So i wanted to just state why the so called "tier" list is basically just an illusion created by people who feel the need to justify their actions. Now before i get to my point, ive been playing Trading card games ever since High school on things like Yugioh, Pokemon ( yes lol) and Magic the gathering for over 10 years and i can generally understand concepts of what is what when it comes to play styles. Ive noticed for the past year and half that netdecking has become basically the norm and its pretty much accepted because its all about winning at all costs. Ive been playing hearthstone ever since launch and i can tell you for sure that for the past year there has never been a faster settling meta then ive seen. Now is it wrong to play a deck because you are more likely to win? obviously you would want to pick something is more appealing. Like you wouldnt play IronBark Protector over the lich king because its not even up for debate. The issue at hand, Its a very tribal time where basically anything that isnt the norm is overlooked or just dismissed because of impressions.
Too often in Card reviews are basically reviewed in 2 scopes....1 is it a good card? and 2 does it fit in a Tier 1 deck? The issue is that streamers that review cards only praise a card if it doesnt meet both standards. This is where card reviews are just flat out wrong most of the time and its basically off of laziness; No its not that their thinking about the card itself...but its more of if the card in question can exist in a meta that already set. I remember there was a card review Trump did with Ungoro where he basically rated every single priest card crap because priest wasnt a good class. Trump is basically the embodiment of what the normal perception of a player is.
So what makes a deck "tier 1"? thats the main topic at hand. Ive played in many meta in Magic the gathering and in hearthstone as well and to me it basically comes down to 2 factors. 1, can the deck get to its end point of winning the game constantly? 2. Can the deck in question help you get out of problems you would have to figure out? Now i know youre gonna say..."thats like what Cubelock or spiteful does and thats why their tier 1". To me i believe any deck with a group of a good cards can be a vessel of getting wins,It doesnt have to be flashy either. What most people dont understand is that deck building correctly can make all the difference. Obviously if you build something with Big Game hunter you will not do as well against decks with small minions.. but that is where you learn,but the issue is that the part of learning how to make something better isnt there cause most people only care about what on top; This is a result of why metas become more stall quickly. A few years ago in hearthstone normally one or two decks would be the most common deck on ladder and you knew who the target was. You could build your deck against something like face hunter and generally be okay. The problem is now there is about 3 or 4 decks that are popular and that creates a bad game of rock paper scissors, but really its just rocks pounding rocks.
I know this topic is probably gonna poorly by those who are spike and think they know everything. But i feel like we are going into same pattern only because we dont learn from mistake of looking at cards and decks for what they could be,
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hearthstone is a game of "copy and pasting"
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
hey guys
So i wanted to just state why the so called "tier" list is basically just an illusion created by people who feel the need to justify their actions. Now before i get to my point, ive been playing Trading card games ever since High school on things like Yugioh, Pokemon ( yes lol) and Magic the gathering for over 10 years and i can generally understand concepts of what is what when it comes to play styles. Ive noticed for the past year and half that netdecking has become basically the norm and its pretty much accepted because its all about winning at all costs. Ive been playing hearthstone ever since launch and i can tell you for sure that for the past year there has never been a faster settling meta then ive seen. Now is it wrong to play a deck because you are more likely to win? obviously you would want to pick something is more appealing. Like you wouldnt play IronBark Protector over the lich king because its not even up for debate. The issue at hand, Its a very tribal time where basically anything that isnt the norm is overlooked or just dismissed because of impressions.
Too often in Card reviews are basically reviewed in 2 scopes....1 is it a good card? and 2 does it fit in a Tier 1 deck? The issue is that streamers that review cards only praise a card if it doesnt meet both standards. This is where card reviews are just flat out wrong most of the time and its basically off of laziness; No its not that their thinking about the card itself...but its more of if the card in question can exist in a meta that already set. I remember there was a card review Trump did with Ungoro where he basically rated every single priest card crap because priest wasnt a good class. Trump is basically the embodiment of what the normal perception of a player is.
So what makes a deck "tier 1"? thats the main topic at hand. Ive played in many meta in Magic the gathering and in hearthstone as well and to me it basically comes down to 2 factors. 1, can the deck get to its end point of winning the game constantly? 2. Can the deck in question help you get out of problems you would have to figure out? Now i know youre gonna say..."thats like what Cubelock or spiteful does and thats why their tier 1". To me i believe any deck with a group of a good cards can be a vessel of getting wins,It doesnt have to be flashy either. What most people dont understand is that deck building correctly can make all the difference. Obviously if you build something with Big Game hunter you will not do as well against decks with small minions.. but that is where you learn,but the issue is that the part of learning how to make something better isnt there cause most people only care about what on top; This is a result of why metas become more stall quickly. A few years ago in hearthstone normally one or two decks would be the most common deck on ladder and you knew who the target was. You could build your deck against something like face hunter and generally be okay. The problem is now there is about 3 or 4 decks that are popular and that creates a bad game of rock paper scissors, but really its just rocks pounding rocks.
I know this topic is probably gonna poorly by those who are spike and think they know everything. But i feel like we are going into same pattern only because we dont learn from mistake of looking at cards and decks for what they could be,
Hearthstone is a game of "copy and pasting"