META decks "kill" all other already released cards in the game and create a boring game without much deck experimenting/building. We need a new mode with the new ladder that is coming later in 2018, which would:
- Match players with OFF-META decks against others with such
- Give an option for a class/card ban
Explanation: A deck has 30 cards. Each card has a percent of usage in the last 24 hours. Your deck is considered a META one if the sum of the percent of usage from your cards goes above a certain number. In this case you will be matched against another META deck.
META decks "kill" all other already released cards in the game and create a boring game without much deck experimenting/building. We need a new mode with the new ladder that is coming later in 2018, which would:
- Match players with OFF-META decks against others with such
- Give an option for a class/card ban
Some questions -
what are "meta decks" and "off meta-decks", and how does the new play mode identify them?
how would the new mode be able to prevent people from playing meta-decks? couldn't they just tweak a meta-deck by a few cards to "cheat" the new mode?
how would the card ban work? do players choose a single card among the 1000 cards available in Standard? do they choose from among a handful of options selected by Team 5? do they choose a bunch of cards and "personalize" their own individual play mode - "i never want to play against these dozen cards again!"
what happens when players simply figure out the best "off-meta" meta decks for the new format? do we get another new play mode which bans meta-decks and off-meta meta decks?
When playing IRL card games, people rarely bring crazy home-brews to the local store to play against a bunch of perfect strangers - HS is the same. If you want to play crazy home-brews, you'll get stomped at the local store, and you'll get stomped on ladder or casual mode in HS. The most straight-forward course of action in each case is to simply play your crazy decks against your friends, and let all the other perfect strangers who enjoy the game play whatever decks they want, without yelling at them on social media. Problem solved.
what happens when players simply figure out the best "off-meta" meta decks for the new format? do we get another new play mode which bans meta-decks and off-meta meta decks?
Best off-meta decks just become meta decks. You identify these by tracking the most used cards by the players in the mode.
A deck has 30 cards. Each card has a percent of usage in the last day. Your deck is considered a meta one if the sum of the percent of usage from your cards goes above a certain number. In this case you will be matched against another meta deck.
what happens when players simply figure out the best "off-meta" meta decks for the new format? do we get another new play mode which bans meta-decks and off-meta meta decks?
Best off-meta decks just become meta decks. You identify these by tracking the most used cards by the players in the mode.
A deck has 30 cards. Each card has a percent of usage in the last day. Your deck is considered a meta one if the sum of the percent of usage from your cards goes above a certain number. In this case you will be matched against another meta deck.
FWIW - the gist of my post was rhetorical. It isn't practicable to create a play mode in which folks can only play Reno Pirate Mech Rogue, Elemental Hunter, Inspire Druid, or similar sorts of decks - just like IRL, you play those sorts of decks against your friends, or you take your chances in constructed.
A better solution for you would be to ask for a seasonal TB mode with a "crazy" set of rules and a restricted card pool - every month, the rules and card pool change. But "Standard, with some bans, and a few days later, some more bans, then some more, then maybe we start unbanning previously popular cards . . ." doesn't seem like an elegant solution to your problem.
META decks "kill" all other already released cards in the game and create a boring game without much deck experimenting/building. We need a new mode with the new ladder that is coming later in 2018, which would:
- Match players with OFF-META decks against others with such
- Give an option for a class/card ban
To be honest I think they regular ladder already does that. I tend to see more off meta decks if I play one of my own creations.
With or without new set of rules, in order to fresh up the decks you see in the mode, you need to change how the matching system works. If a player enjoys meta decks - no problem, match him against another player with such decks. If a player builds a non-meta deck, match him against another such player.
And btw, by last day I mean last 24 hours, so each card usage effectively changes after the start of each game for the last 24 hours.
You can play all the homebrews you would like. You just can't win much doing so. This will be true in any mode that allows deckbuilding, at least as long as people like winning better than losing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
Experienced Deckbuilder, Legend Player, Wild Expert, TCG Veteran and Contributing Author toWildHS & Vicious Syndicate. Any and all support is greatly appreciated as it helps me make further quality content. 🐺 ➣Twitter ➣Decks ➣Patreon
i would realy love a class ban option at least for ranked its way overdue since in tournaments you have also a ban making your decks more consistent and lower the anoying grind to legend.
It can be packed with a transfer of the reward system to casual. Maybe for 10/20/30/40/50 wins a month on unranked you get the rewards.
The game desperately needs to seperate serious ranked players from casuals. Having the reward system attached to ranked is realy a bad thing for everyone.
I do miss the WoToG meta where everyone had access to C'thun, and each deck was very good and could reach high ranks in the ladder. Didn't reach Legend but climbed to Rank 7 with C'Thun Warrior and Rank 6 with C'Thun Rogue/Yogg Druid the following season.
Nowadays all I see (yes... I'm playing Highlander Priest because I HAVE TO) is other Highlander Priests. Not complaining because I'm piloting the same deck, but this meta is awfully stale which I can argue is undeniable. I'd play anything else if it weren't for the fact I'm trying to reach Legend.
Hearthstone with like a "cardlist" each few months would be cool, kind of like Yu-Gi-Oh where you can't use specific cards in duels or during matches. I think it would encourage deck innovation and make a fresher meta for that area, but it would be hard to add to the game.
I think from the comments in this thread it's preferable to have a meta where all classes can participate, but we generally don't like when that participation requires a "kit" of cards like corridor creeper, which are just vanilla minions that can be cheated out for big tempo swings. However, C'thun was popular, which required the use of a kit of fairly well-stated minions that supported the legendary.
I think the difference is that the minions were (mostly) vanilla, and C'thun was a legendary, not an epic, which means drawing him was more difficult and there was no way to cheat him out without losing his battlecry, which was the whole reason to play him in the first place.
This probably sounds obvious, but players remember WotOG fondly because C'thun was a way to equalize the power between the classes but also promised that the big punch of the deck couldn't come out at some ridiculously early turn. I think that's why people are annoyed by this otherwise good meta: too many high power effects too early.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at this thing and let me know what you think!
I think from the comments in this thread it's preferable to have a meta where all classes can participate, but we generally don't like when that participation requires a "kit" of cards like corridor creeper, which are just vanilla minions that can be cheated out for big tempo swings. However, C'thun was popular, which required the use of a kit of fairly well-stated minions that supported the legendary.
I think the difference is that the minions were (mostly) vanilla, and C'thun was a legendary, not an epic, which means drawing him was more difficult and there was no way to cheat him out without losing his battlecry, which was the whole reason to play him in the first place.
This probably sounds obvious, but players remember WotOG fondly because C'thun was a way to equalize the power between the classes but also promised that the big punch of the deck couldn't come out at some ridiculously early turn. I think that's why people are annoyed by this otherwise good meta: too many high power effects too early.
Actually, C'thun was rather hated when he was popular for the first 2 weeks. People feared a 'c'thun curvestone meta'. That only ended because C'thun stopped being threatening. If he stayed powerful, he would've been a disaster to the game. Mean Street's Jade decks are what a Strong C'thun would've been.
In any case afterwards, C'thun stopped being used by most classes until only Warrior really played with him. Thus C'thun became an unofficial class card.
What people don't like is popularity and expectation. They don't like seeing the same cards over and over. That's CARDS, not DECKS. Mean Streets actually had a wide variety of actual DECKS involved from multiple classes. However, they all used similar cards. So it wasn't "Tempo Rogue, Aggro Rogue, Aggro Warrior, Slower Tempo Warrior, ext.." It was "Patches, Reno, Jade" People hated choosing between "I'm in charge, now!" "We're going to be rich" or "I make a slightly bigger man."
We're seeing something similar now. It's either Raza/Anduin/Machinegun, Demons into Cubes, or "I'm in charge, now!" That they have multiple types of decks means nothing since their key cards all match.
I'm with a few of the pros. Machine Gun priest's issue is that it should've been around THIS expansion so that we get 3 months of him and then done. 6 months of Randuin madness, especially when the following expansion boosted his power, is a Bad Thing.
The issue with aggro decks, including creeper, is Patches. Patches is what allows Pirates to exist for all classes and what allows Prince to really exist (since you only really need the 1 and 3 drops of the pirates) which then allows all of these aggro decks to exist. Take Patches out and everything else falls apart into much more manageable decks while Creeper becomes a powerful card that probably is managable enough.
(not that I'll scream over a nerf to Creeper, but I would be fine without one if Patches is dealt with. If Patches remains, Creeper needs to change)
Cubelock...honestly probably wouldn't be a problem is the REST of the meta wasn't as messed up :P.
I like the discussion but I think it remains a minor problem that can’t be fixed. Therefore the question should be which type of meta is healthiest?
If you include a dynamic matching system it won't matter which meta will rule atm since you will always be free to play an off-meta deck and therefore play against all types of decks.
I don't know how long have you been playing HS for, but since the very beginning, people is always complaining about meta.
If it's aggro, you hate the meta
If it's control, you hate the meta
If it's combo, you hate the meta
I would hate being able to play just midrange to be honest, so just enjoy the decks, and think that in a few months, you will be able to hate something else :)
Such truth. But the meta is stale. I don't hate it, but I guess I just can't wait until the next rotation - all part of the next step for HS :)
How, EXACTLY, would you define 'off-meta'? If Razakus is meta and you swapped out one card at a time with a basic card, at what point is it 'off meta'? If your Razakaus deck doesn't have DFP, is not Razakus? If you take 29 basic (different) cards and add Raza, is it Razakus? Furthermore, how do you account for tech cards? Different versions of basically the same deck?
How, EXACTLY, would you define 'off-meta'? If Razakus is meta and you swapped out one card at a time with a basic card, at what point is it 'off meta'? If your Razakaus deck doesn't have DFP, is not Razakus? If you take 29 basic (different) cards and add Raza, is it Razakus? Furthermore, how do you account for tech cards? Different versions of basically the same deck?
what happens when players simply figure out the best "off-meta" meta decks for the new format? do we get another new play mode which bans meta-decks and off-meta meta decks?
Best off-meta decks just become meta decks. You identify these by tracking the most used cards by the players in the mode.
A deck has 30 cards. Each card has a percent of usage in the last day. Your deck is considered a meta one if the sum of the percent of usage from your cards goes above a certain number. In this case you will be matched against another meta deck.
META decks "kill" all other already released cards in the game and create a boring game without much deck experimenting/building. We need a new mode with the new ladder that is coming later in 2018, which would:
- Match players with OFF-META decks against others with such
- Give an option for a class/card ban
Explanation: A deck has 30 cards. Each card has a percent of usage in the last 24 hours. Your deck is considered a META one if the sum of the percent of usage from your cards goes above a certain number. In this case you will be matched against another META deck.
*whine whine* hearthstone sucks *whine whine* I can't play my homebrews *whine whine*
http://www.hearthpwn.com/decks/1022004-razakus-dragonfly
http://www.hearthpwn.com/decks/1021994-reno-jackson2018-ungoro-quest
"Boring" is the new "Cancer" :-D
With or without new set of rules, in order to fresh up the decks you see in the mode, you need to change how the matching system works. If a player enjoys meta decks - no problem, match him against another player with such decks. If a player builds a non-meta deck, match him against another such player.
And btw, by last day I mean last 24 hours, so each card usage effectively changes after the start of each game for the last 24 hours.
I like the discussion but I think it remains a minor problem that can’t be fixed. Therefore the question should be which type of meta is healthiest?
1. A meta where all classes are viable but everyone runs the same neutral minions (current meta with pirates and corridor creeper)
2. An Aggro heavy meta
3. A control heavy meta
You can play all the homebrews you would like. You just can't win much doing so. This will be true in any mode that allows deckbuilding, at least as long as people like winning better than losing.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I'd take a WoTOG meta again where every class had a C'Thun deck that felt totally different to play!
i would realy love a class ban option at least for ranked its way overdue since in tournaments you have also a ban making your decks more consistent and lower the anoying grind to legend.
It can be packed with a transfer of the reward system to casual. Maybe for 10/20/30/40/50 wins a month on unranked you get the rewards.
The game desperately needs to seperate serious ranked players from casuals. Having the reward system attached to ranked is realy a bad thing for everyone.
Class ban should exist in ladder, alone this prevent a broken class like shaman in shamanstone or druid before nerfs ruin all until a late fix become.
I do miss the WoToG meta where everyone had access to C'thun, and each deck was very good and could reach high ranks in the ladder. Didn't reach Legend but climbed to Rank 7 with C'Thun Warrior and Rank 6 with C'Thun Rogue/Yogg Druid the following season.
Nowadays all I see (yes... I'm playing Highlander Priest because I HAVE TO) is other Highlander Priests. Not complaining because I'm piloting the same deck, but this meta is awfully stale which I can argue is undeniable. I'd play anything else if it weren't for the fact I'm trying to reach Legend.
Hearthstone with like a "cardlist" each few months would be cool, kind of like Yu-Gi-Oh where you can't use specific cards in duels or during matches. I think it would encourage deck innovation and make a fresher meta for that area, but it would be hard to add to the game.
Favourite cards by rarity: Deathwing / Leeroy Jenkins, Doomsayer, Undercity Huckster, Blood Imp
Highest Rank achieved: Legend (S46)
Do I suck at Hearthstone? Most likely.
I think from the comments in this thread it's preferable to have a meta where all classes can participate, but we generally don't like when that participation requires a "kit" of cards like corridor creeper, which are just vanilla minions that can be cheated out for big tempo swings. However, C'thun was popular, which required the use of a kit of fairly well-stated minions that supported the legendary.
I think the difference is that the minions were (mostly) vanilla, and C'thun was a legendary, not an epic, which means drawing him was more difficult and there was no way to cheat him out without losing his battlecry, which was the whole reason to play him in the first place.
This probably sounds obvious, but players remember WotOG fondly because C'thun was a way to equalize the power between the classes but also promised that the big punch of the deck couldn't come out at some ridiculously early turn. I think that's why people are annoyed by this otherwise good meta: too many high power effects too early.
Look at this thing and let me know what you think!
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Favourite cards by rarity: Deathwing / Leeroy Jenkins, Doomsayer, Undercity Huckster, Blood Imp
Highest Rank achieved: Legend (S46)
Do I suck at Hearthstone? Most likely.
How, EXACTLY, would you define 'off-meta'? If Razakus is meta and you swapped out one card at a time with a basic card, at what point is it 'off meta'? If your Razakaus deck doesn't have DFP, is not Razakus? If you take 29 basic (different) cards and add Raza, is it Razakus? Furthermore, how do you account for tech cards? Different versions of basically the same deck?
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
I already explained it: