Since we are upon an aggro dominated meta, i wanted to make this thread to talk about:
Q1/ Do you like aggro meta ?
Q2/ What meta do you prefer ?
Even though i only faced 1 control mathchup today and all the others are aggro decks, this is not a salt thread, but in fact it forced me to see how people like an aggro meta.
The early days after a release were always aggro dominated, so I wouldn't assume it will stay this way.
But I guess the coming meta will be a bit faster again, that's true. Personally I prefer a slower meta, but as long as it is not filled with decks like pirate warrior with consistent turn 5 kills it is fine with me.
How many of these "i hate aggro" posts must Hearthpwn endure....
Just wait until the stall/Mecha'thun decks get so optimized that you'll be begging for aggro games... or any games that aren't 30 minutes then instant death with no counter.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Speculation is foolish when the tools of certainty are available." —Cinna, Vedalken Consul
early release of every expansion is always aggro filled, it's extremely easy to take advantage of theorycrafted, unrefined decks with aggro, which doesnt punish as much when mistakes are made.
On the topic tho, no not really. But a solely control or solely combo meta isn't fun either. Ideally all 3 playstyles are represented equally, and then you have a great rock paper scissors style of game, as card games generally should be.
If aggro is the only factor in the meta it should be possible to create an anti-aggro control deck and wreck everyone. Everyone is playing aggro right now because there are a lot of combo decks that are weak against it. As soon as the meta settles, we'll probably see more anti-aggro control, and then more combo again as that usually beats control.
Aggro-control-combo is the rock-paper-scissors of Hearthstone. I don't think zoo is invincibly strong, so the meta will probably sort it out at some point. Only when that doesn't happen naturally Blizz should consider nerfing.
For Question 1: As a player who has enjoyed control decks for a long time I actually enjoy aggressive meta as that is what you have the most success against and the whole optimization, tech options, and mulligan strategy leads to a fun experience trying to grind them out of resources and ultimately win the game with a decent finisher.
For Question 2: Besides favoring aggressive meta I like how hearthstone has been a revolving door for which play style is given its power run. Not for sentimental value but from early on hearthstone was very aggressive with decks such as undertaker hunter. Then there was the reign of control warrior and priest. Combo saw its day with patron warrior and it seems now with all the new tools people have been experimenting with that combo might have its time in the sun again for a variety of classes which is awesome.
How many of these "i hate aggro" posts must Hearthpwn endure....
Just wait until the stall/Mecha'thun decks get so optimized that you'll be begging for aggro games... or any games that aren't 30 minutes then instant death with no counter.
OP clearly stated that this wasn't a salt thread. Just a survey of people's opinions.
I don't care about meta,i play decks i like (Odd,Even,Aggro,Murloc,Mech,OTK,Quest,Devine Shield Paladin) .
That's the same thing I do, and I have fun with the game.
If the meta is too harsh with the decks I like to play, I try to tech my decks or build a new one to counter what is causing me trouble. If the result is a deck that I enjoy, I keep it.
Q2: I prefer a meta where aggro-combo-control is balanced on a level that winrate against each other is between 40 and 60 percent. What I don't like - and unfortunately WW meta was one like this - is when it's basically a rock paper scissors with so polarized chances that no matter what you do, you either win or lose 90% of certain match-ups.
edit: If you remember from the past, Control Warrior vs Freeze Mage was one of these very polarized match-ups, and it was a popular topic. Now there are tons of similar match-ups.
Yeah, I do like aggro metas actually. Control decks beat aggro and that's great for a control player like me. I much rather be countering people than be countered like we were in the WitchWood control meta
Aggro dominated meta is here since HS was released. There is rarely, very rarely tier 1 control deck. Amd if its there, its on third or fourth llace. Always.
Blizzard is really cool with printing cool 9 mana cards and 2 mana 8 8 for aggro deck, but they are not so cool with printing AOEs and defensive tools against this toxicity. According to blizzard logic 1 hp aoe is worth 1,5 to 2 mana and if warrior for example wants to clear board with 2 33s and two 34s (standard warlock turn 4), he must wait till round 8, which usually doesnt happen.
Say what? I'm calling BS here. Even when pirate warrior was running rampant the top tier deck was a control deck (Reno Mage). Ever since I've been playing there's been at least 1 control deck in T1 and that's probably due to the fact control is typically good against aggro decks. If you don't believe me then look back to the end of last season. Quest warrior jumped in the tier list purely because zoolock became stupidly popular.
On topic any type of "dominated" meta isn't good for the game. The ideal scenario i a mix of aggro, midrange, control, and combo. Lately aggro and midrange have kinda blended together it seems but these decks all have their good and bad matchups. Personally I like control decks for the most part so an aggro meta, while boring and mindless to play against, is overall good for my win rates. However someone who likes shudderwock will likely not be having a great time.
I don't usually like an aggro dominated meta because it automatically means that the cards that are playable, even in casual matches, diminishes greatly. When that happens you start to see playstyles pigeonholed into what consistently counters those decks, which results in less original gameplay as a whole.
I prefer a control meta since I am able to pull off dank memes against my opponents and experience the many wow's! that ensue.
Control|value is not viable because of stupid combo deck,so i much more prefer a full aggro meta that a bunch of player playing solitaire and dumping their hand to kill you with the fun,interactive and well designed mechacthun
Well said!
I also prefer an aggro meta . Compared to decks like Shudderwock and other OTK decks, who seem to be made to crush Control/slower midrange decks , aggro feels way more healthy and interactive.
( unless they are too strong and kill u on turn 4 .. Undertaker was such an example. If an earlygame minion is too snowbally ( Like Trogg, Manawyrmetc. it will become uninteractive aswell)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Since we are upon an aggro dominated meta, i wanted to make this thread to talk about:
Q1/ Do you like aggro meta ?
Q2/ What meta do you prefer ?
Even though i only faced 1 control mathchup today and all the others are aggro decks, this is not a salt thread, but in fact it forced me to see how people like an aggro meta.
The early days after a release were always aggro dominated, so I wouldn't assume it will stay this way.
But I guess the coming meta will be a bit faster again, that's true.
Personally I prefer a slower meta, but as long as it is not filled with decks like pirate warrior with consistent turn 5 kills it is fine with me.
How many of these "i hate aggro" posts must Hearthpwn endure....
Just wait until the stall/Mecha'thun decks get so optimized that you'll be begging for aggro games... or any games that aren't 30 minutes then instant death with no counter.
"Speculation is foolish when the tools of certainty are available." —Cinna, Vedalken Consul
I Prefer aggro meta over Combo meta i would prefer Control/Value meta over aggro thought.
early release of every expansion is always aggro filled, it's extremely easy to take advantage of theorycrafted, unrefined decks with aggro, which doesnt punish as much when mistakes are made.
On the topic tho, no not really. But a solely control or solely combo meta isn't fun either. Ideally all 3 playstyles are represented equally, and then you have a great rock paper scissors style of game, as card games generally should be.
Why u hav to be mad? is only card gaem.
iFaisal is really not known for salty threads on here. That's a strange insinuation.
Q1/ Do you like aggro meta ?
Q2/ What meta do you prefer ?
I don't care about meta,i play decks i like (Odd,Even,Aggro,Murloc,Mech,OTK,Quest,Devine Shield Paladin) .
Another expansion milestone is reached - the premature prediction of an aggro meta. Our journey continues.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
If aggro is the only factor in the meta it should be possible to create an anti-aggro control deck and wreck everyone. Everyone is playing aggro right now because there are a lot of combo decks that are weak against it. As soon as the meta settles, we'll probably see more anti-aggro control, and then more combo again as that usually beats control.
Aggro-control-combo is the rock-paper-scissors of Hearthstone. I don't think zoo is invincibly strong, so the meta will probably sort it out at some point. Only when that doesn't happen naturally Blizz should consider nerfing.
OTK meta with no aggro...
For Question 1: As a player who has enjoyed control decks for a long time I actually enjoy aggressive meta as that is what you have the most success against and the whole optimization, tech options, and mulligan strategy leads to a fun experience trying to grind them out of resources and ultimately win the game with a decent finisher.
For Question 2: Besides favoring aggressive meta I like how hearthstone has been a revolving door for which play style is given its power run. Not for sentimental value but from early on hearthstone was very aggressive with decks such as undertaker hunter. Then there was the reign of control warrior and priest. Combo saw its day with patron warrior and it seems now with all the new tools people have been experimenting with that combo might have its time in the sun again for a variety of classes which is awesome.
OP clearly stated that this wasn't a salt thread. Just a survey of people's opinions.
What aggro do you mean? I only see zoolocks and some very weird rogues...
That's the same thing I do, and I have fun with the game.
If the meta is too harsh with the decks I like to play, I try to tech my decks or build a new one to counter what is causing me trouble. If the result is a deck that I enjoy, I keep it.
EDIT: forgot to quote
Q1: It's day 3, there's no meta yet.
Q2: I prefer a meta where aggro-combo-control is balanced on a level that winrate against each other is between 40 and 60 percent. What I don't like - and unfortunately WW meta was one like this - is when it's basically a rock paper scissors with so polarized chances that no matter what you do, you either win or lose 90% of certain match-ups.
edit: If you remember from the past, Control Warrior vs Freeze Mage was one of these very polarized match-ups, and it was a popular topic. Now there are tons of similar match-ups.
Hasn't it most of the time aggro dominated? Besides the last few months, I mean...
Yeah, I do like aggro metas actually. Control decks beat aggro and that's great for a control player like me. I much rather be countering people than be countered like we were in the WitchWood control meta
Legend with : S65 Freeze Mage, S57 Maly Gonk Druid, S57 "Okay" Shaman, S53 Boom-zooka Hunter, S53 Maly Tog Druid, S52 Wild Tog Druid ft.Blingtron, S50 Quest Rogue, S49 Dead Man's Warrior, S41 Wild Clown Fiesta Druid, S41 Hadronox Jade Druid, S40 Wild OTK Dragon Druid, S35 SMOrc Shaman, S33 Jade Druid, S22 Control Priest, S19 Control Priest
Say what? I'm calling BS here. Even when pirate warrior was running rampant the top tier deck was a control deck (Reno Mage). Ever since I've been playing there's been at least 1 control deck in T1 and that's probably due to the fact control is typically good against aggro decks. If you don't believe me then look back to the end of last season. Quest warrior jumped in the tier list purely because zoolock became stupidly popular.
On topic any type of "dominated" meta isn't good for the game. The ideal scenario i a mix of aggro, midrange, control, and combo. Lately aggro and midrange have kinda blended together it seems but these decks all have their good and bad matchups. Personally I like control decks for the most part so an aggro meta, while boring and mindless to play against, is overall good for my win rates. However someone who likes shudderwock will likely not be having a great time.
I don't usually like an aggro dominated meta because it automatically means that the cards that are playable, even in casual matches, diminishes greatly. When that happens you start to see playstyles pigeonholed into what consistently counters those decks, which results in less original gameplay as a whole.
I prefer a control meta since I am able to pull off dank memes against my opponents and experience the many wow's! that ensue.
Well said!
I also prefer an aggro meta . Compared to decks like Shudderwock and other OTK decks, who seem to be made to crush Control/slower midrange decks , aggro feels way more healthy and interactive.
( unless they are too strong and kill u on turn 4 .. Undertaker was such an example. If an earlygame minion is too snowbally ( Like Trogg, Manawyrmetc. it will become uninteractive aswell)