Aggro always seem to be a thing that works, that's the only constant with Hearthstone.
I don't mind really, but it got me thinking. Midrange, control and combo have times when they are completely trash and you would be a fool if you played one of them during their dip, but never aggro. No matter how good of control cards Blizz release aggro, like life, finds a way. Even during the dominant cubelock era aggro still did at the very least okay.
What is it that makes aggro so fantastic in this game compared to other card games? Sure, aggro works there, but it's rarely as strong and reliable all of the time as it's on Hearthstone.
I guess it's because aggro generally has more cheap cards and the synergy / utility of the cards are less specific, so it's slightly less vulnerable to bad draw. It's like cricket. If you bowl a consistent Yorker to a good batsmen, he will probably dig the ball out and carry on. But if he has an off day, you'll bowl him out. It's the old "he misses, he's out", analogy. I'd guess you can substitute a fast ball for a Yorker if you're American and talking baseball.
Because every card in an aggro deck is really good on its own, and CHEAP. In control decks, you play cards that are only great with others (like the cubes), i mean you can get INSANE amount of value with them, but it doesnt matter if a 1 mana 1/3 outvalues them early game. And the overall gameplan is pretty straightforward, hit face and win as fast as possible. I personally LOVE aggro and tempo decks, because i like fast games, and i dont have to pay attention to the game (i always watch a stream/movie while i play HS).
Aggro always seem to be a thing that works, that's the only constant with Hearthstone.
I don't mind really, but it got me thinking. Midrange, control and combo have times when they are completely trash and you would be a fool if you played one of them during their dip, but never aggro. No matter how good of control cards Blizz release aggro, like life, finds a way. Even during the dominant cubelock era aggro still did at the very least okay.
What is it that makes aggro so fantastic in this game compared to other card games? Sure, aggro works there, but it's rarely as strong and reliable all of the time as it's on Hearthstone.
here's a few reasons. ANd there's a Summary at the bottom. Just look for the Bolded letters if you don't want to read an essay.
1. The attacker has the priority choice of target. This makes it much more viable to focus on tempo as you can more easily tear down opposing minions or ignore them to hit the face. The simple fact that if I send a 8/1 out against you and can be sure it hits your Lich King or your face and not your Silver Hand Recruit is a big factor in making actually fighting aggressively worthwhile.
2. The old triangle never really works out properly here. In MTG, the original balance triangle was Aggro -> Control -> Combo -> Aggro.
(yes note that 'Midrange' isn't in the original trilogy.)
Thus the original idea is that Combo decks are meant to keep Aggro at bay. But true combo decks have a tendency to tear EVERYTHING up outside of the most greediest on Control. The combo decks we allow nowadays are more 'control-combo' that drag the game out rather than rush through their cards. They honestly fit more of the Control mindset than the Combo mindset (thus they die to fast aggro).
In any case, this means we don't really allow many decks that reliably kill Aggro. When we do they tend to result in cries of "OMG NERF!"
3. The ladder demands speed.
Someone a long time ago calculated that it's faster to play an aggro deck that loses a lot than a higher winning control deck. The simple raw number of games you can run through makes it the better choice. Also when you're playing hundreds of games at a time you want your deck simple so you don't burn out.
Thus even when aggro doesn't win well, you're best off playing it until the upper legend or tournaments when every game counts.
4. aggro is a newbie killer.
Aggro was dead in 2015. Patron Warrior killed EVERYTHING that wasn't Handlock or Fatigue Warrior. There really wasn't a point to playing any other deck competitively at that time.
What were the forums complaining about? Zoo. Tempo Mage. Secret paladin (though that was a tempo deck. See #3). Decks that couldn't hold a candle to Patron. Why? Because most players don't play well enough to reach that competitive level where Patron slaughtered all.
Aggro is VERY good at killing bad decks. It's also very good at killing bad players that would rather rant than play decks that can deal with aggro or play in a way that lets them deal with it. Over 95% of the player base plays badly (not an exaggerations. you REALLY get a distorted view of the 'average player' when you hang around forums like these and just watch key streamers). This makes aggro always viable as it always has easy targets to hit.
5. We keep changing what 'aggro' is.
This time last year, aggro decks relied on Bonemare as a key card.
That line should make no #*$()#$#) sense.
Bonemare was a 7 mana card. Why, in all that is good and right are we declaring a 7 mana card a good AGGRO TOOL!? And it wasn't even a finisher most of the time!
Seriously, go find some 2014 face hunter decks or click on the link I'm providing right here for an example. Aggro, when not held back, kills you by turn 5. THAT was why we made things like the Face Song back then.
The 'aggro decks' that we are seeing nowadays aren't what aggro used to be. They are tempo decks. Decks that rely on constantly threatening you from turn 1 to turn 20. They sacrifice absolute aggression for staying power but still having the ability to end games quick if the opponent can't hold them. That's why 'aggro' decks either have that constant 'reload' where wiping the board means nothing or are 'sticky' where you can't seem to ever remove EVERYTHING and grab the board from them. They are also more than willing to fight for the board if it means more damage next turn.
Old Paladin is a lot slower than old style aggro decks. Odd Rogue is probably the closest thing and only the fastest versions.
The community has a habit of marking whatever the fastest deck at the time as 'the aggro deck'. It's due to every game having a 'beatdown' or 'aggressive' opponent and a defensive or 'control' opponent, and that's determined by who's the faster deck. When it's Shudderwock Shaman vs Hadronox Druid, the Druid will be the 'aggro' deck. And teh Shaman, if they lose, will come to the forums complaining about 'aggro never going away'.
TL:DR summary:
Aggro has a slight advantage due to the nature of the game from the getgo.
Decks that naturally eat aggro in other games don't balance well here, thus our balance triangle is messed up.
Even when aggro is weak, you will want to use it to rank up faster with it in the ladder,
Even when the meta makes aggro worthless despite all of that, it still makes a great newbie and bad deck killer, thus most players will still see it as a problem
And when the meta is so absolutely lobsided against aggro thus that, despite ALL OF THE ABOVE, aggro still fails, we simply move the goalposts and name the current fastest deck 'the aggro deck' even if it wasn't considered aggro before.
a) It's braindead. Do not try to sweeten the pill, it's true. I have been up to 187 legend and i use aggro decks when i want to play but i am tired to think up head.
2)Immune to bad draws. Self explanatory.
3) Easy to build. Add op cheap stuff, burn and some tempo cards and you are ready to play. Control and other slower decks, not only are harder to optimise but required constant tinkering to what you face the most.
It's a very consistent gameplan, it's proactive and easy to domain. And even if you aren't that good of a player and don't manage to see all the potential synergies an aggro deck will still work just fine for you on most of the metas.
Now, you can say exactly the same things about midrange, the huge difference it's that aggro it's a lot more cheaper.
When you play sealed formats, on most of tcg's aggro it's a pretty good path to choose. For hearthstone arena, not so much. In ladder, howhever, it works most of the time, but it's kinda boring to play so you have to balance the fast laddering and having fun if you want to enjoy your games.
It's a very consistent gameplan, it's proactive and easy to domain. And even if you aren't that good of a player and don't manage to see all the potential synergies an aggro deck will still work just fine for you on most of the metas.
Now, you can say exactly the same things about midrange, the huge difference it's that aggro it's a lot more cheaper.
When you play sealed formats, on most of tcg's aggro it's a pretty good path to choose. For hearthstone arena, not so much. In ladder, howhever, it works most of the time, but it's kinda boring to play so you have to balance the fast laddering and having fun if you want to enjoy your games.
Control doesn't require any more skill than aggro.
It's a very consistent gameplan, it's proactive and easy to domain. And even if you aren't that good of a player and don't manage to see all the potential synergies an aggro deck will still work just fine for you on most of the metas.
Now, you can say exactly the same things about midrange, the huge difference it's that aggro it's a lot more cheaper.
When you play sealed formats, on most of tcg's aggro it's a pretty good path to choose. For hearthstone arena, not so much. In ladder, howhever, it works most of the time, but it's kinda boring to play so you have to balance the fast laddering and having fun if you want to enjoy your games.
Control doesn't require any more skill than aggro.
Agree. But build a deck thinking about little more about how each of your card affects the power level of the other does. If you fail on that aspect as a control player, you have a huge lose. With an aggro deck the difference isn't that big.
I think that in a tempo-based game like HS the most straightforward win condition is to burn your opponent life down asap, so untill they go on with printing power creep or board fillong effect with cheap mana cost than aggro will never die.
Also consider that for how Ladders work, having a fast deck means that you can play more game and - hopefully - get more wins in order to go up faster.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
For what profit is it to a man, if he gains the world and loses his own soul?
a) It's braindead. Do not try to sweeten the pill, it's true. I have been up to 187 legend and i use aggro decks when i want to play but i am tired to think up head.
2)Immune to bad draws. Self explanatory.
3) Easy to build. Add op cheap stuff, burn and some tempo cards and you are ready to play. Control and other slower decks, not only are harder to optimise but required constant tinkering to what you face the most.
As much as I love your post and b/white way of thinking, I'd so NOT want to meet you in a dark alley..
I find that alot of control decks relile a bit to much on random elements were as aggro decks has very few random cards. Face hunter for example has animal companion as its only random card and even then 2/3 of the minions it can get are good pretty much all the time with leokk been very situational.
Just my thoughts im not a high ranking player highest i got was rank 10 but still XD
It's a very consistent gameplan, it's proactive and easy to domain. And even if you aren't that good of a player and don't manage to see all the potential synergies an aggro deck will still work just fine for you on most of the metas.
Now, you can say exactly the same things about midrange, the huge difference it's that aggro it's a lot more cheaper.
When you play sealed formats, on most of tcg's aggro it's a pretty good path to choose. For hearthstone arena, not so much. In ladder, howhever, it works most of the time, but it's kinda boring to play so you have to balance the fast laddering and having fun if you want to enjoy your games.
Control doesn't require any more skill than aggro.
Agree. But build a deck thinking about little more about how each of your card affects the power level of the other does. If you fail on that aspect as a control player, you have a huge lose. With an aggro deck the difference isn't that big.
Aggro, especially nowadays, has a massive consideration of whether they should be slightly more defensive or offensive. Every single point of damage, on the field, in their hand, and potentially in their deck, has to be considered. You WILL lose the game if one damage is put on a minion more than it should, or if one trade didn't happen when it needed it.
Aggro thinking, control thinking, it's not about the deck in most cases but about the matchup and opponent. A control deck can play mindlessly against a slightly less greedy control deck. Aggro, meanwhile, can be mindless against a very greedy control deck. Same goes for any deck who's favorite matchup appears. The goal of a deck is to be able to run automatically towards their win condition. Serious thinking only occurs, for any deck, when that natural progression starts to fail due to RNG or a matchup that can disrupt you. When Shudderwock comes too late or your opponent out tempos you in turn 2 and you aren't autoquitting, that is when you have to think.
(the most legendary games we mark involve matches where both decks have something going wrong. Freeze Mage mirrors that can't get their damage in order until fatigue. Aggro decks where both have good curves. Shudderwock vs Control Warlock where Shudderwock is burned but warlock can't hold a board. Aggro or Control, it's when the win condition fails that you are tested. When it works, it's easy)
An exception to this when you face a weak player, EVERYTHING is easy. Which is why many people get those "I just played (tier 1 deck) and gained 20 ranks!" Noob bashing isn't meant to be hard. If you are flying up the ranks, no matter the deck, it doesn't mean the deck is simple or easy. It just means you need better competition.
Ladder system rewards faster decks. Also while aggro decks might not be extremely easily to pilot to a 60%+ winrate, the margin for error is much lower.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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
1. Laddering system rewards fast games, the faster that you queue into a game, the more games you ge,t the quicker you rank up, there's no "Seeding" which is a mechanic proper ladder systems use to reward players regardless of the length of a match
2, Hearthstone is an uninteractive card game and by uninteractive i don't mean full of combo decks, by uninteractive i mean that what happens in a turn is solely to the decision of the turn's player, there are no instants, no trap cards, no quick play spells nor quick effects and most importantly the attacker decides where to attack and the defender can't declare blockers.
these two mechanics add up so that playing aggro has way more advantages than other playstyles by default, in conclusion: the game's inner mechanics support aggro regardless of what cards they have access to, while control and combo are card dependant, if control gets survability but doesn't get proper win conditions like Wotg/khara priest you can only delay your defeat, if we get win conditions but don't have good survability enabling cards like proper AoEs or healing/armor we can't play control nor combo, like it happened during TGT.
Aggro always seem to be a thing that works, that's the only constant with Hearthstone.
I don't mind really, but it got me thinking. Midrange, control and combo have times when they are completely trash and you would be a fool if you played one of them during their dip, but never aggro. No matter how good of control cards Blizz release aggro, like life, finds a way. Even during the dominant cubelock era aggro still did at the very least okay.
What is it that makes aggro so fantastic in this game compared to other card games? Sure, aggro works there, but it's rarely as strong and reliable all of the time as it's on Hearthstone.
Two reasons: the way the laddering system works, you get rewarded by fast matches. And second: the objective to win is the most straightforward.
I guess it's because aggro generally has more cheap cards and the synergy / utility of the cards are less specific, so it's slightly less vulnerable to bad draw. It's like cricket. If you bowl a consistent Yorker to a good batsmen, he will probably dig the ball out and carry on. But if he has an off day, you'll bowl him out. It's the old "he misses, he's out", analogy. I'd guess you can substitute a fast ball for a Yorker if you're American and talking baseball.
aggro= F2P friendly, you pay about 2-4k dust? control takes most of the time like 8k dust.
Because every card in an aggro deck is really good on its own, and CHEAP.
In control decks, you play cards that are only great with others (like the cubes), i mean you can get INSANE amount of value with them, but it doesnt matter if a 1 mana 1/3 outvalues them early game.
And the overall gameplan is pretty straightforward, hit face and win as fast as possible.
I personally LOVE aggro and tempo decks, because i like fast games, and i dont have to pay attention to the game
(i always watch a stream/movie while i play HS).
Aggro has some other advantages (besides all written above) - its easier to play and severely punish control misplays,
it also "punish" non refined decks (like on expansion launch) and sometimes home-brew/ fun decks
here's a few reasons. ANd there's a Summary at the bottom. Just look for the Bolded letters if you don't want to read an essay.
1. The attacker has the priority choice of target. This makes it much more viable to focus on tempo as you can more easily tear down opposing minions or ignore them to hit the face. The simple fact that if I send a 8/1 out against you and can be sure it hits your Lich King or your face and not your Silver Hand Recruit is a big factor in making actually fighting aggressively worthwhile.
2. The old triangle never really works out properly here. In MTG, the original balance triangle was Aggro -> Control -> Combo -> Aggro.
(yes note that 'Midrange' isn't in the original trilogy.)
Thus the original idea is that Combo decks are meant to keep Aggro at bay. But true combo decks have a tendency to tear EVERYTHING up outside of the most greediest on Control. The combo decks we allow nowadays are more 'control-combo' that drag the game out rather than rush through their cards. They honestly fit more of the Control mindset than the Combo mindset (thus they die to fast aggro).
In any case, this means we don't really allow many decks that reliably kill Aggro. When we do they tend to result in cries of "OMG NERF!"
3. The ladder demands speed.
Someone a long time ago calculated that it's faster to play an aggro deck that loses a lot than a higher winning control deck. The simple raw number of games you can run through makes it the better choice. Also when you're playing hundreds of games at a time you want your deck simple so you don't burn out.
Thus even when aggro doesn't win well, you're best off playing it until the upper legend or tournaments when every game counts.
4. aggro is a newbie killer.
Aggro was dead in 2015. Patron Warrior killed EVERYTHING that wasn't Handlock or Fatigue Warrior. There really wasn't a point to playing any other deck competitively at that time.
What were the forums complaining about? Zoo. Tempo Mage. Secret paladin (though that was a tempo deck. See #3). Decks that couldn't hold a candle to Patron. Why? Because most players don't play well enough to reach that competitive level where Patron slaughtered all.
Aggro is VERY good at killing bad decks. It's also very good at killing bad players that would rather rant than play decks that can deal with aggro or play in a way that lets them deal with it. Over 95% of the player base plays badly (not an exaggerations. you REALLY get a distorted view of the 'average player' when you hang around forums like these and just watch key streamers). This makes aggro always viable as it always has easy targets to hit.
5. We keep changing what 'aggro' is.
This time last year, aggro decks relied on Bonemare as a key card.
That line should make no #*$()#$#) sense.
Bonemare was a 7 mana card. Why, in all that is good and right are we declaring a 7 mana card a good AGGRO TOOL!? And it wasn't even a finisher most of the time!
Seriously, go find some 2014 face hunter decks or click on the link I'm providing right here for an example. Aggro, when not held back, kills you by turn 5. THAT was why we made things like the Face Song back then.
The 'aggro decks' that we are seeing nowadays aren't what aggro used to be. They are tempo decks. Decks that rely on constantly threatening you from turn 1 to turn 20. They sacrifice absolute aggression for staying power but still having the ability to end games quick if the opponent can't hold them. That's why 'aggro' decks either have that constant 'reload' where wiping the board means nothing or are 'sticky' where you can't seem to ever remove EVERYTHING and grab the board from them. They are also more than willing to fight for the board if it means more damage next turn.
Old Paladin is a lot slower than old style aggro decks. Odd Rogue is probably the closest thing and only the fastest versions.
The community has a habit of marking whatever the fastest deck at the time as 'the aggro deck'. It's due to every game having a 'beatdown' or 'aggressive' opponent and a defensive or 'control' opponent, and that's determined by who's the faster deck. When it's Shudderwock Shaman vs Hadronox Druid, the Druid will be the 'aggro' deck. And teh Shaman, if they lose, will come to the forums complaining about 'aggro never going away'.
TL:DR summary:
Aggro has a slight advantage due to the nature of the game from the getgo.
Decks that naturally eat aggro in other games don't balance well here, thus our balance triangle is messed up.
Even when aggro is weak, you will want to use it to rank up faster with it in the ladder,
Even when the meta makes aggro worthless despite all of that, it still makes a great newbie and bad deck killer, thus most players will still see it as a problem
And when the meta is so absolutely lobsided against aggro thus that, despite ALL OF THE ABOVE, aggro still fails, we simply move the goalposts and name the current fastest deck 'the aggro deck' even if it wasn't considered aggro before.
And that is why aggro stays around.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
a) It's braindead. Do not try to sweeten the pill, it's true. I have been up to 187 legend and i use aggro decks when i want to play but i am tired to think up head.
2)Immune to bad draws. Self explanatory.
3) Easy to build. Add op cheap stuff, burn and some tempo cards and you are ready to play. Control and other slower decks, not only are harder to optimise but required constant tinkering to what you face the most.
It's a very consistent gameplan, it's proactive and easy to domain. And even if you aren't that good of a player and don't manage to see all the potential synergies an aggro deck will still work just fine for you on most of the metas.
Now, you can say exactly the same things about midrange, the huge difference it's that aggro it's a lot more cheaper.
When you play sealed formats, on most of tcg's aggro it's a pretty good path to choose. For hearthstone arena, not so much. In ladder, howhever, it works most of the time, but it's kinda boring to play so you have to balance the fast laddering and having fun if you want to enjoy your games.
It has to be snakes.
Aggro doesn't rely on key cards.
If a Control deck doesn't draw board clears and removal, it's dead.
If a Combo deck doesn't draw its combo piece, it's dead.
Aggro's game plan is simple: reduce your life from 30 to zero with whatever cards they draw.
Bad players whine.
Good players adapt.
Control doesn't require any more skill than aggro.
1. The idea behind the game is to reduce your opponents life-total to 0... Which is what Aggro does best. :P
2. It's easy to build.
Agree. But build a deck thinking about little more about how each of your card affects the power level of the other does. If you fail on that aspect as a control player, you have a huge lose. With an aggro deck the difference isn't that big.
It has to be snakes.
I think that in a tempo-based game like HS the most straightforward win condition is to burn your opponent life down asap, so untill they go on with printing power creep or board fillong effect with cheap mana cost than aggro will never die.
Also consider that for how Ladders work, having a fast deck means that you can play more game and - hopefully - get more wins in order to go up faster.
For what profit is it to a man, if he gains the world and loses his own soul?
As much as I love your post and b/white way of thinking, I'd so NOT want to meet you in a dark alley..
Golden Hero Collections thus far; -
Europe: Druid, Hunter, Paladin, Mage, Priest, Rogue, Shaman, Warlock, Warrior (9/9)
Americas: Druid, Mage, Paladin Shaman (4/9)
Everywhere else: Workin on it.. (0/9)
I find that alot of control decks relile a bit to much on random elements were as aggro decks has very few random cards. Face hunter for example has animal companion as its only random card and even then 2/3 of the minions it can get are good pretty much all the time with leokk been very situational.
Just my thoughts im not a high ranking player highest i got was rank 10 but still XD
Aggro, especially nowadays, has a massive consideration of whether they should be slightly more defensive or offensive. Every single point of damage, on the field, in their hand, and potentially in their deck, has to be considered. You WILL lose the game if one damage is put on a minion more than it should, or if one trade didn't happen when it needed it.
Aggro thinking, control thinking, it's not about the deck in most cases but about the matchup and opponent. A control deck can play mindlessly against a slightly less greedy control deck. Aggro, meanwhile, can be mindless against a very greedy control deck. Same goes for any deck who's favorite matchup appears. The goal of a deck is to be able to run automatically towards their win condition. Serious thinking only occurs, for any deck, when that natural progression starts to fail due to RNG or a matchup that can disrupt you. When Shudderwock comes too late or your opponent out tempos you in turn 2 and you aren't autoquitting, that is when you have to think.
(the most legendary games we mark involve matches where both decks have something going wrong. Freeze Mage mirrors that can't get their damage in order until fatigue. Aggro decks where both have good curves. Shudderwock vs Control Warlock where Shudderwock is burned but warlock can't hold a board. Aggro or Control, it's when the win condition fails that you are tested. When it works, it's easy)
An exception to this when you face a weak player, EVERYTHING is easy. Which is why many people get those "I just played (tier 1 deck) and gained 20 ranks!" Noob bashing isn't meant to be hard. If you are flying up the ranks, no matter the deck, it doesn't mean the deck is simple or easy. It just means you need better competition.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
I think there are two major reasons:
1. People like shorter games
2. Like it or not, the game needs aggro. Without it, control could get WAY too greedy and make games an unreasonable length.
Unpopular opinion: Rogue is OP
Ladder system rewards faster decks. Also while aggro decks might not be extremely easily to pilot to a 60%+ winrate, the margin for error is much lower.
1. Laddering system rewards fast games, the faster that you queue into a game, the more games you ge,t the quicker you rank up, there's no "Seeding" which is a mechanic proper ladder systems use to reward players regardless of the length of a match
2, Hearthstone is an uninteractive card game and by uninteractive i don't mean full of combo decks, by uninteractive i mean that what happens in a turn is solely to the decision of the turn's player, there are no instants, no trap cards, no quick play spells nor quick effects and most importantly the attacker decides where to attack and the defender can't declare blockers.
these two mechanics add up so that playing aggro has way more advantages than other playstyles by default,
in conclusion: the game's inner mechanics support aggro regardless of what cards they have access to, while control and combo are card dependant, if control gets survability but doesn't get proper win conditions like Wotg/khara priest you can only delay your defeat, if we get win conditions but don't have good survability enabling cards like proper AoEs or healing/armor we can't play control nor combo, like it happened during TGT.