In this thread, I'll be asking you all to answer/discuss what has been the best meta in Hearthstone history, alongside which cards have been the best for the game, while still proving to be fun and viable.
Things you could consider would be:
- During what set did you enjoy the constructed meta the most?
- Which cards do you think are the most healthy for the game alongside being fun/viable.
- Which sort of mechanics/cards do you think that the game should avoid?
- Which types of mechanics/cards do you think the game should go for?
- Which sort of thematics do you think are the most enjoyable?
Alongside anything thing you would want to see from when Rastakhan's Rumble. Be that any specific Techs, any sort of thematic thing, specific archtype cards. ETC. Alongside with the things you DON'T want to see.
Feel free to add any reasons for your choices, and why specifically these reasons make it enjoyable/healthy for the game.
Discuss as much as you want of this thread as you want! But refrain from using profanity and namecalling, let's keep this civil guys!
Once in a while i'll collect the information into a single post, which looks at what people agree on is good for the game.
As one of the Fan Creations Moderators, I will also be making a full custom 135 card set, that I will try and implement your views into, to try and construct what could be seen as the "Ultimate Set"! Feel free to add suggestions to it to me personally over a PM!
Personally i feel like the Old Gods meta was the best. It had a lot of variety, alongside having a ton of decks that required a lot of decisionmaking, while still not just killing you out of nowhere. It has some problems later on tho, with Yogg being in a ton of decks.
In this thread, I'll be asking you all to answer/discuss what has been the best meta in Hearthstone history, alongside which cards have been the best for the game, while still proving to be fun and viable.
Things you could consider would be:
- During what set did you enjoy the constructed meta the most?
I don't consider what I enjoyed to be the best place for the meta but I think I enjoyed Old Gods the most. Trying every class against each of the old gods and seeing which one 'stuck' was interesting, especially since it wasn't immediately clear where they best worked.
- Which cards do you think are the most healthy for the game alongside being fun/viable.
I'm thinking cards that make you have to make choices within the game. I don't mean cards that have more than one use, like Nourish. I mean cards that leave you going "I could use it now and gain a benefit, but I could use it later and gain in this other way.. what should I do?" Flobbidinous Floop I believe is a good example as decks that use him have been having to decide whether to play him for The Combo with Maly or with other cards, like MTC. A basic example, though are cards that have a 'tempo' and a 'value' play where you can play it on curve for tempo or hold it for better value later.
We don't have many of those at the moment though. Most cards either have one main use or, if they can be used in different ways, there's always a Better way to use it and a way that's not really worth it (i.e. the Omega cards).
- Which sort of mechanics/cards do you think that the game should avoid?
Not AVOID but be careful of 'check' cards. As in "do you have a way to remove this card? No? I win!" Flappy bird is a good example of this. What should be avoided are CHEAP versions of this. The question should be "Did you already use the card you need to stop me?" rather than "did you draw this in time?"
Another avoid would be high variance 'win' cards like Keleseth. A card where drawing it in the deck means you win while not drawing it means you lose. Same for highly random cards where it ranges from "I win instantly" to "Ugg I lose the game".
- Which types of mechanics/cards do you think the game should go for?
More of them, simply put. Just keep adding more in general.
Mechancis where there's a good reason to do either option are good though. Magnetic I consider a very good mechanic.
- Which sort of thematics do you think are the most enjoyable?
The reason? I had just started playing hs and pulled a golden Mogor the Ogre. Ultimate rng decks were a lot of fun, and I had no idea what I was doing. Plus, we had the solo expansions that came out/continued coming out and a decent amount of fun decks to play.
My favorite meta was karazhan. Barnes was super cool, along with malchezaar, the curator, medivh, and moroes. They were all experimented with even though only barnes and the curator were even decent, but I loved the flavour of the cards too. They were all fun cards that were pretty balanced though, none of them too OP.
I think “healthy cards” are a myth, because it pretty much just means cards that aren’t broken. So I don’t think there is a “most healthy card” however I think malygos, yogg, and togwaggle are some of the most fun.
i cant answer every single of your question right now but i know what is not a good design.
even tho i like those cards, nzoth and shudderwock type is one of the worst.
instead of using your resources(esp for shudderwock) you just throw them. doesnt matter once the end game card gets in to play, its over.
when i play lets say..miracle rogue. i have limited burn (prior to faldorei, i had to conserve some minions for coldblood or save one eviscerate/sap etc.) i have be careful.
also things like druid combo. tog or star alligner. tog just messes with your deck and you cant really swap. this combo shouldnt be THIS easy. same goes for star alligner.
most fun cards.. even tho it usually frusturating for your opponent, discover cards are the most fun. (or dk hunter hp)
For me, I'd say the Kobolds meta purely as I think the recruit mechanic was awful. Not all classes could cheat out big minions equally. Warlock, for me, was without peer. I'd like to see this being discouraged.
On the reverse, I really enjoyed Witchwood. The set delivered the rush mechanic, which for me encouraged proper minion combat whilst allowing you to be reactive to the board. I also enjoyed the design idea of building stories fully into the sets and surfacing class specific hero cards.
Iconic cards for these metas are varied but special mention to the big Green cube.
- During what set did you enjoy the constructed meta the most?
Old Gods. Hands down. I could say League of Explorers was good too.
- Which cards do you think are the most healthy for the game alongside being fun/viable.
Cards that have powerful and interesting effects but that neither A - Decide the game the turn it's played. And B - Has the potential to generate insane and/or infinite value.
So DKs are bad, because after playing a DK, for the rest of the game your deck/character is just better. The value for most DKs keeps increasing as turns go on.
The Lich King is a great card like Ysera. It's powerful, it's strong, it's impactiful because it's a taunt and gives good value even with RNG aspects attached to it. It can be killed tho and it won't give more cards after that.
- Which sort of mechanics/cards do you think that the game should avoid?
The game has simple rules, all it needs to do is stop trying to cheat of break those rules. Mana cheat is stupid and broken. Togglewaggle is bad but only because we have so much mana cheat.
Too much draw, ramp and amor should never be on the same deck. OTK decks are interesting and nice if you A - don't have too many of them. B - Have disruption so you can counter it. C - OTK decks must never feel like they are playing solitaire. If you can just draw and barely interact with the board and still be safe behind 20+ armor. Well, the game has a problem.
Discard is stupid, it is always feast of famine.
Game needs to stop with infinite value generators and make it so the game doesn't NEED hate cards to work properly. Jade Idol, is an example of a card that should never have been printed.
Quests are bad and Start of the game effects are FINE IF they don't make the decks just better than decks without it. They need reasonable trade-offs. Playing the 30 even or odd cards is not a tradeoff when your class has enough good cards.
Game needs to stop with high-polarized decks. Quest Rogue, Jade Druid and Odd Warrior are types of decks that just kill the game. It makes sure a lot of decks that could be interesting never see play. These decks should never be accepted even when their power level is low.
Also a more controversial one: Tribal mechanics are BROKEN when used in early game minions.
Tribal decks should have vanilla tribal early game minions and mid-game to late-game tribal synergy cards. Which was what dragons used to do.
- Which types of mechanics/cards do you think the game should go for?
Mid-range decks are what the game used to do best. I feel like the game should go back to that. Recruiting and cheating mana and triggering deathrattles is fine, but when all the game revolves around these kind of things the game feels very High-Roll-y and too fast for many classes to compete.
So more board-centric mechanics and slower/grindier mechanics are best. Keep the match interesting and interactive. I also feel like if the game slowed down we could have more niche cards be more impactful. Bolvar and Lynessa for example are good cards but the game is so fast and broke they will barely ever see play.
- Which sort of thematics do you think are the most enjoyable?
Any thematic where I feel I'm playing with my whole deck without being too unfair instead of just drawing a few core cards and bursting someone out of space. Or playing whatever has the most stats to hit my opponent in the face with.
So i definitely agree that infinite value cards, like Hero Cards, and instant kill combos in a large amount are a problem for the game all together. Those sort of effects at current times can't really be sort out with a new set, just by not including them in a future set, because they will still be included in former sets.
Another thing that comes to mind with those, are that there are barely anything a Control/Midrange deck can do against them, with the lack of current tech cards.
It would be unlikely that the current Meta Game would be less combo focused, if something like Dirty Rat was still in the standard Meta Game. Because it helped counterplay Combo Decks. A thing i feel that is not commonly understood, is was could be defined as tech against specific archtypes. Currently all Hero Cards act as tech cards against control/attrition decks, alongside powerful tools like Defile and Spreading Plague acting as Tech cards against Aggro.
Currently we have exactly 1 anti-combo tech card in the standard meta game, which is Demonic Project, which is even a class specific card, alongside not being able to deal with arguably the harshest control counter, Hero Cards.
Imo, Hero Cards individually aren't the problem. The problem with them is what each of them offers overall... Near infinite value. A tech card against them could probaly solve this to a large degree, making for some sort of counterplay against one of the most oppresive archtype destroyer.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I want a new title, but Flux won't let me have one,
So DKs are bad, because after playing a DK, for the rest of the game your deck/character is just better. The value for most DKs keeps increasing as turns go on.
The initial DKs are bad and I think even blizzard agrees with that. The newer ones, Hagetha and Dr. Boom, I think are great though. They change the matchup but they don't win games by themselves. In fact, even when you put it in your deck it's not always a good idea to play them the second you can as their powers can actually get in the way of your win condition.
Also a more controversial one: Tribal mechanics are BROKEN when used in early game minions.
Controversial? Who argues with this who has lived through the murloc and pirate metas? early game synergy spam in general is a bad idea.
Mid-range decks are what the game used to do best. I feel like the game should go back to that. Recruiting and cheating mana and triggering deathrattles is fine, but when all the game revolves around these kind of things the game feels very High-Roll-y and too fast for many classes to compete.
We've never had a mid-range meta. The entire point to Mid-range decks is to counter control decks, but the second mid-range becomes powerful aggro blows up as aggro tears apart mid-range. Killing aggro, meanwhile, results in metas like this one where hyper-slow decks dominate. If you somehow find a way to avoid both of that, Combo decks (which are just the more extreme cousin to mid-range), which also tear apart mid-range, dominates.
Mid-range is just unstable as an archetype, best used as a reaction to control. It's weak to too many other archetypes as it's not fast enough to deal with aggro, a slower, weaker version of combo, and typically can't take on very greedy decks.
We've never had a mid-range meta. The entire point to Mid-range decks is to counter control decks, but the second mid-range becomes powerful aggro blows up as aggro tears apart mid-range. Killing aggro, meanwhile, results in metas like this one where hyper-slow decks dominate. If you somehow find a way to avoid both of that, Combo decks (which are just the more extreme cousin to mid-range), which also tear apart mid-range, dominates.
Mid-range is just unstable as an archetype, best used as a reaction to control. It's weak to too many other archetypes as it's not fast enough to deal with aggro, a slower, weaker version of combo, and typically can't take on very greedy decks.
I believe Midrange has traditionally with things like GvG Midrange Paladin and Midrange Shaman from Karazhan, with the way they play against different archetypes. Against slower decks, they work to act as a proactive deck, while against Aggro they work as a reactive deck.
If i remember correctly, then Midrange decks usually have a lot of "average" matchups, because they're extremely good at adapting to the situation, while not having something they just demolish. As an example, Midrange Shaman back in the days had around a 45-60% winrate against more or less the entire metagame. Midrange Paladin had some more biased winrates, but still with a ton of Fifty-Fifties.
I think this is in general Healthy for Hearthstone. Because these matches are more often determined by who is the better player, than who happened to face up with the favorable deck. Midrange Shaman, however, was problematic, because it was just TOO good, as it was usually slightly favored against more or less the entire meta.
Karazhan was however definitely a Midrange Meta, mostly because both Midrange Hunter and ESPECIALLY Midrange Shaman filled most of the meta, alongside Zoolock, which at the time actually was a Midrange deck, as it had a lot more midrangy sort of minions.
But you do raise some good points that i will further into! Also, thank you to everyone who've commented so far!
My favorite meta was karazhan. Barnes was super cool, along with malchezaar, the curator, medivh, and moroes. They were all experimented with even though only barnes and the curator were even decent, but I loved the flavour of the cards too. They were all fun cards that were pretty balanced though, none of them too OP.
I think “healthy cards” are a myth, because it pretty much just means cards that aren’t broken. So I don’t think there is a “most healthy card” however I think malygos, yogg, and togwaggle are some of the most fun.
"The flow of time is always cruel... its speed seems different for each person, but no one can change it... A thing that does not change with time is a memory of younger days..."
Vanilla HS was the best meta. All 9 classes were viable and nothing was overpowered. Budget (I.e. <= 1 Legendary) decks could compete with decks with 5+ Legendaries (looking at you, Wallet Warrior), and you didn't have to budget-ify an expensive deck; the budget build was often the correct build! Also RNG was a lot less; there were far fewer "if I draw Keleseth on 2" types of games, because there were far fewer of those types of cards.
The main thing that was bad about vanilla was that Force/Roar was still a thing. I think the perfect meta would be vanilla, but with Force of Nature nerfed.
- During what set did you enjoy the constructed meta the most?
Un'Goro, why? Because motherf'n dinosaurs. Just wish they added more of them.
- Which cards do you think are the most healthy for the game alongside being fun/viable
Reno cards (when they aren't opressive). I love the puzzle of making a deck with only 1 card, and if the reward is something strong/ fun (Kazakus with his custom spells) and doesn't make the enemy quit due to frustration/ rage (Reno Jackson healing back to full when the enemy just wittled you down to 6 hp is stupid... funny but stupid) it would be really cool. Every play also adds some tension since you only get 1 copy of a card and you never know if you'll need it later.
- Which sort of mechanics/cards do you think that the game should avoid?
MANA CHEAT and broken ass Hero cards. I really like the hero cards in general, but they are just way to strong, I've even started to auto conceed against any mage I see because I know they're just gonna drop Frost Lich Jaina and all my hard work is gone.
- Which types of mechanics/cards do you think the game should go for?
Maybe not a populour opinion, but a little more rng. Not the stupid "deal X damage to random minions" etc. I mean like Evolve and Tespionage. Evolve Shaman single handedly kept me interested in this game (and will always be my favourite deck) back when Razakus Priest and Cubelock were plagueing standard and currently it's the same with Tespionage.
- Which sort of thematics do you think are the most enjoyable?
I really like the goofyness of this game, I know a lot of people are expecting some epic edgy story heavy stuff, but I think people need to realize... this is a childrens card game.
- During what set did you enjoy the constructed meta the most? I'm not sure. I think I have liked and disliked all of them since set rotation began fairly equally. I hated quite a lot of metagames before rotation. Primarily because there was no hope - you didn't know when they would end or if they'd ever be balanced.
- Which cards do you think are the most healthy for the game alongside being fun/viable. I think Cube has popped up in more places than I expected. It's clearly an incredibly powerful card, but at first glance, everyone thought it'd be far too slow. I think that has been an example of a good card. Floop is also a good example. Cards that let you use them in different ways and increase player agency. Cards that play themselves (Keleseth), aren't fun or really interesting beyond deck building. And "Don't include 2 drops" isn't actually very interesting as it turns out.
- Which sort of mechanics/cards do you think that the game should avoid? I think they need to move far away from the "infinite value" type of things we've had a lot of over the last year or so. It's okay for some of this - Elise packs don't bother me, for example. But Death Knights and things like it have make Hero Powers take precedence over the cards in your deck.
- Which types of mechanics/cards do you think the game should go for? I'd like to see more ways to interact with your opponent's "non-interactive" cards. Hearthstone is fundamentally non-interactive, so this will take some clever design. But we've seen it in the past, and I'd like to see more of it going forward.
- Which sort of thematics do you think are the most enjoyable? If you mean cosmetics of the set, I think their themes are spot-on. This is one area where Blizzard is better than just about anybody. If you mean mechanical theme stuff like "Quests" or "Legendary Weapons" then I'll refer to my answers above.
We've never had a mid-range meta. The entire point to Mid-range decks is to counter control decks, but the second mid-range becomes powerful aggro blows up as aggro tears apart mid-range. Killing aggro, meanwhile, results in metas like this one where hyper-slow decks dominate. If you somehow find a way to avoid both of that, Combo decks (which are just the more extreme cousin to mid-range), which also tear apart mid-range, dominates.
Mid-range is just unstable as an archetype, best used as a reaction to control. It's weak to too many other archetypes as it's not fast enough to deal with aggro, a slower, weaker version of combo, and typically can't take on very greedy decks.
I believe Midrange has traditionally with things like GvG Midrange Paladin and Midrange Shaman from Karazhan, with the way they play against different archetypes. Against slower decks, they work to act as a proactive deck, while against Aggro they work as a reactive deck.
If i remember correctly, then Midrange decks usually have a lot of "average" matchups, because they're extremely good at adapting to the situation, while not having something they just demolish. As an example, Midrange Shaman back in the days had around a 45-60% winrate against more or less the entire metagame. Midrange Paladin had some more biased winrates, but still with a ton of Fifty-Fifties.
I think this is in general Healthy for Hearthstone. Because these matches are more often determined by who is the better player, than who happened to face up with the favorable deck. Midrange Shaman, however, was problematic, because it was just TOO good, as it was usually slightly favored against more or less the entire meta.
Karazhan was however definitely a Midrange Meta, mostly because both Midrange Hunter and ESPECIALLY Midrange Shaman filled most of the meta, alongside Zoolock, which at the time actually was a Midrange deck, as it had a lot more midrangy sort of minions.
But you do raise some good points that i will further into! Also, thank you to everyone who've commented so far!
Midrange works like that in MTG. In Hearthstone Midrange specifically falls flat to aggro. Aggro is a full on direct counter to midrange decks. Midrnage decks COULD be tooled to be anti-aggro but then they lose their ability to fight control properly. In the end, it never really worked out that way.
Now this was all before Tempo became a major thing (which is why it's important to tell the difference between aggro and tempo). IIRC Tempo isn't as strong against Midrange. So PERHAPS if we keep aggro out of the loop and focus on Tempo as the 'fast deck' (think Even/Odd paladin instead of Pirate Warrior) then perhaps it can work out.
I think deathrattle activators, recruit and absurd value generation need to be looked at. If a Hunter cubes something and uses play dead in the midgame, you're all but finished unless you're playing some boring hyper control deck. There is no way on Earth cube should cost what it does.
OTK / combo decks are also out of control. I am looking forward to seeing most of the druid shell rotate out, together with grumble and Zola, and most of the death knights.
Finally, going infinite should not be encouraged.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello everyone!
In this thread, I'll be asking you all to answer/discuss what has been the best meta in Hearthstone history, alongside which cards have been the best for the game, while still proving to be fun and viable.
Things you could consider would be:
- During what set did you enjoy the constructed meta the most?
- Which cards do you think are the most healthy for the game alongside being fun/viable.
- Which sort of mechanics/cards do you think that the game should avoid?
- Which types of mechanics/cards do you think the game should go for?
- Which sort of thematics do you think are the most enjoyable?
Alongside anything thing you would want to see from when Rastakhan's Rumble. Be that any specific Techs, any sort of thematic thing, specific archtype cards. ETC. Alongside with the things you DON'T want to see.
Feel free to add any reasons for your choices, and why specifically these reasons make it enjoyable/healthy for the game.
Discuss as much as you want of this thread as you want! But refrain from using profanity and namecalling, let's keep this civil guys!
Once in a while i'll collect the information into a single post, which looks at what people agree on is good for the game.
As one of the Fan Creations Moderators, I will also be making a full custom 135 card set, that I will try and implement your views into, to try and construct what could be seen as the "Ultimate Set"! Feel free to add suggestions to it to me personally over a PM!
So Discuss to your hearts contents!
I want a new title, but Flux won't let me have one,
This space is reserved for any sort of updates and/links.
I want a new title, but Flux won't let me have one,
Personally i feel like the Old Gods meta was the best. It had a lot of variety, alongside having a ton of decks that required a lot of decisionmaking, while still not just killing you out of nowhere. It has some problems later on tho, with Yogg being in a ton of decks.
Cards i would say feel good for both players would include something like The Curator,Loatheb and Book of Specters
I want a new title, but Flux won't let me have one,
I don't consider what I enjoyed to be the best place for the meta but I think I enjoyed Old Gods the most. Trying every class against each of the old gods and seeing which one 'stuck' was interesting, especially since it wasn't immediately clear where they best worked.
I'm thinking cards that make you have to make choices within the game. I don't mean cards that have more than one use, like Nourish. I mean cards that leave you going "I could use it now and gain a benefit, but I could use it later and gain in this other way.. what should I do?" Flobbidinous Floop I believe is a good example as decks that use him have been having to decide whether to play him for The Combo with Maly or with other cards, like MTC. A basic example, though are cards that have a 'tempo' and a 'value' play where you can play it on curve for tempo or hold it for better value later.
We don't have many of those at the moment though. Most cards either have one main use or, if they can be used in different ways, there's always a Better way to use it and a way that's not really worth it (i.e. the Omega cards).
Not AVOID but be careful of 'check' cards. As in "do you have a way to remove this card? No? I win!" Flappy bird is a good example of this. What should be avoided are CHEAP versions of this. The question should be "Did you already use the card you need to stop me?" rather than "did you draw this in time?"
Another avoid would be high variance 'win' cards like Keleseth. A card where drawing it in the deck means you win while not drawing it means you lose. Same for highly random cards where it ranges from "I win instantly" to "Ugg I lose the game".
More of them, simply put. Just keep adding more in general.
Mechancis where there's a good reason to do either option are good though. Magnetic I consider a very good mechanic.
easter eggs. "Hello, Brother."
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
100% GvG.
The reason? I had just started playing hs and pulled a golden Mogor the Ogre. Ultimate rng decks were a lot of fun, and I had no idea what I was doing. Plus, we had the solo expansions that came out/continued coming out and a decent amount of fun decks to play.
My favorite meta was karazhan. Barnes was super cool, along with malchezaar, the curator, medivh, and moroes. They were all experimented with even though only barnes and the curator were even decent, but I loved the flavour of the cards too. They were all fun cards that were pretty balanced though, none of them too OP.
I think “healthy cards” are a myth, because it pretty much just means cards that aren’t broken. So I don’t think there is a “most healthy card” however I think malygos, yogg, and togwaggle are some of the most fun.
i cant answer every single of your question right now but i know what is not a good design.
even tho i like those cards, nzoth and shudderwock type is one of the worst.
instead of using your resources(esp for shudderwock) you just throw them. doesnt matter once the end game card gets in to play, its over.
when i play lets say..miracle rogue. i have limited burn (prior to faldorei, i had to conserve some minions for coldblood or save one eviscerate/sap etc.) i have be careful.
also things like druid combo. tog or star alligner. tog just messes with your deck and you cant really swap. this combo shouldnt be THIS easy. same goes for star alligner.
most fun cards.. even tho it usually frusturating for your opponent, discover cards are the most fun. (or dk hunter hp)
For me, I'd say the Kobolds meta purely as I think the recruit mechanic was awful. Not all classes could cheat out big minions equally. Warlock, for me, was without peer. I'd like to see this being discouraged.
On the reverse, I really enjoyed Witchwood. The set delivered the rush mechanic, which for me encouraged proper minion combat whilst allowing you to be reactive to the board. I also enjoyed the design idea of building stories fully into the sets and surfacing class specific hero cards.
Iconic cards for these metas are varied but special mention to the big Green cube.
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)
- During what set did you enjoy the constructed meta the most?
Old Gods. Hands down. I could say League of Explorers was good too.
- Which cards do you think are the most healthy for the game alongside being fun/viable.
Cards that have powerful and interesting effects but that neither A - Decide the game the turn it's played. And B - Has the potential to generate insane and/or infinite value.
So DKs are bad, because after playing a DK, for the rest of the game your deck/character is just better. The value for most DKs keeps increasing as turns go on.
The Lich King is a great card like Ysera. It's powerful, it's strong, it's impactiful because it's a taunt and gives good value even with RNG aspects attached to it. It can be killed tho and it won't give more cards after that.
- Which sort of mechanics/cards do you think that the game should avoid?
The game has simple rules, all it needs to do is stop trying to cheat of break those rules. Mana cheat is stupid and broken. Togglewaggle is bad but only because we have so much mana cheat.
Too much draw, ramp and amor should never be on the same deck. OTK decks are interesting and nice if you A - don't have too many of them. B - Have disruption so you can counter it. C - OTK decks must never feel like they are playing solitaire. If you can just draw and barely interact with the board and still be safe behind 20+ armor. Well, the game has a problem.
Discard is stupid, it is always feast of famine.
Game needs to stop with infinite value generators and make it so the game doesn't NEED hate cards to work properly. Jade Idol, is an example of a card that should never have been printed.
Quests are bad and Start of the game effects are FINE IF they don't make the decks just better than decks without it. They need reasonable trade-offs. Playing the 30 even or odd cards is not a tradeoff when your class has enough good cards.
Game needs to stop with high-polarized decks. Quest Rogue, Jade Druid and Odd Warrior are types of decks that just kill the game. It makes sure a lot of decks that could be interesting never see play. These decks should never be accepted even when their power level is low.
Also a more controversial one: Tribal mechanics are BROKEN when used in early game minions.
Tribal decks should have vanilla tribal early game minions and mid-game to late-game tribal synergy cards. Which was what dragons used to do.
- Which types of mechanics/cards do you think the game should go for?
Mid-range decks are what the game used to do best. I feel like the game should go back to that. Recruiting and cheating mana and triggering deathrattles is fine, but when all the game revolves around these kind of things the game feels very High-Roll-y and too fast for many classes to compete.
So more board-centric mechanics and slower/grindier mechanics are best. Keep the match interesting and interactive. I also feel like if the game slowed down we could have more niche cards be more impactful. Bolvar and Lynessa for example are good cards but the game is so fast and broke they will barely ever see play.
- Which sort of thematics do you think are the most enjoyable?
Any thematic where I feel I'm playing with my whole deck without being too unfair instead of just drawing a few core cards and bursting someone out of space. Or playing whatever has the most stats to hit my opponent in the face with.
So i definitely agree that infinite value cards, like Hero Cards, and instant kill combos in a large amount are a problem for the game all together. Those sort of effects at current times can't really be sort out with a new set, just by not including them in a future set, because they will still be included in former sets.
Another thing that comes to mind with those, are that there are barely anything a Control/Midrange deck can do against them, with the lack of current tech cards.
It would be unlikely that the current Meta Game would be less combo focused, if something like Dirty Rat was still in the standard Meta Game. Because it helped counterplay Combo Decks. A thing i feel that is not commonly understood, is was could be defined as tech against specific archtypes. Currently all Hero Cards act as tech cards against control/attrition decks, alongside powerful tools like Defile and Spreading Plague acting as Tech cards against Aggro.
Currently we have exactly 1 anti-combo tech card in the standard meta game, which is Demonic Project, which is even a class specific card, alongside not being able to deal with arguably the harshest control counter, Hero Cards.
Imo, Hero Cards individually aren't the problem. The problem with them is what each of them offers overall... Near infinite value. A tech card against them could probaly solve this to a large degree, making for some sort of counterplay against one of the most oppresive archtype destroyer.
I want a new title, but Flux won't let me have one,
The initial DKs are bad and I think even blizzard agrees with that. The newer ones, Hagetha and Dr. Boom, I think are great though. They change the matchup but they don't win games by themselves. In fact, even when you put it in your deck it's not always a good idea to play them the second you can as their powers can actually get in the way of your win condition.
Controversial? Who argues with this who has lived through the murloc and pirate metas? early game synergy spam in general is a bad idea.
We've never had a mid-range meta. The entire point to Mid-range decks is to counter control decks, but the second mid-range becomes powerful aggro blows up as aggro tears apart mid-range. Killing aggro, meanwhile, results in metas like this one where hyper-slow decks dominate. If you somehow find a way to avoid both of that, Combo decks (which are just the more extreme cousin to mid-range), which also tear apart mid-range, dominates.
Mid-range is just unstable as an archetype, best used as a reaction to control. It's weak to too many other archetypes as it's not fast enough to deal with aggro, a slower, weaker version of combo, and typically can't take on very greedy decks.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
I believe Midrange has traditionally with things like GvG Midrange Paladin and Midrange Shaman from Karazhan, with the way they play against different archetypes. Against slower decks, they work to act as a proactive deck, while against Aggro they work as a reactive deck.
If i remember correctly, then Midrange decks usually have a lot of "average" matchups, because they're extremely good at adapting to the situation, while not having something they just demolish. As an example, Midrange Shaman back in the days had around a 45-60% winrate against more or less the entire metagame. Midrange Paladin had some more biased winrates, but still with a ton of Fifty-Fifties.
I think this is in general Healthy for Hearthstone. Because these matches are more often determined by who is the better player, than who happened to face up with the favorable deck. Midrange Shaman, however, was problematic, because it was just TOO good, as it was usually slightly favored against more or less the entire meta.
Karazhan was however definitely a Midrange Meta, mostly because both Midrange Hunter and ESPECIALLY Midrange Shaman filled most of the meta, alongside Zoolock, which at the time actually was a Midrange deck, as it had a lot more midrangy sort of minions.
But you do raise some good points that i will further into! Also, thank you to everyone who've commented so far!
I want a new title, but Flux won't let me have one,
My favorite meta was probably koft as I could play my yogg dörty rat meme decks and I just loved that expansion in general
Azure Drake
"The flow of time is always cruel... its speed seems different for each person, but no one can change it... A thing that does not change with time is a memory of younger days..."
Vanilla HS was the best meta. All 9 classes were viable and nothing was overpowered. Budget (I.e. <= 1 Legendary) decks could compete with decks with 5+ Legendaries (looking at you, Wallet Warrior), and you didn't have to budget-ify an expensive deck; the budget build was often the correct build! Also RNG was a lot less; there were far fewer "if I draw Keleseth on 2" types of games, because there were far fewer of those types of cards.
The main thing that was bad about vanilla was that Force/Roar was still a thing. I think the perfect meta would be vanilla, but with Force of Nature nerfed.
- During what set did you enjoy the constructed meta the most?
Un'Goro, why? Because motherf'n dinosaurs. Just wish they added more of them.
- Which cards do you think are the most healthy for the game alongside being fun/viable
Reno cards (when they aren't opressive). I love the puzzle of making a deck with only 1 card, and if the reward is something strong/ fun (Kazakus with his custom spells) and doesn't make the enemy quit due to frustration/ rage (Reno Jackson healing back to full when the enemy just wittled you down to 6 hp is stupid... funny but stupid) it would be really cool. Every play also adds some tension since you only get 1 copy of a card and you never know if you'll need it later.
- Which sort of mechanics/cards do you think that the game should avoid?
MANA CHEAT and broken ass Hero cards. I really like the hero cards in general, but they are just way to strong, I've even started to auto conceed against any mage I see because I know they're just gonna drop Frost Lich Jaina and all my hard work is gone.
- Which types of mechanics/cards do you think the game should go for?
Maybe not a populour opinion, but a little more rng. Not the stupid "deal X damage to random minions" etc. I mean like Evolve and Tespionage. Evolve Shaman single handedly kept me interested in this game (and will always be my favourite deck) back when Razakus Priest and Cubelock were plagueing standard and currently it's the same with Tespionage.
- Which sort of thematics do you think are the most enjoyable?
I really like the goofyness of this game, I know a lot of people are expecting some epic edgy story heavy stuff, but I think people need to realize... this is a childrens card game.
- During what set did you enjoy the constructed meta the most?
I'm not sure. I think I have liked and disliked all of them since set rotation began fairly equally. I hated quite a lot of metagames before rotation. Primarily because there was no hope - you didn't know when they would end or if they'd ever be balanced.
- Which cards do you think are the most healthy for the game alongside being fun/viable.
I think Cube has popped up in more places than I expected. It's clearly an incredibly powerful card, but at first glance, everyone thought it'd be far too slow. I think that has been an example of a good card. Floop is also a good example. Cards that let you use them in different ways and increase player agency. Cards that play themselves (Keleseth), aren't fun or really interesting beyond deck building. And "Don't include 2 drops" isn't actually very interesting as it turns out.
- Which sort of mechanics/cards do you think that the game should avoid?
I think they need to move far away from the "infinite value" type of things we've had a lot of over the last year or so. It's okay for some of this - Elise packs don't bother me, for example. But Death Knights and things like it have make Hero Powers take precedence over the cards in your deck.
- Which types of mechanics/cards do you think the game should go for?
I'd like to see more ways to interact with your opponent's "non-interactive" cards. Hearthstone is fundamentally non-interactive, so this will take some clever design. But we've seen it in the past, and I'd like to see more of it going forward.
- Which sort of thematics do you think are the most enjoyable?
If you mean cosmetics of the set, I think their themes are spot-on. This is one area where Blizzard is better than just about anybody. If you mean mechanical theme stuff like "Quests" or "Legendary Weapons" then I'll refer to my answers above.
Updated to also include any sort of feedback regarding what that people would want/doesn't want from Rastakhan's Rumble.
I want a new title, but Flux won't let me have one,
Midrange works like that in MTG. In Hearthstone Midrange specifically falls flat to aggro. Aggro is a full on direct counter to midrange decks. Midrnage decks COULD be tooled to be anti-aggro but then they lose their ability to fight control properly. In the end, it never really worked out that way.
Now this was all before Tempo became a major thing (which is why it's important to tell the difference between aggro and tempo). IIRC Tempo isn't as strong against Midrange. So PERHAPS if we keep aggro out of the loop and focus on Tempo as the 'fast deck' (think Even/Odd paladin instead of Pirate Warrior) then perhaps it can work out.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
I think deathrattle activators, recruit and absurd value generation need to be looked at. If a Hunter cubes something and uses play dead in the midgame, you're all but finished unless you're playing some boring hyper control deck. There is no way on Earth cube should cost what it does.
OTK / combo decks are also out of control. I am looking forward to seeing most of the druid shell rotate out, together with grumble and Zola, and most of the death knights.
Finally, going infinite should not be encouraged.