And there is a card called Star Aligner, familiar?
Anyways, Zalae might have said that people just find excuses to not get better at game, but another streamer (quite a popular one) Savjz left the game. So, I can say 'Game sucks balls, look, he left'. But I won't, because it doesn't. Zalae's opinions are not more or less important than Savjz's. Also, he only plays a several T1 decks to get to high legends, so he has less problematic polarized matchups for him. ALSO, he is a pro player, and in tournaments, he can ban whatever the fuck he wants, that might affect his judgment. I am not denying that he is very good, or Hunterace for that matter, but pro opinions are a bit different than what we have.
IMO, we have two options until JtU, KFT and K&C leaves the meta. We either have 1 or 2 very strong deck terrorizing the meta, or we have a diverse meta with specific decks hunting other specific decks with a very high winrate. There are some reasons;
1-) Quests are made to beat control decks, because they generate super high value, nothing can fight them in long term. We had rogue, mage and warrior; then some druid and warrior; and now we have warrior occasionally, and of course rogue. You can say that Blizzard will create new cards to punish greedy control players, because thats what they did with Jade Idol as well. Well, I prefer not. Greedy control decks are punished by aggro players enough. So, you either go full greed, and lose to aggro, or go anti-aggro, and lose to control.
Same quests, however, lose to aggro decks. Apparently, we can't expect a deck to be strong against everything at the same time. But if a deck loses to a playstyle while hunting down another playstyle, that's where polarization happens. Game already had a balance between midrange, aggro and control. Blizzard added elements in between (Jade cards, and now quests), and they fucked it up.
2-) Everything I say about quest decks is the same for combo decks either. But combo decks has been a part of the game since forever, and they have some disruptors available, either a card, but playing differently. I don't play combo decks very often, but I won't blame those. However, I will blame Team 5 for something. Earlier combo deck I remember is freeze mage, and it had limited answers to stuff, didn't have too many defensive tools, and if you use them, you lose some burn potential. Combo decks rn (Not just Druid, but Raza Priest too), have too many tools to deal with stuff, they can be invincible. Druid shouldn't be able to gain over 50 armor in one game for example. Biggest contender is Branching Paths, closely followed by Ultimate Infestation.Combo decks used to be fragile, now they are not.
3-)Egg logic: One question, why? We have 2 egg cards and a Mechanical Whelp, and deathrattle synergy. This is another thing beating control and losing to aggro in general. Deathrattles are sticky stuff, and they prevent board clears to be effective, but they do nothing against a swarm of tiny minions going face and killing you in 3 turns. They can be considered as midrange decks maybe, but they play differently. After Devilsaur Egg and Carnivorous Cube rotates out, I hope they won't bring more similar stuff. There are two other hunter cards supporting this theme too, but I wanted to go with neutrals.
4-)Speaking of neutrals, T5 should have learned by now that, introducing very strong neutral cards with common, rare or epic rarity isn't a good idea. They are getting nerfed in short time anyways. This is not about polarization, its more about feeling like the same core while playing against diferent classes.
It was a long post, sorry about that. And any grammar mistakes.
I will never get how people say this meta is fine. More decks being played =/= healthy meta, that's why there will be balance changes even if the devs said they wanted to skip this expansion's nerfs. I'm not gonna talk about the super polarized match ups, the VS article is there and good enough.
For people saying "don't concede". I play big spell mage and never concede against quest rogue, mill druid, mecha'thun priest etc. and I almost always lose even if I try my best and plan my game 10 turns ahead. The only way I could possibly win is if my opponents draw like sh*t or if they discard combo pieces. How is this fun? Hoping your opponents mess up/draw too bad? That's how you expect to win in this meta?
Oh, and some say every meta is the worst and the next meta will win this title? Well, of course. As long as ungoro, kotft and knc are in standard every meta is the worst. If you say every meta is bad then why WotOG was so good? Right, because we didn't have stupid things like quests, recruit, mana cheat, powerful heroes etc.
Why do you think you should win more than you do? Seriously, why?
You decided to play your strategy, your opponent decided to play their strategy. If your opponent is playing a strategy that is favoured against yours, why should you be able to win?
Fact is, you shouldn't. Assuming both of you play the matchup to perfection, he should ALWAYS WIN. That is how it should always go.
The only path for you to win is if you play it to perfection, and your opponent fails to do so. Aside from that, there should be no occasion where your opponent, who played as well or better than you, and who also decided to use a strategy that is favoured against yours, should ever lose.
Can you explain to me, why should they lose to you, if you both played as well as each other, and he has a strategical advantage, why would they have to lose to you?
Doesn't that seem unfair to you?
It is not about FUN, it is never all that fun when you lose, but there is another person on the other side of the table, that person is having FUN because they won, and because they won AS THEY SHOULD.
We have had so many Metagames where Decks were at such a High Power Level that they consistently awarded undeserved wins to players, we are in a Metagame where it is extremely hard for these undeserved wins to take place, and people complain?
I played a lot of games against quest rogues and even if I tried my best while my opponents played like trash cans I still lost because of the polarizing match ups. Is it too hard for you to understand why this meta is so unhealthy? It's because of decks like quest rogue, odd warrior etc. So that's how you rank up nowadays? Pick a polarized deck and hope to queue into good match ups, hit legend, assume you are good? Nice meta.
And what's that bs with "if your opponent plays better than you then he should win"? I can play big spell mage very well and still lose to zoolock (good match up) after they had the nuts openening with flame imp, coin voodoo doctor into double happy ghoul. Does this mean my opponent played perfectly and I played like trash? No, it means RNG was in his favour. Now, how does BSM playing perfectly wins against quest rogue that plays like trash? Right, it doesn't.
I'm not looking for wins against opponents that play well or better than me, but losing to bad players just because they play a deck like quest rogue? Come on now.
I would take cubelock and even paladin meta over the current meta. Even if those 2 decks were so popular and strong, they were not polarized at all, in fact they were the least polarized decks according to VS report. That was better than "Oh, my opponent plays combo/quest rogue and I'm control, let's just concede on turn 1 and save 15 minutes of my life" or "Hey look, odd warrior and I'm playing aggro, concede on turn 4 incoming".
Ok so the issue is that you assume your opponent plays badly, and as such, he should lose.
That is problem, you are assuming what they did was incorrect, or that they played badly, but can you actually present their mistakes, and actually manage to fully explain why they were mistakes and in context?
It is absurdly easy to stated that your opponent is a trash can because he defeated you, it is extremely difficult to take a look at yourself, see if you made any mistake, and to have the option to see through their perspective and see if they made the mistakes.
Do you bother to read your opponent's hand? To keep careful track of how they play their cards, from where, how long their cards have been in hand, cross reference that with what existed in their hands in the turns you think they made mistakes, and understand why they made their plays?
My guess is you don't, you simply assume they made mistakes because you lost and since you cannot even consider that you made mistakes, or that they played correctly, it has to come down to the opponent being a trash can instead of a player who did things correctly.
Polarised matchups are perfectly fine, it means there is a large diversity of decks and strategies that people can play, and some interact in very polarised ways. It is a million times better than having an unbalanced metagame where certain decks are so above average power level, that they can steamroll every strategy even if they are unfavoured or played badly.
That is what used to happen, people would pick a deck, like say, Aggro Shaman, and would crush every other strategy, regardless of if they were unfavoured, and just climb through sheer unbalanced power of the deck.
When game is balanced, however, you actually need to take careful consideration, study what side of the Metagame you are facing, and use a strategy accordingly. You like, like if this was a Strategy Card Game, which it is.
Of course you can lose to Zoolock, if you draw poorly. So can the Quest Rogue, it is just harder for the Mage to get the kill than the Warlock, because you are playing a reactive strategy, while the Warlock is playing a proactive strategy. But you can play proactively and still win, it is just very hard. And if the Quest Rogue is as bad as you say they are, then they will fuck up so badly that you can take a win from them. That is the problem, your opponent is not fucking up badly like you say they are, and that is why you cannot take away a win from them.
One of the biggest flaws of Combo decks is how easily they can defeat themselves. This is almost exclusive to combo decks. Combo decks can easily destroy their own game plan if played incorrectly, so if they didn't destroy themselves, it likely means you are having the wrong perception.
You are making an assumption that the opponent is playing badly, and you are doing so because you have a negative impression of anyone that plays anything that destroys you. The best thing for you to do is try playing the Quest Rogue, and seeing if you would actually make the played they did, that you assumed were mistakes, but might actually turn out to be correct.
Never assume people playing Combo decks are playing worse than you, as if they made it to the same level you are at, they did so because they had to pilot their decks correctly for the most part.
Combo decks are the most demanding of Proper Technical Play, if you don't believe that, just pick a random person that is not very advanced in this game, and a very advanced player, like a Pro. Hand them each a Combo deck like Quest Rogue and even a Control deck like the Big Spell Mage. Record their results over a large sample size, like 1000 games, and you will see a much higher difference in winrates from the Quest Rogue, meaning it is more demanding.
And yes, obviously you would take those decks, they were unbalanced, they were far above average power level, meaning all you had to do to climb, was use them, and destroy the whole Metagame by powering through good and bad matchups, without even having to play correctly.
This is so dumb, to see that people actually truly desire to win so badly, that they don't give a flying fuck about balance, they couldn't care less about Strategy, about Proper Technical Play, solely care about winning and having Over Power tools to enable that.
I use hearthstone deck tracker and usually rewatch my games 2-3 times even more if I lose because I want see my mistakes and try to improve my game play. But what can I expect from you? It seems you live in your universe, where auto loss is ok and people shouldn't be able to say that others play badly. I have enough knowledge about this game and know when people misplay, watching replays of my games just to see my opponents misplay and still win because of the stupid decks they play is not cool. There should be punishment for misplays, that's how you improve. But you are probably a quest rogue player and you enjoy your free wins, so I will let you alone and hope the upcoming nerfs will bring that deck to trash tier forever.
And please don't tell me about comparing pros to noobs. This game is about grinding, just pick a deck, stick to it and you will learn everything you need. Give a rank 25 player malygos druid, tell him to play 30 games a day and he will hit rank 5 in maximum 2 weeks even if maly druid is hard to pilot. If this game requires something, that would be time spent trying to learn some basic things, but skill? Not really.
I will never get how people say this meta is fine. More decks being played =/= healthy meta, that's why there will be balance changes even if the devs said they wanted to skip this expansion's nerfs. I'm not gonna talk about the super polarized match ups, the VS article is there and good enough.
For people saying "don't concede". I play big spell mage and never concede against quest rogue, mill druid, mecha'thun priest etc. and I almost always lose even if I try my best and plan my game 10 turns ahead. The only way I could possibly win is if my opponents draw like sh*t or if they discard combo pieces. How is this fun? Hoping your opponents mess up/draw too bad? That's how you expect to win in this meta?
Oh, and some say every meta is the worst and the next meta will win this title? Well, of course. As long as ungoro, kotft and knc are in standard every meta is the worst. If you say every meta is bad then why WotOG was so good? Right, because we didn't have stupid things like quests, recruit, mana cheat, powerful heroes etc.
Deep concept here. Outplaying your opponent has more to do with making less mistakes then them as opposed to formulating and executing some novel plan. This is not only true in HS, but in all card games: poker, bridge, ...
If you don’t like this, consider some other game, like Chess or Go.
And there is a card called Star Aligner, familiar?
Anyways, Zalae might have said that people just find excuses to not get better at game, but another streamer (quite a popular one) Savjz left the game. So, I can say 'Game sucks balls, look, he left'. But I won't, because it doesn't. Zalae's opinions are not more or less important than Savjz's. Also, he only plays a several T1 decks to get to high legends, so he has less problematic polarized matchups for him. ALSO, he is a pro player, and in tournaments, he can ban whatever the fuck he wants, that might affect his judgment. I am not denying that he is very good, or Hunterace for that matter, but pro opinions are a bit different than what we have.
IMO, we have two options until JtU, KFT and K&C leaves the meta. We either have 1 or 2 very strong deck terrorizing the meta, or we have a diverse meta with specific decks hunting other specific decks with a very high winrate. There are some reasons;
1-) Quests are made to beat control decks, because they generate super high value, nothing can fight them in long term. We had rogue, mage and warrior; then some druid and warrior; and now we have warrior occasionally, and of course rogue. You can say that Blizzard will create new cards to punish greedy control players, because thats what they did with Jade Idol as well. Well, I prefer not. Greedy control decks are punished by aggro players enough. So, you either go full greed, and lose to aggro, or go anti-aggro, and lose to control.
Same quests, however, lose to aggro decks. Apparently, we can't expect a deck to be strong against everything at the same time. But if a deck loses to a playstyle while hunting down another playstyle, that's where polarization happens. Game already had a balance between midrange, aggro and control. Blizzard added elements in between (Jade cards, and now quests), and they fucked it up.
2-) Everything I say about quest decks is the same for combo decks either. But combo decks has been a part of the game since forever, and they have some disruptors available, either a card, but playing differently. I don't play combo decks very often, but I won't blame those. However, I will blame Team 5 for something. Earlier combo deck I remember is freeze mage, and it had limited answers to stuff, didn't have too many defensive tools, and if you use them, you lose some burn potential. Combo decks rn (Not just Druid, but Raza Priest too), have too many tools to deal with stuff, they can be invincible. Druid shouldn't be able to gain over 50 armor in one game for example. Biggest contender is Branching Paths, closely followed by Ultimate Infestation.Combo decks used to be fragile, now they are not.
3-)Egg logic: One question, why? We have 2 egg cards and a Mechanical Whelp, and deathrattle synergy. This is another thing beating control and losing to aggro in general. Deathrattles are sticky stuff, and they prevent board clears to be effective, but they do nothing against a swarm of tiny minions going face and killing you in 3 turns. They can be considered as midrange decks maybe, but they play differently. After Devilsaur Egg and Carnivorous Cube rotates out, I hope they won't bring more similar stuff. There are two other hunter cards supporting this theme too, but I wanted to go with neutrals.
4-)Speaking of neutrals, T5 should have learned by now that, introducing very strong neutral cards with common, rare or epic rarity isn't a good idea. They are getting nerfed in short time anyways. This is not about polarization, its more about feeling like the same core while playing against diferent classes.
It was a long post, sorry about that. And any grammar mistakes.
Long post —- short answers:
1) That is called assymetric game balance - without it, there is no meta game
2) Combo decks are NOT invincible in this meta game. In fact, no deck is.
3) There must always be Eggs; just like there must always be a Lich King.
Meanwhile in Arena ..... best Meta we have seen in quite a while. I dont have a lot of time to climb ladder, and honestly I havent encountered the real Standard Meta for that same reason. Not sure about the other HS players here but lately Ive prefer to play Arena instead of any other game mode (apart from the weekly Tavern Brawl game until a pack is received :D )
Hearthstone is FUCKIN DEAD! THIS GAME IS AN ANUL GAME. PLUS THIS IS WHAT EVERYONE SAYS IN EACH META
The game is almost dead. Inevitably, the prophecy was ever going to be fulfilled. The end of times is near, bro, and as I said in other thread, only a miracle could save Hearthstone.
the hearthstone community is so stupid, and short sited when it comes to a good meta. i hope i can put it all into this post.
people want a meta that is diverse, and where strategy and thinking matters, not a 1-deck-beats-all sort of thing. the most ideal meta is one where almost every class has a tier-1 or tier-2 deck, and most of the classes can climb to at least rank 5. and we also want to play lots of control decks and not brain dead aggro decks.
but when we got a diverse control meta in KaC, (diverse meaning cubelock, kingsbane, control druid, and big priest.) everyone wanted the meta to change to more aggro decks, because climbing in a control meta was stale, and took to long.
and here when we have quest rogue, odd warrior, star aligner druid, even shaman, deathrattle hunter, and odd paladin. (or at least that is what i can think of) people say the game is dead, and that every single deck is broken. people have whined about the meat since the game came out.
the problem is not that blizzard is lazy, or that they dont playtest their cards, or that they are just a stupid, company in general, but the problem is that they make cards, they make cards so the game stays interesting, and because they make new cards they will make things that people hate, the game can never be "fixed" because a game like this is broken by nature.
the reason people dont like diverse, strategic metas is because they dont like to have to think through all 85 seconds of their turn to make the right play, they want things easy, but then when the 1-deck-beats-all meta comes out they dont like how op that deck is. the fact is people will whine about everything because the game will never be the best it can be, because things like this are just broken.
I hope i have made my point and that my post did not drag on to long for anyone to skip it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Rejoice, for even in death, you have become children of Thanos.
And there is a card called Star Aligner, familiar?
Anyways, Zalae might have said that people just find excuses to not get better at game, but another streamer (quite a popular one) Savjz left the game. So, I can say 'Game sucks balls, look, he left'. But I won't, because it doesn't. Zalae's opinions are not more or less important than Savjz's. Also, he only plays a several T1 decks to get to high legends, so he has less problematic polarized matchups for him. ALSO, he is a pro player, and in tournaments, he can ban whatever the fuck he wants, that might affect his judgment. I am not denying that he is very good, or Hunterace for that matter, but pro opinions are a bit different than what we have.
IMO, we have two options until JtU, KFT and K&C leaves the meta. We either have 1 or 2 very strong deck terrorizing the meta, or we have a diverse meta with specific decks hunting other specific decks with a very high winrate. There are some reasons;
1-) Quests are made to beat control decks, because they generate super high value, nothing can fight them in long term. We had rogue, mage and warrior; then some druid and warrior; and now we have warrior occasionally, and of course rogue. You can say that Blizzard will create new cards to punish greedy control players, because thats what they did with Jade Idol as well. Well, I prefer not. Greedy control decks are punished by aggro players enough. So, you either go full greed, and lose to aggro, or go anti-aggro, and lose to control.
Same quests, however, lose to aggro decks. Apparently, we can't expect a deck to be strong against everything at the same time. But if a deck loses to a playstyle while hunting down another playstyle, that's where polarization happens. Game already had a balance between midrange, aggro and control. Blizzard added elements in between (Jade cards, and now quests), and they fucked it up.
2-) Everything I say about quest decks is the same for combo decks either. But combo decks has been a part of the game since forever, and they have some disruptors available, either a card, but playing differently. I don't play combo decks very often, but I won't blame those. However, I will blame Team 5 for something. Earlier combo deck I remember is freeze mage, and it had limited answers to stuff, didn't have too many defensive tools, and if you use them, you lose some burn potential. Combo decks rn (Not just Druid, but Raza Priest too), have too many tools to deal with stuff, they can be invincible. Druid shouldn't be able to gain over 50 armor in one game for example. Biggest contender is Branching Paths, closely followed by Ultimate Infestation.Combo decks used to be fragile, now they are not.
3-)Egg logic: One question, why? We have 2 egg cards and a Mechanical Whelp, and deathrattle synergy. This is another thing beating control and losing to aggro in general. Deathrattles are sticky stuff, and they prevent board clears to be effective, but they do nothing against a swarm of tiny minions going face and killing you in 3 turns. They can be considered as midrange decks maybe, but they play differently. After Devilsaur Egg and Carnivorous Cube rotates out, I hope they won't bring more similar stuff. There are two other hunter cards supporting this theme too, but I wanted to go with neutrals.
4-)Speaking of neutrals, T5 should have learned by now that, introducing very strong neutral cards with common, rare or epic rarity isn't a good idea. They are getting nerfed in short time anyways. This is not about polarization, its more about feeling like the same core while playing against diferent classes.
It was a long post, sorry about that. And any grammar mistakes.
Long post —- short answers:
1) That is called assymetric game balance - without it, there is no meta game
2) Combo decks are NOT invincible in this meta game. In fact, no deck is.
3) There must always be Eggs; just like there must always be a Lich King.
4) I actually agree.
Combo decks are not invincible, I didn't say that. They are less fragile than before, they have many more tools to survive until they have what they need. Malygos Druid in Karazhan and Malygos Druid now is a good example. You can see the difference clearly. Well, 30+ armor and 6 mana 5/25 taunt are hard to miss.
What is asymmetric game balance? Haven't heard that term before.
The meta is one of the best I've experience (personal opinion) simply cause i can play a bunch of different decks with relative success. Sure the meta is full of aggro or combo but I've had surprising success with decks like Cloning Gallery Priest and Big spell mage just cause you can outplay aggro and control. the Meta has some polarizing decks but it isn't impossible to outplay them. the meta iI think was the worst was early Gadgetzan because of decks like pirate warrior and Midrange shaman because even with skill they were impossible to outplay and would just present too many threats for a deck to deal with. Take last nights global game for example between Caimiao and Moyen. Sure Caimiao was playing meta decks Zoo/Maly Druid/ Odd rogue but he pulled a reverse sweep against even warlock which wasn't to favorable for any of his decks by outplaying Moyen. that is why i think this is a fairly healthy meta
So you are actually tryingf to claim this meta is more polarizing than pirate warrior vs reno mage meta? Excuse me while I....bwahahahahaha....*breathes*....hahahahhahahaha
So you are actually tryingf to claim this meta is more polarizing than pirate warrior vs reno mage meta? Excuse me while I....bwahahahahaha....*breathes*....hahahahhahahaha
Not more polarizing, just that he likes this meta a lot better - because of variety. Even the best standard decks now have some tough matchups, this has not always been the case.
Hearthstone is FUCKIN DEAD! THIS GAME IS AN ANUL GAME. PLUS THIS IS WHAT EVERYONE SAYS IN EACH META
Lol ypu must be lying about playing since tgt or you'd have given the worst meta title to gadgetzan.
This is by far one of the freshest meta's in a long time. All classes have something viable and most classes have multiple viable decks too.
Sounds to me as if you're on a losing streak.
Why u hav to be mad? is only card gaem.
And there is a card called Star Aligner, familiar?
Anyways, Zalae might have said that people just find excuses to not get better at game, but another streamer (quite a popular one) Savjz left the game. So, I can say 'Game sucks balls, look, he left'. But I won't, because it doesn't. Zalae's opinions are not more or less important than Savjz's. Also, he only plays a several T1 decks to get to high legends, so he has less problematic polarized matchups for him. ALSO, he is a pro player, and in tournaments, he can ban whatever the fuck he wants, that might affect his judgment. I am not denying that he is very good, or Hunterace for that matter, but pro opinions are a bit different than what we have.
IMO, we have two options until JtU, KFT and K&C leaves the meta. We either have 1 or 2 very strong deck terrorizing the meta, or we have a diverse meta with specific decks hunting other specific decks with a very high winrate. There are some reasons;
1-) Quests are made to beat control decks, because they generate super high value, nothing can fight them in long term. We had rogue, mage and warrior; then some druid and warrior; and now we have warrior occasionally, and of course rogue. You can say that Blizzard will create new cards to punish greedy control players, because thats what they did with Jade Idol as well. Well, I prefer not. Greedy control decks are punished by aggro players enough. So, you either go full greed, and lose to aggro, or go anti-aggro, and lose to control.
Same quests, however, lose to aggro decks. Apparently, we can't expect a deck to be strong against everything at the same time. But if a deck loses to a playstyle while hunting down another playstyle, that's where polarization happens. Game already had a balance between midrange, aggro and control. Blizzard added elements in between (Jade cards, and now quests), and they fucked it up.
2-) Everything I say about quest decks is the same for combo decks either. But combo decks has been a part of the game since forever, and they have some disruptors available, either a card, but playing differently. I don't play combo decks very often, but I won't blame those. However, I will blame Team 5 for something. Earlier combo deck I remember is freeze mage, and it had limited answers to stuff, didn't have too many defensive tools, and if you use them, you lose some burn potential. Combo decks rn (Not just Druid, but Raza Priest too), have too many tools to deal with stuff, they can be invincible. Druid shouldn't be able to gain over 50 armor in one game for example. Biggest contender is Branching Paths, closely followed by Ultimate Infestation.Combo decks used to be fragile, now they are not.
3-)Egg logic: One question, why? We have 2 egg cards and a Mechanical Whelp, and deathrattle synergy. This is another thing beating control and losing to aggro in general. Deathrattles are sticky stuff, and they prevent board clears to be effective, but they do nothing against a swarm of tiny minions going face and killing you in 3 turns. They can be considered as midrange decks maybe, but they play differently. After Devilsaur Egg and Carnivorous Cube rotates out, I hope they won't bring more similar stuff. There are two other hunter cards supporting this theme too, but I wanted to go with neutrals.
4-)Speaking of neutrals, T5 should have learned by now that, introducing very strong neutral cards with common, rare or epic rarity isn't a good idea. They are getting nerfed in short time anyways. This is not about polarization, its more about feeling like the same core while playing against diferent classes.
It was a long post, sorry about that. And any grammar mistakes.
Huntertaker and Secret Paladin disagree with the OP.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I played a lot of games against quest rogues and even if I tried my best while my opponents played like trash cans I still lost because of the polarizing match ups. Is it too hard for you to understand why this meta is so unhealthy? It's because of decks like quest rogue, odd warrior etc. So that's how you rank up nowadays? Pick a polarized deck and hope to queue into good match ups, hit legend, assume you are good? Nice meta.
And what's that bs with "if your opponent plays better than you then he should win"? I can play big spell mage very well and still lose to zoolock (good match up) after they had the nuts openening with flame imp, coin voodoo doctor into double happy ghoul. Does this mean my opponent played perfectly and I played like trash? No, it means RNG was in his favour. Now, how does BSM playing perfectly wins against quest rogue that plays like trash? Right, it doesn't.
I'm not looking for wins against opponents that play well or better than me, but losing to bad players just because they play a deck like quest rogue? Come on now.
I would take cubelock and even paladin meta over the current meta. Even if those 2 decks were so popular and strong, they were not polarized at all, in fact they were the least polarized decks according to VS report. That was better than "Oh, my opponent plays combo/quest rogue and I'm control, let's just concede on turn 1 and save 15 minutes of my life" or "Hey look, odd warrior and I'm playing aggro, concede on turn 4 incoming".
I use hearthstone deck tracker and usually rewatch my games 2-3 times even more if I lose because I want see my mistakes and try to improve my game play. But what can I expect from you? It seems you live in your universe, where auto loss is ok and people shouldn't be able to say that others play badly. I have enough knowledge about this game and know when people misplay, watching replays of my games just to see my opponents misplay and still win because of the stupid decks they play is not cool. There should be punishment for misplays, that's how you improve. But you are probably a quest rogue player and you enjoy your free wins, so I will let you alone and hope the upcoming nerfs will bring that deck to trash tier forever.
And please don't tell me about comparing pros to noobs. This game is about grinding, just pick a deck, stick to it and you will learn everything you need. Give a rank 25 player malygos druid, tell him to play 30 games a day and he will hit rank 5 in maximum 2 weeks even if maly druid is hard to pilot. If this game requires something, that would be time spent trying to learn some basic things, but skill? Not really.
Deep concept here. Outplaying your opponent has more to do with making less mistakes then them as opposed to formulating and executing some novel plan. This is not only true in HS, but in all card games: poker, bridge, ...
If you don’t like this, consider some other game, like Chess or Go.
meta is unhealthy if there's one deck dominating
meta is unhealthy if there are a few good decks
what makes a meta good then? all decks are equally good and deck selection doesn't matter?
the whole point is that some decks are supposed to have advantages over others. I don't get what meta people will actually be happy with.
Long post —- short answers:
1) That is called assymetric game balance - without it, there is no meta game
2) Combo decks are NOT invincible in this meta game. In fact, no deck is.
3) There must always be Eggs; just like there must always be a Lich King.
4) I actually agree.
Meanwhile in Arena ..... best Meta we have seen in quite a while.
I dont have a lot of time to climb ladder, and honestly I havent encountered the real Standard Meta for that same reason. Not sure about the other HS players here but lately Ive prefer to play Arena instead of any other game mode (apart from the weekly Tavern Brawl game until a pack is received :D )
To see the alternative, you don't have to look further than Wild, right now:
-I want to play all-cards midrange dude paladin!
-Nice, I can beat odd rogue, pirate warrior and some meme decks!
(Climb climb)
-Ouch, I am owned my even shaman and SA Druid, which are the strongest and most popular decks, forget about it...
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
The game is almost dead. Inevitably, the prophecy was ever going to be fulfilled. The end of times is near, bro, and as I said in other thread, only a miracle could save Hearthstone.
the hearthstone community is so stupid, and short sited when it comes to a good meta. i hope i can put it all into this post.
people want a meta that is diverse, and where strategy and thinking matters, not a 1-deck-beats-all sort of thing. the most ideal meta is one where almost every class has a tier-1 or tier-2 deck, and most of the classes can climb to at least rank 5. and we also want to play lots of control decks and not brain dead aggro decks.
but when we got a diverse control meta in KaC, (diverse meaning cubelock, kingsbane, control druid, and big priest.) everyone wanted the meta to change to more aggro decks, because climbing in a control meta was stale, and took to long.
and here when we have quest rogue, odd warrior, star aligner druid, even shaman, deathrattle hunter, and odd paladin. (or at least that is what i can think of) people say the game is dead, and that every single deck is broken. people have whined about the meat since the game came out.
the problem is not that blizzard is lazy, or that they dont playtest their cards, or that they are just a stupid, company in general, but the problem is that they make cards, they make cards so the game stays interesting, and because they make new cards they will make things that people hate, the game can never be "fixed" because a game like this is broken by nature.
the reason people dont like diverse, strategic metas is because they dont like to have to think through all 85 seconds of their turn to make the right play, they want things easy, but then when the 1-deck-beats-all meta comes out they dont like how op that deck is. the fact is people will whine about everything because the game will never be the best it can be, because things like this are just broken.
I hope i have made my point and that my post did not drag on to long for anyone to skip it.
Rejoice, for even in death, you have become children of Thanos.
Combo decks are not invincible, I didn't say that. They are less fragile than before, they have many more tools to survive until they have what they need. Malygos Druid in Karazhan and Malygos Druid now is a good example. You can see the difference clearly. Well, 30+ armor and 6 mana 5/25 taunt are hard to miss.
What is asymmetric game balance? Haven't heard that term before.
The meta is one of the best I've experience (personal opinion) simply cause i can play a bunch of different decks with relative success. Sure the meta is full of aggro or combo but I've had surprising success with decks like Cloning Gallery Priest and Big spell mage just cause you can outplay aggro and control. the Meta has some polarizing decks but it isn't impossible to outplay them. the meta iI think was the worst was early Gadgetzan because of decks like pirate warrior and Midrange shaman because even with skill they were impossible to outplay and would just present too many threats for a deck to deal with. Take last nights global game for example between Caimiao and Moyen. Sure Caimiao was playing meta decks Zoo/Maly Druid/ Odd rogue but he pulled a reverse sweep against even warlock which wasn't to favorable for any of his decks by outplaying Moyen. that is why i think this is a fairly healthy meta
Lovely
So you are actually tryingf to claim this meta is more polarizing than pirate warrior vs reno mage meta? Excuse me while I....bwahahahahaha....*breathes*....hahahahhahahaha
Not more polarizing, just that he likes this meta a lot better - because of variety. Even the best standard decks now have some tough matchups, this has not always been the case.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
Actually I wasn't kidding, if you play on Casual in Wild Mode, it's, you know, quite fun.
If you concede as soon as you see a Hunter, that sounds like a "you" problem.
Wide variety of tier 1 and tier 2 decks. Looks great!
Anger is the punishment we give ourselves for someone else's mistake.