1) How is a meta that has, a least, a dozen competitive decks less 'skill-based' than a meta that has one dominate agro deck? You can, today, competitively deck build and play every class, some with multiple decks. A 2 toned meta (OP and counter OP) ALWAYS eliminates, at least, 2 classes from viability. This meta actually encourages learning multiple play styles and playing the same classes in different ways. Diverse does equal good.
2)Also, that 'dice roll' matchup argument is SUPER weak. Play games out, I've beaten dozens of 'bad matchups' b/c I played the game out; card draw, actual play, deck building, and patience- that wins in this meta not auto win or SMORC decks. It just comes off as folks who want to play auto win decks- there's solitaire on your computer for that. Diverse does equal balanced.
3) Oh, and control is not dead... In constructed you see just as many, if not more, Odd Rouge, Odd Paladin, and Tempo Mage decks as you do Combo Druid, DK Hunter or ?Mecha'thun? (seriously?) decks and some of those "OTK combo" decks can be messed with enough to undo their win condition. And ladder... please... Zoo, Odd Rogue and Odd Paly still see a bulk of the play... control is still very much alive.
4) Ultimately its all a bit subjective, you claim diverse does not equal good nor balanced... but to me it does. You might have liked the Pirate Warrior meta, but I hate 2 toned metas; I prefer a wide meta so that when I que up and see my next opponent I don't already know how the game will have to play out for me to win or lose. You might like predictable games, but I love the challenge of beating a deck that I'm not equipped to beat or getting those off meta decks that own me b/c they specifically tech against whatever deck I'm running, or when someone surprises with a new take on a current meta deck. Diverse does equal good and fun... a least for some of us... like the OP.
So, unproductive!? This thread started off positive... but, ya, the 'salty noobs' or 'salty ___' gotta crap all over someone who is actually having fun and willing to say so. And I'm willing to agree and call BS on folks who cry 'stale' or 'too dice rolly.' If you've got a different take, fine say it, but If you're just gonna be self-righteous, keep that crap to yourself... be better than that.
People haven't gotten used to the adversity that we have right now,so they keep losing because match ups rotate fast and they can't concentrate against a single match up.
The reason that they are losing is enough to make them hate the "stale" meta.
Tbh , i havent seen a healthier meta with all 9 classes being played since forever.
1) How is a meta that has, a least, a dozen competitive decks less 'skill-based' than a meta that has one dominate agro deck? You can, today, competitively deck build and play every class, some with multiple decks. A 2 toned meta (OP and counter OP) ALWAYS eliminates, at least, 2 classes from viability. This meta actually encourages learning multiple play styles and playing the same classes in different ways. Diverse does equal good.
There's not much skill in copying a deck from VS and hoping to get good matchups. The current meta is the worst case of RPS we've ever seen. The more targets and wider variety of said targets, the harder it is to counter the pool as a whole; it's simply a matter of picking a deck and hoping you get good matchups. In contrast, with fewer targets spanning a smaller variety, it's easier to design a deck to counter the whole. It can also be said that of the best decks, the core package is too big and too flexible (looking at you, Druid). In previous metas, you would know in the first turn or two what any deck you were up against was, and could plan turns accordingly. That's far less true now.
2)Also, that 'dice roll' matchup argument is SUPER weak. Play games out, I've beaten dozens of 'bad matchups' b/c I played the game out; card draw, actual play, deck building, and patience- that wins in this meta not auto win or SMORC decks. It just comes off as folks who want to play auto win decks- there's solitaire on your computer for that. Diverse does equal balanced.
You made two points that are unrelated. No one here is arguing that 'bad matchup' means '0% chance to win.' You should be fighting for every win% point, never just conceding because you got a bad matchup. As to your second point, no - 'diverse' and 'balanced' aren't the same thing. Further, 'balanced meta' and 'good meta' aren't the same thing.
3) Oh, and control is not dead... In constructed you see just as many, if not more, Odd Rouge, Odd Paladin, and Tempo Mage decks as you do Combo Druid, DK Hunter or ?Mecha'thun? (seriously?) decks and some of those "OTK combo" decks can be messed with enough to undo their win condition. And ladder... please... Zoo, Odd Rogue and Odd Paly still see a bulk of the play... control is still very much alive.
....constructed and ladder are the same thing. FWIW, I did extremely poorly with Control Warlock, and only started winning with it once I was running the Mechathun version. Odd Warrior performed very poorly for me as well - many aggro decks just have too much pressure too fast, especially aggro mage, and the Hunter DK will outvalue any control deck that doesn't have some combo OTK finisher. If you're running control, its because you hope to queue into mostly Odd Rogue and Heal Zoo.
4) Ultimately its all a bit subjective, you claim diverse does not equal good nor balanced... but to me it does. You might have liked the Pirate Warrior meta, but I hate 2 toned metas; I prefer a wide meta so that when I que up and see my next opponent I don't already know how the game will have to play out for me to win or lose. You might like predictable games, but I love the challenge of beating a deck that I'm not equipped to beat or getting those off meta decks that own me b/c they specifically tech against whatever deck I'm running, or when someone surprises with a new take on a current meta deck. Diverse does equal good and fun... a least for some of us... like the OP.
So, unproductive!? This thread started off positive... but, ya, the 'salty noobs' or 'salty ___' gotta crap all over someone who is actually having fun and willing to say so. And I'm willing to agree and call BS on folks who cry 'stale' or 'too dice rolly.' If you've got a different take, fine say it, but If you're just gonna be self-righteous, keep that crap to yourself... be better than that.
If you feel any of my posts here violate the forum rules, please report them and look to get me banned. Otherwise, I was merely calling out your unproductive post, dismissing views that opposed the OP as "salty noobs." Thanks for taking the time to write out your explanation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
1) You mentioned folks copying a deck. Who mentioned net decking? That's just pivoting. Net decking has always been an issue, this meta is no worse than any other. But also, "In previous metas, you would know in the first turn or two what any deck you were up against was, and could plan turns accordingly. That's far less true now. " This is a bad thing? This is one of the main reason why this meta is really good. You and I have massively different ideas on what connotes a good meta... you're really making my point for me. Seeing this as a negative assumes/ encourages everyone to net deck... a diverse meta means you can't reliably predict who you will play so you have to build a balanced deck that has variable and viable win conditions and tech options. IOW I'm not being forced to play the current OP deck or its counter- if I want to be competitive.
2) "You made two points that are unrelated." I beg to differ, diversity in matchup and game balance are related. Typically aggro beats combo, combo beats control and control beats aggro; right now there is a wide and effective sampling of all archetypes, which means all deck archetypes are, by and large, held 'in check' by another deck. It appears that some 'salty' folks are upset over this balance and their inability to reliably predict their opponent's deck- this is the 'dice roll matchup' effect- which I think is great for the game. And yes while the words diverse and balanced don't objectively mean the same thing, I was hoping you could draw conclusions and not nitpick over technicalities. Though, if you don't think a balanced meta is a good meta then I have to question why you enjoy playing? If it's just to win, then I can't relate. I want to win, but I want a competitive challenge and the more balanced the meta is the more challenging the competition becomes.
3) Sorry "casual" constructed and ladder and they are different, currently. Casual constructed is full of combo, OTK and off meta decks while, I'm finding alot of agro (as usual) and control decks on ladder this season. Again hoping you could draw the conclusions and not nitpick over technicalities. Also, I love queuing up against aggro w/Odd Warrior- I find it has so much cheap removal and tanking potential that it can almost always outlast the agro swarms. My only issue with the deck is that it doesn't really have a true win condition... which is why I sub one in for those combo or other control matches. And I find DK Hunter, while strong, to be unpredictable. 50% of the time a good value or control deck can outlast Rexxar.
4) "violate forum rules," "look to get me banned"- wow rhetoric is a bit OTT don't you think? But calling out someone (calling their post unproductive) for calling out folks (calling other's posts salty and noob-ish) is a bit pretentious and hypocritical (i.e. self-righteous). Just saying... see ya out there.
I watched Kolento's stream yesterday. He played quest rogue and (by his own accord) faced 11/13 aggro decks. The games were a drag, he kept losing (though he had a great win against warrior, who insta-conceded after turn 1 quest :D ). Then he decided to switch decks, first page of nine meta decks were dismissed, because he said they all have too polarized matchups. Second page of decks, another nine meta decks were looked at, and after a while token druid was selected as the deck to play, because it is the only one not to have these 90% matchups.
The whole scene was pretty telling about the current meta.
It's a weak deck on its own. If Healzoo falls out of favor, so will Odd Warrior.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
Gotta call BS on you Kaladin. For a few things...
1) How is a meta that has, a least, a dozen competitive decks less 'skill-based' than a meta that has one dominate agro deck? You can, today, competitively deck build and play every class, some with multiple decks. A 2 toned meta (OP and counter OP) ALWAYS eliminates, at least, 2 classes from viability. This meta actually encourages learning multiple play styles and playing the same classes in different ways. Diverse does equal good.
2)Also, that 'dice roll' matchup argument is SUPER weak. Play games out, I've beaten dozens of 'bad matchups' b/c I played the game out; card draw, actual play, deck building, and patience- that wins in this meta not auto win or SMORC decks. It just comes off as folks who want to play auto win decks- there's solitaire on your computer for that. Diverse does equal balanced.
3) Oh, and control is not dead... In constructed you see just as many, if not more, Odd Rouge, Odd Paladin, and Tempo Mage decks as you do Combo Druid, DK Hunter or ?Mecha'thun? (seriously?) decks and some of those "OTK combo" decks can be messed with enough to undo their win condition. And ladder... please... Zoo, Odd Rogue and Odd Paly still see a bulk of the play... control is still very much alive.
4) Ultimately its all a bit subjective, you claim diverse does not equal good nor balanced... but to me it does. You might have liked the Pirate Warrior meta, but I hate 2 toned metas; I prefer a wide meta so that when I que up and see my next opponent I don't already know how the game will have to play out for me to win or lose. You might like predictable games, but I love the challenge of beating a deck that I'm not equipped to beat or getting those off meta decks that own me b/c they specifically tech against whatever deck I'm running, or when someone surprises with a new take on a current meta deck. Diverse does equal good and fun... a least for some of us... like the OP.
So, unproductive!? This thread started off positive... but, ya, the 'salty noobs' or 'salty ___' gotta crap all over someone who is actually having fun and willing to say so. And I'm willing to agree and call BS on folks who cry 'stale' or 'too dice rolly.' If you've got a different take, fine say it, but If you're just gonna be self-righteous, keep that crap to yourself... be better than that.
People haven't gotten used to the adversity that we have right now,so they keep losing because match ups rotate fast and they can't concentrate against a single match up.
The reason that they are losing is enough to make them hate the "stale" meta.
Tbh , i havent seen a healthier meta with all 9 classes being played since forever.
Just Another Legend Player#Kappa
There's not much skill in copying a deck from VS and hoping to get good matchups. The current meta is the worst case of RPS we've ever seen. The more targets and wider variety of said targets, the harder it is to counter the pool as a whole; it's simply a matter of picking a deck and hoping you get good matchups. In contrast, with fewer targets spanning a smaller variety, it's easier to design a deck to counter the whole. It can also be said that of the best decks, the core package is too big and too flexible (looking at you, Druid). In previous metas, you would know in the first turn or two what any deck you were up against was, and could plan turns accordingly. That's far less true now.
You made two points that are unrelated. No one here is arguing that 'bad matchup' means '0% chance to win.' You should be fighting for every win% point, never just conceding because you got a bad matchup. As to your second point, no - 'diverse' and 'balanced' aren't the same thing. Further, 'balanced meta' and 'good meta' aren't the same thing.
....constructed and ladder are the same thing. FWIW, I did extremely poorly with Control Warlock, and only started winning with it once I was running the Mechathun version. Odd Warrior performed very poorly for me as well - many aggro decks just have too much pressure too fast, especially aggro mage, and the Hunter DK will outvalue any control deck that doesn't have some combo OTK finisher. If you're running control, its because you hope to queue into mostly Odd Rogue and Heal Zoo.
Purely subjective point that I will not address.
If you feel any of my posts here violate the forum rules, please report them and look to get me banned. Otherwise, I was merely calling out your unproductive post, dismissing views that opposed the OP as "salty noobs." Thanks for taking the time to write out your explanation.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
Kaladin, still
1) You mentioned folks copying a deck. Who mentioned net decking? That's just pivoting. Net decking has always been an issue, this meta is no worse than any other. But also, "In previous metas, you would know in the first turn or two what any deck you were up against was, and could plan turns accordingly. That's far less true now. " This is a bad thing? This is one of the main reason why this meta is really good. You and I have massively different ideas on what connotes a good meta... you're really making my point for me. Seeing this as a negative assumes/ encourages everyone to net deck... a diverse meta means you can't reliably predict who you will play so you have to build a balanced deck that has variable and viable win conditions and tech options. IOW I'm not being forced to play the current OP deck or its counter- if I want to be competitive.
2) "You made two points that are unrelated." I beg to differ, diversity in matchup and game balance are related. Typically aggro beats combo, combo beats control and control beats aggro; right now there is a wide and effective sampling of all archetypes, which means all deck archetypes are, by and large, held 'in check' by another deck. It appears that some 'salty' folks are upset over this balance and their inability to reliably predict their opponent's deck- this is the 'dice roll matchup' effect- which I think is great for the game. And yes while the words diverse and balanced don't objectively mean the same thing, I was hoping you could draw conclusions and not nitpick over technicalities. Though, if you don't think a balanced meta is a good meta then I have to question why you enjoy playing? If it's just to win, then I can't relate. I want to win, but I want a competitive challenge and the more balanced the meta is the more challenging the competition becomes.
3) Sorry "casual" constructed and ladder and they are different, currently. Casual constructed is full of combo, OTK and off meta decks while, I'm finding alot of agro (as usual) and control decks on ladder this season. Again hoping you could draw the conclusions and not nitpick over technicalities. Also, I love queuing up against aggro w/Odd Warrior- I find it has so much cheap removal and tanking potential that it can almost always outlast the agro swarms. My only issue with the deck is that it doesn't really have a true win condition... which is why I sub one in for those combo or other control matches. And I find DK Hunter, while strong, to be unpredictable. 50% of the time a good value or control deck can outlast Rexxar.
4) "violate forum rules," "look to get me banned"- wow rhetoric is a bit OTT don't you think? But calling out someone (calling their post unproductive) for calling out folks (calling other's posts salty and noob-ish) is a bit pretentious and hypocritical (i.e. self-righteous). Just saying... see ya out there.
If someone posted "No i don't" it would be locked right away.
Agree to disagree then, we are just getting down to my opinion vs yours.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
I watched Kolento's stream yesterday. He played quest rogue and (by his own accord) faced 11/13 aggro decks. The games were a drag, he kept losing (though he had a great win against warrior, who insta-conceded after turn 1 quest :D ). Then he decided to switch decks, first page of nine meta decks were dismissed, because he said they all have too polarized matchups. Second page of decks, another nine meta decks were looked at, and after a while token druid was selected as the deck to play, because it is the only one not to have these 90% matchups.
The whole scene was pretty telling about the current meta.
enjoy while it lasts...
Dead but dreaming