That all said, the concept of netdecking as a negative action is still something that is completely made up. And hence my point would be correct. Maybe that makes it a little clearer for you.
Yes this is the whole basis of the thread. "How do people feel about netdecking in casual?" It's not made up, it's merely an opinion, a completely valid one at that.
None of this has anything to do with the point that I made. I was talking about when people accuse others of "netdecking", rather than worrying about what Tom, Dick or Harry thinks the definition of netdecking is or should be. That, and the obvious fact that you will never be able to determine if somone actually netdeck any deck regardless of the cards in it. To do so, actually 100% IS in your head.
For instance, if I read that Token Druid is T1 on ladder but never look at a decklist and put together what I think should go into it....yeah I'm netdecking. If I look at a decklist but swap out one card...I'm netdecking. If a person is making a homebrew deck and it just accidentally happens to be the exact decklist as a T1 ladder deck.....okay they get a one time free pass but it's still a netdeck.
If I post the exact decklist from VS for a top tier competitive deck and ask, "Is this a netdeck?" the only correct answer is "yes it's a netdeck."
We can both make assumptions about what people do or don't think / feel. The difference is the part you seem to have intentionally missed out from this sentence where I said "I believe that..." (an opinion-based statement) whereas you have made a factual claim that I am 100% incorrect. So unless you have evidence that supports this that isn't simply your subjective opinion dressed up as fact then that's where the argument should end.
That's actually on you to prove (the idea that most people cry 'netdecker' as an excuse for losing), or to admit this is at best just an opinion without evidence.
Again. Subjective remark based on personal anecdote doesn't equate to factual evidence about the actions of the player base at large. State your opinion as opion (like I did), or back it up with some evidence.
"Accusing someone of netdecking is akin to accusations of cheating" - explain or prove it. Explain how 1 = 2.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
That all said, the concept of netdecking as a negative action is still something that is completely made up. And hence my point would be correct. Maybe that makes it a little clearer for you.
Yes this is the whole basis of the thread. "How do people feel about netdecking in casual?" It's not made up, it's merely an opinion, a completely valid one at that.
Good. So you agree. It's an opinion which is a decision a person made up in their head based on assumptions they made. Not based in actual fact.
For instance, if I read that Token Druid is T1 on ladder but never look at a decklist and put together what I think should go into it....yeah I'm netdecking. If I look at a decklist but swap out one card...I'm netdecking. If a person is making a homebrew deck and it just accidentally happens to be the exact decklist as a T1 ladder deck.....okay they get a one time free pass but it's still a netdeck.
If I post the exact decklist from VS for a top tier competitive deck and ask, "Is this a netdeck?" the only correct answer is "yes it's a netdeck."
And ironically (considering your earlier comment), that is entirely incorrect. What you have there is purely an opinion dressed up as fact (again). if a person creates a deck that is card-for-card identical to one someone else randomly posts online, it is in no way possible to be a netdeck. There was no interaction with the internet to obtain the deck building knowledge. Therefore it is logically impossible to be considered a netdeck. Otherwise you would have to claim that the person who created a deck was netdecking when they invented it, because it is now found card-for-card online.
That's actually on you to prove (the idea that most people cry 'netdecker' as an excuse for losing), or to admit this is at best just an opinion without evidence.
Except it's not. You appear to have missed (again) the point that I raised an opinion-based assumption on the motive for calling a person a netdecker. I am allowed to do that and have no onus to produce evidence of that assumption. You, however made the bold claim that it was 100% incorrect. And didn't even back it up with a reason. Just expected that to be taken as fact. Even Endlesstides called you out on that.
Again. Subjective remark based on personal anecdote doesn't equate to factual evidence about the actions of the player base at large. State your opinion as opion (like I did), or back it up with some evidence.
"Accusing someone of netdecking is akin to accusations of cheating" - explain or prove it. Explain how 1 = 2.
Why do you think 1 = 2? Expain or prove. See, I can make nonsensical demands as well. That's just arrogance.
I compared calling someone a netdecker in a negative and accusatory way as being akin to calling them cheating because you are making the insinuation that they only won because of relying on an outside source (netdecking) to provide them the means of winning - this is essentially a form of cheating; winning through unfair means. (At least that's the insinuation behind the accusation - nobody is actually claiming netdecking is cheating, before you go off on some other wild tangent here...)
Of course an opinion is not a fact. If it were, this thread would not be 8 pages, but a single post that stated "Netdecking in casual is bad." What are you arguing?
Pointing out netdecking is not the same as baseless accusations of cheating. If you aren't going to explain or prove your claims, then we have no discussion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
Except that I made my point in my initial post. To which you baselessly claimed I was "100% incorrect". I'm not really seeing a valid counterpoint to my supposition statement from anything youve written yet. (especially since you've made the claim that it was 100% incorrect) I've been waiting to see some evidence as to why - and I'm afraid demanding proof from me (when I've already stated my opinion and reasons) only seems to indicate that your scoffing remark had no real substance to it.
Going back to my original point, (and to reiterate it so it is not lost here), I believe that many people use the concept of netdecking - when directed towards another player in a negative manner - as an emotional response to losing a game, and that it insinuates that the opponent was provided an unfair advantage in their win (which falls within the concept of cheating - albeit without the direct accusation of such). This is a fairly natural and common occurence of human behaviour as a means to justify (and diminish the significance of) the loss and why the fault lies with the winner (rather than the skill of the loser).
netdecking is a real thing. it's not an imaginary concept. people don't like a non competitive format where a majority of their games are against competitive decks. this isnt' really that hard to understand. just read through the thread; i would be shocked if you could find even ONE post that said "i'd actually prefer that casual be comprised of mostly competitive decks."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
netdecking is a real thing. it's not an imaginary concept. people don't like a non competitive format where a majority of their games are against competitive decks. this isnt' really that hard to understand. just read through the thread; i would be shocked if you could find even ONE post that said "i'd actually prefer that casual be comprised of mostly competitive decks."
You're mistaking apples for oranges here. I have not claimed that the action of netdecking is an imaginary concept. I have only addressed the action of accusing another person of being a netecker and what the intent behind that accusation is. I have also pointed out that no deck can possibly be considered a netdeck without actionable evidence that the source of knowledge for the deck was derived from an online space. To claim otherwise is a fallacy and based exclusively upon something which is in the accuser's head (personal opinion). Your last sentence in the reply above actually has absolutely no relevance to anything I've said either - so I'm not sure if you understand what is actually being discussed here (in regards to my original reply to the other poster's comment).
So if I can just make sure we're talking about the same thing, can your argument be summed up as, "You can't possibly know if they're netdecking unless they specifically say they got their decklist off the internet"?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
Someone was mad at me because i played whizbang in casual. He called me netdecker and other things... You are not allowed to play this game. People are always find a way to be mad at someone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Once upon a time there laughed a man. He had a great big beard and a company he ran. He rapped better than most. He memed harder than Toast. Now he’s embarked upon a new road. Goodbye, goodbye, we love you Ben Brode
So if I can just make sure we're talking about the same thing, can your argument be summed up as, "You can't possibly know if they're netdecking unless they specifically say they got their decklist off the internet"?
There are two parts to what I was saying. The first part : yes, as you've said above. The second part was examining the motive and intent behind calling someone a netdecker.
I believe then you are missing the point. We aren't mad about where people get their decklists. We are mad that high level competitive decks (exact copies, variants, budget versions, etc) are being played at an unacceptably high rate in a non competitive (casual) format.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
I believe then you are missing the point. We aren't mad about where people get their decklists. We are mad that high level competitive decks (exact copies, variants, budget versions, etc) are being played at an unacceptably high rate in a non competitive (casual) format.
Perhaps you should go back and read what I was actually replying to. Just because what I have talked about doesn't fit your narrow view of the topic, simply means you can't comprehend alternate areas of discussion within a thread on things related to the thread. And I don't know what "We" you are talking about - you specifically said earlier that you could only talk for yourself. Anyway, none of that matters - it appears (as we surmised) that I was correct after all. Let's move on...
I'm referring to the 'we' in this thread based on replies. (To the thread: If I spoke out of turn on your behalf and you actually a) do enjoy and prefer a casual mode where most decks are competitive netdecks, or b) you actually do cry "netdeckers!" purely out of salt in order to make yourself feel better, then please call me out and speak up!)
You're speaking in some generalities that make no sense. Sounds very much like an r/iamverysmart post.
What exactly do you think you're correct about?
There is a very obvious need and call for a mode that is (mostly) free of competitive decks.
edit:
Perhaps you should go back and read what I was actually replying to.
No need; I know exactly what you were replying to, because I fucking wrote it.
You all play a free to enter, mobile optional, collectible card game, and you think that just because there is a ranked selection and a casual selection someone or something explicitly laid out the experience you will have/should expect in each mode? This is just pure ignorance if you are someone who curses, harasses, or puts down net-decking in casual. It is casual mode because it does not effect your current ranking...The fact it is called "Casual Mode" in no way insinuates that the experience you have is in fact the definition of "casual". It is gaming jargon for "You have nothing to gain or lose by coming here." WhY uSe CaSuAl As ThE nAmE tHeN?! Because its a 6 letter word that easily explains to virtually any age range that this zone is not tracked for any competitive purposes. Can you be competitive in this mode? YES. Does it matter if you are being competitive? NO. Do you have something to lose in ranked? YES. If you don't want to lose rank where do you go? CASUAL...WITH ANY DECK YOU PLEASE AT ANY TIME OF THE DAY BECAUSE THAT MODE IS DESIGNED TO NOT MATTER FOR TOURNAMENT, PROFESSIONAL, OR POINT/REWARD EARNING PURPOSES.
If I'm getting your general idea why would you be against someone harassing trolling or flaming someone for netdecking or playing a t1 deck in casual? There are no rules against it and some people have fun making other people feel bad.
My argument is any deck can and should be played in casual. Even if it is the number one deck.
I get your point but I think that only applies when there is diversity. Casual is like 90% t1 net decks for me and I'm sure the frustration for others stems from that as well. It is silly to dismiss someone's experience because you don't have the same. I also see those same t1 decks BMing at a much higher rate. I think if someone wants to tell someone off for that it's fine in my book and it should be fine in yours too.
Woah woah woah are you assuming I don't deal with the same problems every other player has? I have played this game for 3 years pretty consistently and in no way am I saying I don't still see the same trends you do. In casual every day I get "Greetings" right before the turn I get executed. In casual every day I fight 5-10 bomb warriors while I'm trying to see if a heal/token druid hybrid would be good/fun. In casual every day I get Emote spammed when I'm playing something fun and my opponent is playing the top win-rate deck, crushing me mercilessly when I have to summon 20 minions of cost 0-2. Don't EVER assume I don't experience the things you are discouraged exist. I have lived in them for years, and yet I still defend their right to do it... For everyone absolutely destroying casual because they are mad/trolling/win-farming there is someone trying a deck for the first time trying to push past rank 11 and is afraid to hit the ladder for that great feeling of watching 10 pop up and they have EVERY RIGHT to play in casual first. I have hit legend and play to rank 5 basically every month. At this point I don't play in casual nearly as often. However, damn right I've been playing casual this past week because the meta is unrefined and I'd like to meme a little with fun decks before jumping back in and try-harding with the others. It is a card game, and it is online with virtually no communication. The only time you know for a fact a player is being rude is if they spam emotes left and right AND they are absolutely digging into you/roping you. Otherwise, you could very well be here complaining about someone building their confidence up with a deck to hit a record rank that makes them feel good. I stand by my previous comment.
That's fine, but you should also be fine with the guy who gets tired of it and adds someone to flame them afterwards. If you take an all or nothing stance, you have to be that about everything.
When did I say I wasn't? Are you reading the replies or arguing for the sake of arguing?
Yes I realize that, and I’m here telling you that this supposed system would backfire harder than my ass after a Moe’s Monday deal... it gives you the power to do just as I said: abuse the system if you’re salty.
Abuse? Not really. It's intended to make the game better for everyone. This salty person doesn't enjoy the game that much. The proposed system is intended to incentivise behavior from players to avoid such outcomes. As I said it would be pretty weird in ranked, but it would be amazing in casual.
Ok, just to go back and be sure: You are still insinuating that a casual mode where the opponents decided for each other if the match counted is a good system? You think this system won't be abused, and you think more often than not it will prove to be a better format than casual is now? I'm trying to understand how you rationalize that losing a game to a try hard and moving on is worse than someone losing to you and getting mad they lost so they strip you of all your rewards for that game- gold, xp, quest progression, etc... all because they have the power you want to give them to say "this game wasn't what I deem fair, doesn't count"... I'm sorry but I stand by it and I think most others do too that the internet is the internet and this system would be just straight destructive to the game.
"You're absolutely correct in what you're saying there" ('The whole concept of "netdecking" is 100 percent in your head.') - This is just....actually wrong. You're agreeing with a claim that netdecks are imagined....on a site that posts netdecks.
This is my slight error - I didn't specify which part I was inferring was correct from the previous user's post and it was ambiguous enought to be misunderstood. I was actually referring to the idea that 2 people could create decks with 25 identical cards based on an archetype and that has nothing to do with netdecking per se. That all said, the concept of netdecking as a negative action is still something that is completely made up. And hence my point would be correct. Maybe that makes it a little clearer for you.
I'll just go ahead and clarify my own words here. When I said that netdecking is all in your head, I did not mean that no one ever grabs a list from the internet. Obviously they do.
But when you are actually playing Hearthstone, you have no way of knowing how the other player built their deck. Thus, any perception that they have netdecked is no more than that: a perception.
The Bomb Warrior I built the first day of RoS was, I later discovered, basically the same as the one that became popular -- within four cards' difference. The same was true of an early Token Druid I made all by myself.
How is this possible? Because it's simply not all that hard to choose the most sensible cards for a given archetype. Anyone with any deckbuilding skill is going to come up with a very similar list.
So yes, netdecking -- more specifically, your perception of whether people are netdecking -- is all in your head. You cannot know if it is actually happening, and more important, there is very little you or anyone else can do about it, so complaining is totally pointless.
Your one and only option is to form a friends league where everyone agrees not to play popular decks. If you can't make friends or agree on a banned list, that's your problem.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
yes that is currently the only option and that's why this thread exists - because we see casual as problematic, when most decks played there are competitive.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
yes that is currently the only option and that's why this thread exists - because we see casual as problematic, when most decks played there are competitive.
I feel bad as I just played a game in casual with a murloc shaman deck (I know you hate this especially) in my defence I am teching myself how to use the hagatha hero card properly so when I go on ladder I will know what I'm doing.
I only played one game though, as I realized 90% of the time I'd just be steamrolling them with murlocs early game, which is not the intention at all.
Thinking about crafting some bits for a basic control shaman where i can test her out with this instead, and I don't feel as bad playing control in casual.
In fact I can farm all the filthy netdeckers playing aggro with it. ha ha.
I couldn't care less if some slackers need to "do quests quick". If you're that invested in Hearthstone you have spare time to play in ranked mode.
They've done it every other meta, and now the losers playing the exact same Tempo Rogue and Control Warrior list are "on that grind" making the game a chore for themselves and everybody else.
These are people who only ever have 3 decks in their collection at any one time. The top 3 meta decks. And if they get a quest for another class, they copy the highest winrate list from Heartharena and jump on Casual... or they jam all the 1 cost cards for that class into a deck and ruin some wild players fun with a boring non-game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yes this is the whole basis of the thread. "How do people feel about netdecking in casual?" It's not made up, it's merely an opinion, a completely valid one at that.
For instance, if I read that Token Druid is T1 on ladder but never look at a decklist and put together what I think should go into it....yeah I'm netdecking. If I look at a decklist but swap out one card...I'm netdecking. If a person is making a homebrew deck and it just accidentally happens to be the exact decklist as a T1 ladder deck.....okay they get a one time free pass but it's still a netdeck.
If I post the exact decklist from VS for a top tier competitive deck and ask, "Is this a netdeck?" the only correct answer is "yes it's a netdeck."
That's actually on you to prove (the idea that most people cry 'netdecker' as an excuse for losing), or to admit this is at best just an opinion without evidence.
"Accusing someone of netdecking is akin to accusations of cheating" - explain or prove it. Explain how 1 = 2.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
Good. So you agree. It's an opinion which is a decision a person made up in their head based on assumptions they made. Not based in actual fact.
And ironically (considering your earlier comment), that is entirely incorrect. What you have there is purely an opinion dressed up as fact (again). if a person creates a deck that is card-for-card identical to one someone else randomly posts online, it is in no way possible to be a netdeck. There was no interaction with the internet to obtain the deck building knowledge. Therefore it is logically impossible to be considered a netdeck.
Otherwise you would have to claim that the person who created a deck was netdecking when they invented it, because it is now found card-for-card online.
Except it's not. You appear to have missed (again) the point that I raised an opinion-based assumption on the motive for calling a person a netdecker. I am allowed to do that and have no onus to produce evidence of that assumption.
You, however made the bold claim that it was 100% incorrect. And didn't even back it up with a reason. Just expected that to be taken as fact. Even Endlesstides called you out on that.
Why do you think 1 = 2? Expain or prove.
See, I can make nonsensical demands as well. That's just arrogance.
I compared calling someone a netdecker in a negative and accusatory way as being akin to calling them cheating because you are making the insinuation that they only won because of relying on an outside source (netdecking) to provide them the means of winning - this is essentially a form of cheating; winning through unfair means.
(At least that's the insinuation behind the accusation - nobody is actually claiming netdecking is cheating, before you go off on some other wild tangent here...)
Of course an opinion is not a fact. If it were, this thread would not be 8 pages, but a single post that stated "Netdecking in casual is bad." What are you arguing?
Pointing out netdecking is not the same as baseless accusations of cheating. If you aren't going to explain or prove your claims, then we have no discussion.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
Except that I made my point in my initial post. To which you baselessly claimed I was "100% incorrect".
I'm not really seeing a valid counterpoint to my supposition statement from anything youve written yet. (especially since you've made the claim that it was 100% incorrect) I've been waiting to see some evidence as to why - and I'm afraid demanding proof from me (when I've already stated my opinion and reasons) only seems to indicate that your scoffing remark had no real substance to it.
Going back to my original point, (and to reiterate it so it is not lost here), I believe that many people use the concept of netdecking - when directed towards another player in a negative manner - as an emotional response to losing a game, and that it insinuates that the opponent was provided an unfair advantage in their win (which falls within the concept of cheating - albeit without the direct accusation of such). This is a fairly natural and common occurence of human behaviour as a means to justify (and diminish the significance of) the loss and why the fault lies with the winner (rather than the skill of the loser).
netdecking is a real thing. it's not an imaginary concept. people don't like a non competitive format where a majority of their games are against competitive decks. this isnt' really that hard to understand. just read through the thread; i would be shocked if you could find even ONE post that said "i'd actually prefer that casual be comprised of mostly competitive decks."
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
You're mistaking apples for oranges here.
I have not claimed that the action of netdecking is an imaginary concept.
I have only addressed the action of accusing another person of being a netecker and what the intent behind that accusation is.
I have also pointed out that no deck can possibly be considered a netdeck without actionable evidence that the source of knowledge for the deck was derived from an online space. To claim otherwise is a fallacy and based exclusively upon something which is in the accuser's head (personal opinion).
Your last sentence in the reply above actually has absolutely no relevance to anything I've said either - so I'm not sure if you understand what is actually being discussed here (in regards to my original reply to the other poster's comment).
So if I can just make sure we're talking about the same thing, can your argument be summed up as, "You can't possibly know if they're netdecking unless they specifically say they got their decklist off the internet"?
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
Someone was mad at me because i played whizbang in casual. He called me netdecker and other things...
You are not allowed to play this game. People are always find a way to be mad at someone.
Once upon a time there laughed a man. He had a great big beard and a company he ran. He rapped better than most. He memed harder than Toast. Now he’s embarked upon a new road. Goodbye, goodbye, we love you Ben Brode
There are two parts to what I was saying.
The first part : yes, as you've said above.
The second part was examining the motive and intent behind calling someone a netdecker.
I believe then you are missing the point. We aren't mad about where people get their decklists. We are mad that high level competitive decks (exact copies, variants, budget versions, etc) are being played at an unacceptably high rate in a non competitive (casual) format.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
Perhaps you should go back and read what I was actually replying to.
Just because what I have talked about doesn't fit your narrow view of the topic, simply means you can't comprehend alternate areas of discussion within a thread on things related to the thread.
And I don't know what "We" you are talking about - you specifically said earlier that you could only talk for yourself.
Anyway, none of that matters - it appears (as we surmised) that I was correct after all. Let's move on...
No, you weren't actually.
I'm referring to the 'we' in this thread based on replies. (To the thread: If I spoke out of turn on your behalf and you actually a) do enjoy and prefer a casual mode where most decks are competitive netdecks, or b) you actually do cry "netdeckers!" purely out of salt in order to make yourself feel better, then please call me out and speak up!)
You're speaking in some generalities that make no sense. Sounds very much like an r/iamverysmart post.
What exactly do you think you're correct about?
There is a very obvious need and call for a mode that is (mostly) free of competitive decks.
edit:
No need; I know exactly what you were replying to, because I fucking wrote it.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
When did I say I wasn't? Are you reading the replies or arguing for the sake of arguing?
Ok, just to go back and be sure: You are still insinuating that a casual mode where the opponents decided for each other if the match counted is a good system? You think this system won't be abused, and you think more often than not it will prove to be a better format than casual is now? I'm trying to understand how you rationalize that losing a game to a try hard and moving on is worse than someone losing to you and getting mad they lost so they strip you of all your rewards for that game- gold, xp, quest progression, etc... all because they have the power you want to give them to say "this game wasn't what I deem fair, doesn't count"... I'm sorry but I stand by it and I think most others do too that the internet is the internet and this system would be just straight destructive to the game.
I'll just go ahead and clarify my own words here. When I said that netdecking is all in your head, I did not mean that no one ever grabs a list from the internet. Obviously they do.
But when you are actually playing Hearthstone, you have no way of knowing how the other player built their deck. Thus, any perception that they have netdecked is no more than that: a perception.
The Bomb Warrior I built the first day of RoS was, I later discovered, basically the same as the one that became popular -- within four cards' difference. The same was true of an early Token Druid I made all by myself.
How is this possible? Because it's simply not all that hard to choose the most sensible cards for a given archetype. Anyone with any deckbuilding skill is going to come up with a very similar list.
So yes, netdecking -- more specifically, your perception of whether people are netdecking -- is all in your head. You cannot know if it is actually happening, and more important, there is very little you or anyone else can do about it, so complaining is totally pointless.
Your one and only option is to form a friends league where everyone agrees not to play popular decks. If you can't make friends or agree on a banned list, that's your problem.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
yes that is currently the only option and that's why this thread exists - because we see casual as problematic, when most decks played there are competitive.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
I feel bad as I just played a game in casual with a murloc shaman deck (I know you hate this especially) in my defence I am teching myself how to use the hagatha hero card properly so when I go on ladder I will know what I'm doing.
I only played one game though, as I realized 90% of the time I'd just be steamrolling them with murlocs early game, which is not the intention at all.
Thinking about crafting some bits for a basic control shaman where i can test her out with this instead, and I don't feel as bad playing control in casual.
In fact I can farm all the filthy netdeckers playing aggro with it. ha ha.
Most of the time if I am playing casual it’s because I need to complete a quest. It’s a lot simpler to netdeck than build my own.
Before you whine, you should realize I’d build basically the same deck on my own, because
1: The synergies are obvious. You aren’t a special snowflake for recognizing them
2: I’ve played against them multiple times
I don't get it. People want to play a weak deck and still win. Devs can't help you there, only a therapist can.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I couldn't care less if some slackers need to "do quests quick". If you're that invested in Hearthstone you have spare time to play in ranked mode.
They've done it every other meta, and now the losers playing the exact same Tempo Rogue and Control Warrior list are "on that grind" making the game a chore for themselves and everybody else.
These are people who only ever have 3 decks in their collection at any one time. The top 3 meta decks. And if they get a quest for another class, they copy the highest winrate list from Heartharena and jump on Casual... or they jam all the 1 cost cards for that class into a deck and ruin some wild players fun with a boring non-game.