Very balanced meta so far. every class has at least one viable deck type and hopefully that encourages people to develop in those areas so it gets better (although it could get worse) https://www.vicioussyndicate.com/vs-data-reaper-report-63/
*note* i was referring to legend winrates but it's pretty similar at lower ranks with approximately 4% difference
Maybe, although I feel like there's a big difference in 54% win rate decks and 58% win rate. especially in the hands of a skilled player. The tempo decks that are getting around the 58% win rate I believe have a high variance in winning based on skill level, as it's easy to make a mistake (removal vs face). In order to really be able to pilot a tempo deck well you need high level skills like reading the other persons hand.... that being said, that's probably a good thing because it implies that they game is now more skill based.
Agreed. I think ideally what Blizzard should also strive for though I think this just makes the design space way too hard is to ensure that one meta deck doesn't have a huge advantage over another meta deck. It's not fun when you know there's a 80+% chance you are going to lose or you are going to win.
Maybe, although I feel like there's a big difference in 54% win rate decks and 58% win rate. especially in the hands of a skilled player. The tempo decks that are getting around the 58% win rate I believe have a high variance in winning based on skill level, as it's easy to make a mistake (removal vs face). In order to really be able to pilot a tempo deck well you need high level skills like reading the other persons hand.... that being said, that's probably a good thing because it implies that they game is now more skill based.
That's a VERY good thing.
We need a mixture of decently wining decks that are easy to navigate for newer players (starcraft is VERY hard to have mainstream appeal because of this lack) while rewarding higher end players. Having every class represented is also a great thing as well.
I have heard of compaints about decks being high variance. Also F2P is in a bad state since we don't really have much in budget decks, especially since even aggro is demanding 1-2 legendaries now. The biggest complaint I heard though is the timing: that it took too long to respond to with a nerf.
Maybe, although I feel like there's a big difference in 54% win rate decks and 58% win rate. especially in the hands of a skilled player. The tempo decks that are getting around the 58% win rate I believe have a high variance in winning based on skill level, as it's easy to make a mistake (removal vs face). In order to really be able to pilot a tempo deck well you need high level skills like reading the other persons hand.... that being said, that's probably a good thing because it implies that they game is now more skill based.
none of the decks have a 58% winrate highest is 55% and it goes down to less than 53% at legend
Agreed! Loving the diversity, as well as the (slightly) higher skill required to get a bigger winrate. I've noticed my winrate has gone up substantially with several different decks just due to reading my opponents hand, watching their mulligans, predictions, etc. I notice the more predictable the deck, the more it falls flat (sometimes). It's all about having the best cards possible but still packing a couple surprises for opponents! (I.e. One consecration in Murlock pally, 2x shadowcaster in tempo rogue instead of 1, etc).
Personally I'm not seeing a whole lot of diversity within deck archetypes. Rank 10-5+ seemed to be mostly Evolve Shaman, Tempo Rogue, Mid-range Hunter, Jade Druid and Highlander Priest, and pretty much 100% of the time there was very little variation in all builds.
It can't disagree that it hasn't got better since the Druid nerfs, I'm just happy Aggro Druid is gone, but I still think the game suffers from a serious lack of actual player agency where skill/knowledge can determine the outcome of a game. Right now decks just play themselves or pray for high rolls/card draw order.
50/50 win rates seems balanced but when it is happens regardless of player knowledge and practice. It kinda sucks.
im fairly certain it doesnt happen independent of skill. some players get to legend consistently every season with very few games and very high winrates. i notice my win percentage often goes down whenever there's a new update because it's a skill equalizer for everyone to be unfamiliar with the particular meta. it doesnt completely equalize skill but it makes it harder to have a huge advantage over your peers and lowers overall winrate. and usually the people around your rank are going to be within range of your skill level anyway
Maybe, although I feel like there's a big difference in 54% win rate decks and 58% win rate. especially in the hands of a skilled player. The tempo decks that are getting around the 58% win rate I believe have a high variance in winning based on skill level, as it's easy to make a mistake (removal vs face). In order to really be able to pilot a tempo deck well you need high level skills like reading the other persons hand.... that being said, that's probably a good thing because it implies that they game is now more skill based.
That's a VERY good thing.
We need a mixture of decently wining decks that are easy to navigate for newer players (starcraft is VERY hard to have mainstream appeal because of this lack) while rewarding higher end players. Having every class represented is also a great thing as well.
I have heard of compaints about decks being high variance. Also F2P is in a bad state since we don't really have much in budget decks, especially since even aggro is demanding 1-2 legendaries now. The biggest complaint I heard though is the timing: that it took too long to respond to with a nerf.
Overall though it is an improvement.
But very much an improvement
Hunter can play without patches and rexxar, TBH rexxar isn't that great of a card.
But yeah even zoo uses both kelesath and patches.. and it used to be THE budget deck..
blizzard should do something about it quick.. (not about patches, about the pace on which new players get content.)
it will be antoundengly bad once the next expansion hits if the legendaries there aren't 100% garbage and they will define the meta a deck specially a highlander one might hit a price of 15K dust to craft and it will be a top meta deck that has to run all those legendaries..
while FKT was kind(ish) to new players by giving a lot of gold before the expasnion hit + 6 free packs + a free DK card I thiunk the new played experiance is still too far off.
Very balanced meta so far. every class has at least one viable deck type and hopefully that encourages people to develop in those areas so it gets better (although it could get worse) https://www.vicioussyndicate.com/vs-data-reaper-report-63/
*note* i was referring to legend winrates but it's pretty similar at lower ranks with approximately 4% difference
Maybe, although I feel like there's a big difference in 54% win rate decks and 58% win rate. especially in the hands of a skilled player. The tempo decks that are getting around the 58% win rate I believe have a high variance in winning based on skill level, as it's easy to make a mistake (removal vs face). In order to really be able to pilot a tempo deck well you need high level skills like reading the other persons hand.... that being said, that's probably a good thing because it implies that they game is now more skill based.
Agreed. I think ideally what Blizzard should also strive for though I think this just makes the design space way too hard is to ensure that one meta deck doesn't have a huge advantage over another meta deck. It's not fun when you know there's a 80+% chance you are going to lose or you are going to win.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Agreed! Loving the diversity, as well as the (slightly) higher skill required to get a bigger winrate. I've noticed my winrate has gone up substantially with several different decks just due to reading my opponents hand, watching their mulligans, predictions, etc. I notice the more predictable the deck, the more it falls flat (sometimes). It's all about having the best cards possible but still packing a couple surprises for opponents! (I.e. One consecration in Murlock pally, 2x shadowcaster in tempo rogue instead of 1, etc).
antoundengly ?