deck is one built entirely around one mechanic. If you have a priest with just Barnes, a big minion and a bunch of resurrect, and cards entirely to facilitate that it is a gimmick deck. If you add a Barnes/resurrect package to a regular deck it isn't a gimmick deck.
The "gimmick" is that Barnes giving you a 1/1 copy of a minion isn't the problem, but when that minion can be resurrected 3 or 4 times, it exploits what Barnes was intended to do. The same goes for Keleseth ... Playing him once, and getting a +1/+1 to all minions is fine ... but playing him 2 or 3 times, especially if that happens early in the game, is again exploiting the ability of the card into doing much more than it was designed to do.
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland
I wanna write her, name in the sky
I wanna free fall, out into nothin'
Gonna leave this, world for awhile
I think the only bad thing that can be said is that the deck is kind of high rolly, which I don't particularly like. The overall win percentage is fairly good, but I just don't like the highroll nature.
I will use my Hunter deck as an example, just because I probably pay more attention to my opening hand on it more than any other. In that deck, I have 3 1 cost minions ... so 1/10th of the total deck. But, I would estimate that I draw one of those 3 minions at least 75% of the time. Statistically that seems like it should be impossible. (Maybe someone who is way better at math than I am could actually figure out the probability of drawing "Card X by Turn Y".)
I am not saying that the game gives you Keleseth specifically, but I do believe there is some algorithm in place that gives lower mana cards a higher chance to be drawn early, and higher cost cards to come late. This would be a logical way of explaining why you are very likely to have Keleseth by T2, and Barnes by T4.
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland
I wanna write her, name in the sky
I wanna free fall, out into nothin'
Gonna leave this, world for awhile