Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
A meta isn't healthy if it has a lot of "cancer" decks in it. A true cancer deck makes a meta unhealthy. Having ten cancer decks in a meta isn't any more healthy than having one. I'm not saying any of the decks we have right now are cancerous, just pointing out that having more cancer doesn't give you a healthier meta.
But having 10 cancer decks, means the meta is very balance,...... That is what he meant.
That's not what it means at all. You could have 100 cancer decks and still have an unbalanced meta.
Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
A meta isn't healthy if it has a lot of "cancer" decks in it. A true cancer deck makes a meta unhealthy. Having ten cancer decks in a meta isn't any more healthy than having one. I'm not saying any of the decks we have right now are cancerous, just pointing out that having more cancer doesn't give you a healthier meta.
You miss the point. It's just that everyone is whining about some decks.
Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
A meta isn't healthy if it has a lot of "cancer" decks in it. A true cancer deck makes a meta unhealthy. Having ten cancer decks in a meta isn't any more healthy than having one. I'm not saying any of the decks we have right now are cancerous, just pointing out that having more cancer doesn't give you a healthier meta.
You miss the point. It's just that everyone is whining about some decks.
That, or there are actually too many cancer decks.
Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
A meta isn't healthy if it has a lot of "cancer" decks in it. A true cancer deck makes a meta unhealthy. Having ten cancer decks in a meta isn't any more healthy than having one. I'm not saying any of the decks we have right now are cancerous, just pointing out that having more cancer doesn't give you a healthier meta.
But having 10 cancer decks, means the meta is very balance,...... That is what he meant.
No, having multiple high-tier decks means the meta is balanced.
Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
A meta isn't healthy if it has a lot of "cancer" decks in it. A true cancer deck makes a meta unhealthy. Having ten cancer decks in a meta isn't any more healthy than having one. I'm not saying any of the decks we have right now are cancerous, just pointing out that having more cancer doesn't give you a healthier meta.
But having 10 cancer decks, means the meta is very balance,...... That is what he meant.
No, having multiple high-tier decks means the meta is balanced.
Actually I'd say having many T2 and T3 decks is the best case. T1 decks might be too strong already. T2 and T3 decks are all withing the 45-55% winrate ratio, which is probably the best from a balance point.
Of course you could also have a balanced deck with a high winrate because the meta is currently favoring that deck.
The current Meta has 17 T2/T3 decks and only 2 T1 decks. Sounds really good to me
FWIW - I screenshot the HSReplays meta page every week. The current meta-game is the flattest and widest since the peak which was reached during Un'Goro, with 22 decks, each of the major archetypes, and all nine classes represented among the top three tiers - Warrior isn't played often enough to make the front page of the meta report, but if you look at the class numbers, Pirate Warrior is comfortably in third tier.
As far as "cancer" - I've not noticed either the OP, or anyone supporting his claim, bothering to explain how the word has any meaning other than "I don't like this deck." There is a salt thread for those who aren't honestly interested in constructively engaging in discussion about the game, but who find more value in anonymously bitching to an audience of perfect strangers . . .
Everything is toxic to someone. Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
Decks I've seen being called cancer on hearthpwn since the patches nerf:
sounds like a healthy format. And tbh calling aggro decks mindless is usually a mistake inexperienced players often make
For sure this meta could be the second healthiest one. It only loses to the mid time of Un'goro because non warlock control decks are being too much bullyed, and even though the meta is slower the other 2 decks you can call control are priest decks that care more about tempo than anything else. (Big and the new Dragons version). There is no actual "Control" in hearthstone in really, for so every single control needs to be attached with a very good tempo body or have a mind blowing effect to be playable (only not truth for mage), see warrior for example, the only time control warrior was good was when groomash was a bullshit crazzy card and with C'thun... And C'thun decks are almost tempo decks.
And.. Mindless only means lees mind than the other decks.
Of course every game needs to be played with the mind, but the amount of thought you utilize when playing an aggro deck in hearthstone is bullshit compared to most card games mainly. It is not even comparable to how much thinking is needed for control. The variables are too much polarized.
Everything is toxic to someone. Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
Decks I've seen being called cancer on hearthpwn since the patches nerf:
sounds like a healthy format. And tbh calling aggro decks mindless is usually a mistake inexperienced players often make
For sure this meta could be the second healthiest one. It only loses to the mid time of Un'goro because non warlock control decks are being too much bullyed, and even though the meta is slower the other 2 decks you can call control are priest decks that care more about tempo than anything else. (Big and the new Dragons version).
And.. Mindless only means lees mind than the other decks.
Of course every game needs to be played with the mind, but the amount of thought you utilize when playing an aggro deck in hearthstone is bullshit compared to most card games mainly. It is not even comparable to how much thinking is needed for control. The variables are too much polarized.
To be honest I think more when doing laundry.
But that is true for every deck in HS. The game just is simple. Aggro or control. You can still get a few percentages by playing around cards and sequencing correctly but it's way easier than for example playing Magic correctly.
Only some combodecks need a bit more thinking as you need to manage kinda unusual resources
Everything is toxic to someone. Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
Decks I've seen being called cancer on hearthpwn since the patches nerf:
sounds like a healthy format. And tbh calling aggro decks mindless is usually a mistake inexperienced players often make
For sure this meta could be the second healthiest one. It only loses to the mid time of Un'goro because non warlock control decks are being too much bullyed, and even though the meta is slower the other 2 decks you can call control are priest decks that care more about tempo than anything else. (Big and the new Dragons version).
And.. Mindless only means lees mind than the other decks.
Of course every game needs to be played with the mind, but the amount of thought you utilize when playing an aggro deck in hearthstone is bullshit compared to most card games mainly. It is not even comparable to how much thinking is needed for control. The variables are too much polarized.
To be honest I think more when doing laundry.
But that is true for every deck in HS. The game just is simple. Aggro or control. You can still get a few percentages by playing around cards and sequencing correctly but it's way easier than for example playing Magic correctly.
Only some combodecks need a bit more thinking as you need to manage kinda unusual resources
That's what i'm talking about, in a game where you don't think even for control imagine aggro/rush decks.
Everything is toxic to someone. Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
Decks I've seen being called cancer on hearthpwn since the patches nerf:
sounds like a healthy format. And tbh calling aggro decks mindless is usually a mistake inexperienced players often make
For sure this meta could be the second healthiest one. It only loses to the mid time of Un'goro because non warlock control decks are being too much bullyed, and even though the meta is slower the other 2 decks you can call control are priest decks that care more about tempo than anything else. (Big and the new Dragons version).
And.. Mindless only means lees mind than the other decks.
Of course every game needs to be played with the mind, but the amount of thought you utilize when playing an aggro deck in hearthstone is bullshit compared to most card games mainly. It is not even comparable to how much thinking is needed for control. The variables are too much polarized.
To be honest I think more when doing laundry.
But that is true for every deck in HS. The game just is simple. Aggro or control. You can still get a few percentages by playing around cards and sequencing correctly but it's way easier than for example playing Magic correctly.
Only some combodecks need a bit more thinking as you need to manage kinda unusual resources
That's what i'm talking about, in a game where you don't think even for control imagine aggro/rush decks.
Not much of a difference. Aggro decks usually have a similar amount of decisions but condensed in less turns
Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
A meta isn't healthy if it has a lot of "cancer" decks in it. A true cancer deck makes a meta unhealthy. Having ten cancer decks in a meta isn't any more healthy than having one. I'm not saying any of the decks we have right now are cancerous, just pointing out that having more cancer doesn't give you a healthier meta.
You miss the point. It's just that everyone is whining about some decks.
Your point was that there are a lot of decks that people are complaining are cancer so that must mean the meta is healthy. That is absolutely not true, and in fact could mean the complete opposite.
Just counting the amount of "cancer" decks in the format probably means this is the most healthy standard in a long time.
A meta isn't healthy if it has a lot of "cancer" decks in it. A true cancer deck makes a meta unhealthy. Having ten cancer decks in a meta isn't any more healthy than having one. I'm not saying any of the decks we have right now are cancerous, just pointing out that having more cancer doesn't give you a healthier meta.
You miss the point. It's just that everyone is whining about some decks.
Your point was that there are a lot of decks that people are complaining are cancer so that must mean the meta is healthy. That is absolutely not true, and in fact could mean the complete opposite.
Or perhaps I was just making fun of all the cancer idiots
Meh, I don't think that it, as a singular archetype, is toxic. I do think meta's as a whole are a bit toxic and restrictive to creativity and individual design, but that's a people problem not a hearthstone problem.
ITT a bunch of people who haven't played warrior
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
FWIW - I screenshot the HSReplays meta page every week. The current meta-game is the flattest and widest since the peak which was reached during Un'Goro, with 22 decks, each of the major archetypes, and all nine classes represented among the top three tiers - Warrior isn't played often enough to make the front page of the meta report, but if you look at the class numbers, Pirate Warrior is comfortably in third tier.
As far as "cancer" - I've not noticed either the OP, or anyone supporting his claim, bothering to explain how the word has any meaning other than "I don't like this deck." There is a salt thread for those who aren't honestly interested in constructively engaging in discussion about the game, but who find more value in anonymously bitching to an audience of perfect strangers . . .
I like Paladin. Dude Paladin is just straight up whack. I use big spell mage and by turn 4 or 5 Im clearing every turn. Ive never lost.
Hello!
Or maybe we are saying, dudedin is just 1 of like 10 strong decks, and some counter each other. Which makes it a balance Meta.
What constitutes a "cancer" deck? There will always be good decks. Anyone whining about "cancer" decks is an idiot.
Nope, i don't feel it
Meh, I don't think that it, as a singular archetype, is toxic. I do think meta's as a whole are a bit toxic and restrictive to creativity and individual design, but that's a people problem not a hearthstone problem.
This is what the meta looks like when you are too f2p to have a full control warlock deck to counter it:
I have tried playing this deck and I got slaughtered by Warlocks and most Priests. It can do very well but it has its weaknesses.
On the ladder now, rank 2, and I don't see much of this deck.