Please. OP is 100% right and these clowns defending this RNG Casino BS are either your typical blind forum fanboys, complete retards, or Blizard employees. One idiot in here even tried to defend this by comparing OP's idea of a having a bit less RNG to Chess. What a moron.
Horrorwolf, this aint no salt and tears thread,so... heres your answer :
You 've been playing since beta and you are sad you spend like 10.000 hours try to prove you have skills. Blizzard, fanboys and ordinary morons like me support this RNG and Discover mechanic so much that you may think we don't love you.
i don't know about the others, i do love you. So here is an advise, find something in your life that worths about caring and trying and salting so much, this is just a moneymaking RNG infestedgame!!!
chess is boring i know, no golden heroes...just 1 class in black and white variance...bad design, no updates,no fairytales.no dragons..no packs....but its pure focus and concetration and play around without guessing,assuming and knowledge of Quantum mechanics.
You could argue that "why don't you then just hire a booster?" doing all the climbing for you and getting you that desired cardback, but that would not exactly fill myself with satisfaction after like 5 years of trying to get there and fail each and every month.
This dude just suggested hiring someone to boost for the monthly cardback and I'm kekking.
This and the guy with the pony avatar are the people who agree with OP that Hearthstone has just now suddenly become full of RNG. I really wonder sometimes...
This dude just suggested hiring someone to boost for the monthly cardback and I'm kekking.
This and the guy with the pony avatar are the people who agree with OP that Hearthstone has just now suddenly become full of RNG. I really wonder sometimes...
my best rank was Rank 1, and I got trolled by Blizzard RNG as always, just two stars before hitting that desired Legendary rank, then I fell all the way back to 4 or 5, and then I never make it back to 1.
If OP could stop using his alt accounts to praise himself and call his detractors clowns that'd be great
I won't call you a clown, but I still think OP isn't entirely wrong. The degree to which RNG can impact the game at this stage is unprecedented. I don't think anyone is saying that HS just became a game where luck is a significant factor, nor do I see anyone suggesting that there is a "collective conspiracy" like Tyrantum said. It's fascinating to me how violently opposed some people are to OP's particular line of reasoning, but I suppose he did go a little far when he said that HS is now a "100% randomized casino".
With that said, Lanko was the only person that provided a rational counterargument to the original post; everyone else that doesn't like it is either misrepresenting those who agree with it or making ad hominem attacks. To Lanko, I appreciate the effort you went to to demonstrate that random effects and RNG do not dominate the meta, but you failed to take into account the rate at which decks are played as opposed to how many decks make little use of discover effects. I'm not sure what rank you're playing at, and I can't speak to lower ranks, but in my experience from rank 5 to legend practically half of my opponents are gala rogue for the last several months. A disproportionate portion of the meta is represented by hunter variants and rogue, which makes extremely heavy use of discover effects. It's also worth stating that every highlander deck that exists utilizes extremely powerful discover effects (read: zephyrus and alex), so while the cards in question that provide these effects may make up a relatively small part of said highlander decks, they have the capability to single handedly swing a game in one's favor. So making a purely quantitative argument on the basis of how many decks do not use or make little use of discover effects is a bit narrow-minded: there are other factors that need to be considered (i.e. which decks are being played the most, what is the power level of the discover cards that these decks employ).
I'll disagree again with the "unprecedent level of RNG meta".
We had metas where Ragnaros and Sylvanas were in almost all decks, so much that they had to be Hall of Famed.
We had a meta where the best win condition in the game was nothing less than Yogg-Saron, Hope's End, even in tournaments.
Mana cheating? Dragonqueen pales in comparison to what decks could do with N'zoth.
We had Cube Warlock with Skull, Possessed Lackeys, Cubes, Gul'dan and N'zoth. We had a period of a meta that was full Control, with tournament lineups being N'zoth Mage, N'zoth Paladin, Cube/Control Warlock and one more.
We had a meta with Cube/Control Lock at the same time with Spiteful Summoner Priest/Druid summoning Deathwing on turns 5/6 and 4 mana Call to Arms Paladin. And even around/later a meta with Spell Hunter that was pretty much Barnes Hunter, with the known interaction with Y'sharrj (however is spelled). Now THAT was a RNG and mana cheating meta. All those ended up nerfed.
We had a meta with Shudderwock Shaman where the Shaman winning depended purely on the order which battlecries happened first, Odd Taunt Warrior having Ragnaros hero power as a win condition and Deathrattle Hunter abusing Cubes with extremely cheap activators to cheat stuff, Kathrena Winterwisp and infinite with the ultimate RNG/Discover card in Deathstalker Rexxar.
Then we had a meta tyrannized by the near infinite RNG/Discover of 7 mana Dr.Boom, Mad Genius for months to the point in non-official tournaments Elysiana was banned and every tournament Specialist format was 95% mirror matches.
Then we had the extreme clown fiesta meta with 3 mana Conjurer's Calling and 5 manaLuna's Pocket Galaxy, a true meta and matches/mirrors where people were rolling dices to win.
And how can we forget the latest event, with Hare Evolve Shaman? Paired with Quest and Lackey generators, it was the ultimate RNG/Discover fiesta.
So no, the current meta is nowhere near those levels.
As for Zephrys and Dragonqueen, you pointed the frequency. By "every highlander deck out there" you mean Highlander Hunter and Mage, with a very small splash of Warrior. Lock uses it in Galakrond Control, but they are the clunkiest cards in the deck, by far, sometimes costing matches, but recently they are less than 2%. HL Hunter and Mage and Warrior combined barely make 12% of the meta, according to stats. Highlander Rogue is almost non-existant and inferior to Galakrond Rogue. So in other ~88% of matches, you are not seeing Zeph or Dragonqueen at all.
Dragon and Face Hunter together account for 20%, Galakrond Rogue for another ~12%, Ress Priest for 7%, Embiggen for 8%, Gala Warrior for ~8%, etc.
Except for Rogue, the RNG, Discover and cheating in the other matchups is very low.
You also pointed out which decks are being played the most and the amount of Discover. Again, the most popular decks (from 5-1) are Dragon Hunter (by far, with almost 16%), Galakrond Rogue (11%) , Embiggen Druid (8%), Mech Paladin (7%), Ress Priest (7%), Highlander Hunter (6%), Highlander Mage (6%), Galakrond Warrior (6%). Gala Rogue gets 11%, HL Mage barely makes 6%, as HL Hunter. The others combined have nowhere the amount of RNG and neither Zeph/Dragonqueen and make almost 50%.
As for my rank, I'm a multiple time Legend. This month I finished Rank 2 as I only played ladder for ~4 days. Sure, Galakrond Rogue frequency is ridiculous, specially at Legend, where it's almost mirrors all day, and while I can see that having one, two decks more reliant on random value generation might be a necessity for the meta or for certain groups of players, I can relate that perhaps it should have a lower power level.
Then again, you have Hunter and Druid doing very well against it, and Paladin and Warrior aren't bad either. Mage is a race for who cheats mana and swings first. Control Warlock is favoured. It's not a polarizing deck, as it isn't heavily favoured or heavily unfavoured, and the amount of Discover allows it the chance to find outs for every match up, which is a good attractive quality for many players.
Calling quest druid Mana cheating 'tame'. Hilarious, every 'choose one' card played after quest IS Mana cheating, sir.
Well, that's true, but there are also 2 other things to consider:
First is that you play the first 4 turns extremely sub-optimally, which is near suicidal against a lot of decks. There is a reason Quest Druid bounces between near Tier 1 in one meta and in another meta is near Tier 4.
The second is the extreme build around of the deck, far more heavy than Highlander. You have to put lots of Choose One cards to make it worth, and like I said, the variance from being near T1 in some metas and near T4 in others shows it isn't consistent, so when it is, it should feel very powerful, for all the restrictions of the deck building.
Right now you run consistently into quest druid, which implies itself is being consistent if it's getting played as much. Quest Druid probably cheats most mana besides galakrond rogue and highlander mage currently.
As for the deckbuilding restrictions, the ability to innervate, play treeno jackson, 10-10 with rush for 5 mana, besides Loti, Floop and the anubisaths, i'd say those more than make up for it.
If OP could stop using his alt accounts to praise himself and call his detractors clowns that'd be great
I won't call you a clown, but I still think OP isn't entirely wrong. The degree to which RNG can impact the game at this stage is unprecedented. I don't think anyone is saying that HS just became a game where luck is a significant factor, nor do I see anyone suggesting that there is a "collective conspiracy" like Tyrantum said. It's fascinating to me how violently opposed some people are to OP's particular line of reasoning, but I suppose he did go a little far when he said that HS is now a "100% randomized casino".
With that said, Lanko was the only person that provided a rational counterargument to the original post; everyone else that doesn't like it is either misrepresenting those who agree with it or making ad hominem attacks. To Lanko, I appreciate the effort you went to to demonstrate that random effects and RNG do not dominate the meta, but you failed to take into account the rate at which decks are played as opposed to how many decks make little use of discover effects. I'm not sure what rank you're playing at, and I can't speak to lower ranks, but in my experience from rank 5 to legend practically half of my opponents are gala rogue for the last several months. A disproportionate portion of the meta is represented by hunter variants and rogue, which makes extremely heavy use of discover effects. It's also worth stating that every highlander deck that exists utilizes extremely powerful discover effects (read: zephyrus and alex), so while the cards in question that provide these effects may make up a relatively small part of said highlander decks, they have the capability to single handedly swing a game in one's favor. So making a purely quantitative argument on the basis of how many decks do not use or make little use of discover effects is a bit narrow-minded: there are other factors that need to be considered (i.e. which decks are being played the most, what is the power level of the discover cards that these decks employ).
I'll disagree again with the "unprecedent level of RNG meta".
We had metas where Ragnaros and Sylvanas were in almost all decks, so much that they had to be Hall of Famed.
We had a meta where the best win condition in the game was nothing less than Yogg-Saron, Hope's End, even in tournaments.
Mana cheating? Dragonqueen pales in comparison to what decks could do with N'zoth.
We had Cube Warlock with Skull, Possessed Lackeys, Cubes, Gul'dan and N'zoth. We had a period of a meta that was full Control, with tournament lineups being N'zoth Mage, N'zoth Paladin, Cube/Control Warlock and one more.
We had a meta with Cube/Control Lock at the same time with Spiteful Summoner Priest/Druid summoning Deathwing on turns 5/6 and 4 mana Call to Arms Paladin. And even around/later a meta with Spell Hunter that was pretty much Barnes Hunter, with the known interaction with Y'sharrj (however is spelled). Now THAT was a RNG and mana cheating meta. All those ended up nerfed.
We had a meta with Shudderwock Shaman where the Shaman winning depended purely on the order which battlecries happened first, Odd Taunt Warrior having Ragnaros hero power as a win condition and Deathrattle Hunter abusing Cubes with extremely cheap activators to cheat stuff, Kathrena Winterwisp and infinite with the ultimate RNG/Discover card in Deathstalker Rexxar.
Then we had a meta tyrannized by the near infinite RNG/Discover of 7 mana Dr.Boom, Mad Genius for months to the point in non-official tournaments Elysiana was banned and every tournament Specialist format was 95% mirror matches.
Then we had the extreme clown fiesta meta with 3 mana Conjurer's Calling and 5 manaLuna's Pocket Galaxy, a true meta and matches/mirrors where people were rolling dices to win.
And how can we forget the latest event, with Hare Evolve Shaman? Paired with Quest and Lackey generators, it was the ultimate RNG/Discover fiesta.
So no, the current meta is nowhere near those levels.
As for Zephrys and Dragonqueen, you pointed the frequency. By "every highlander deck out there" you mean Highlander Hunter and Mage, with a very small splash of Warrior. Lock uses it in Galakrond Control, but they are the clunkiest cards in the deck, by far, sometimes costing matches, but recently they are less than 2%. HL Hunter and Mage and Warrior combined barely make 12% of the meta, according to stats. Highlander Rogue is almost non-existant and inferior to Galakrond Rogue. So in other ~88% of matches, you are not seeing Zeph or Dragonqueen at all.
Dragon and Face Hunter together account for 20%, Galakrond Rogue for another ~12%, Ress Priest for 7%, Embiggen for 8%, Gala Warrior for ~8%, etc.
Except for Rogue, the RNG, Discover and cheating in the other matchups is very low.
You also pointed out which decks are being played the most and the amount of Discover. Again, the most popular decks (from 5-1) are Dragon Hunter (by far, with almost 16%), Galakrond Rogue (11%) , Embiggen Druid (8%), Mech Paladin (7%), Ress Priest (7%), Highlander Hunter (6%), Highlander Mage (6%), Galakrond Warrior (6%). Gala Rogue gets 11%, HL Mage barely makes 6%, as HL Hunter. The others combined have nowhere the amount of RNG and neither Zeph/Dragonqueen and make almost 50%.
As for my rank, I'm a multiple time Legend. This month I finished Rank 2 as I only played ladder for ~4 days. Sure, Galakrond Rogue frequency is ridiculous, specially at Legend, where it's almost mirrors all day, and while I can see that having one, two decks more reliant on random value generation might be a necessity for the meta or for certain groups of players, I can relate that perhaps it should have a lower power level.
Then again, you have Hunter and Druid doing very well against it, and Paladin and Warrior aren't bad either. Mage is a race for who cheats mana and swings first. Control Warlock is favoured. It's not a polarizing deck, as it isn't heavily favoured or heavily unfavoured, and the amount of Discover allows it the chance to find outs for every match up, which is a good attractive quality for many players.
Calling quest druid Mana cheating 'tame'. Hilarious, every 'choose one' card played after quest IS Mana cheating, sir.
Well, that's true, but there are also 2 other things to consider:
First is that you play the first 4 turns extremely sub-optimally, which is near suicidal against a lot of decks. There is a reason Quest Druid bounces between near Tier 1 in one meta and in another meta is near Tier 4.
The second is the extreme build around of the deck, far more heavy than Highlander. You have to put lots of Choose One cards to make it worth, and like I said, the variance from being near T1 in some metas and near T4 in others shows it isn't consistent, so when it is, it should feel very powerful, for all the restrictions of the deck building.
This guy knows what he's talking about, we are not at unprecedented levels of rng and Mana cheating.
If OP could stop using his alt accounts to praise himself and call his detractors clowns that'd be great
I won't call you a clown, but I still think OP isn't entirely wrong. The degree to which RNG can impact the game at this stage is unprecedented. I don't think anyone is saying that HS just became a game where luck is a significant factor, nor do I see anyone suggesting that there is a "collective conspiracy" like Tyrantum said. It's fascinating to me how violently opposed some people are to OP's particular line of reasoning, but I suppose he did go a little far when he said that HS is now a "100% randomized casino".
With that said, Lanko was the only person that provided a rational counterargument to the original post; everyone else that doesn't like it is either misrepresenting those who agree with it or making ad hominem attacks. To Lanko, I appreciate the effort you went to to demonstrate that random effects and RNG do not dominate the meta, but you failed to take into account the rate at which decks are played as opposed to how many decks make little use of discover effects. I'm not sure what rank you're playing at, and I can't speak to lower ranks, but in my experience from rank 5 to legend practically half of my opponents are gala rogue for the last several months. A disproportionate portion of the meta is represented by hunter variants and rogue, which makes extremely heavy use of discover effects. It's also worth stating that every highlander deck that exists utilizes extremely powerful discover effects (read: zephyrus and alex), so while the cards in question that provide these effects may make up a relatively small part of said highlander decks, they have the capability to single handedly swing a game in one's favor. So making a purely quantitative argument on the basis of how many decks do not use or make little use of discover effects is a bit narrow-minded: there are other factors that need to be considered (i.e. which decks are being played the most, what is the power level of the discover cards that these decks employ).
Alex is not a discover effect. And now the swing happens at turn 9, just a few months ago we were having shaman swing the game at turn 3/4/5. Hunter does not use many discover effects, rogue does.
If OP could stop using his alt accounts to praise himself and call his detractors clowns that'd be great
I won't call you a clown, but I still think OP isn't entirely wrong. The degree to which RNG can impact the game at this stage is unprecedented. I don't think anyone is saying that HS just became a game where luck is a significant factor, nor do I see anyone suggesting that there is a "collective conspiracy" like Tyrantum said. It's fascinating to me how violently opposed some people are to OP's particular line of reasoning, but I suppose he did go a little far when he said that HS is now a "100% randomized casino".
With that said, Lanko was the only person that provided a rational counterargument to the original post; everyone else that doesn't like it is either misrepresenting those who agree with it or making ad hominem attacks. To Lanko, I appreciate the effort you went to to demonstrate that random effects and RNG do not dominate the meta, but you failed to take into account the rate at which decks are played as opposed to how many decks make little use of discover effects. I'm not sure what rank you're playing at, and I can't speak to lower ranks, but in my experience from rank 5 to legend practically half of my opponents are gala rogue for the last several months. A disproportionate portion of the meta is represented by hunter variants and rogue, which makes extremely heavy use of discover effects. It's also worth stating that every highlander deck that exists utilizes extremely powerful discover effects (read: zephyrus and alex), so while the cards in question that provide these effects may make up a relatively small part of said highlander decks, they have the capability to single handedly swing a game in one's favor. So making a purely quantitative argument on the basis of how many decks do not use or make little use of discover effects is a bit narrow-minded: there are other factors that need to be considered (i.e. which decks are being played the most, what is the power level of the discover cards that these decks employ).
I'll disagree again with the "unprecedent level of RNG meta".
We had metas where Ragnaros and Sylvanas were in almost all decks, so much that they had to be Hall of Famed.
We had a meta where the best win condition in the game was nothing less than Yogg-Saron, Hope's End, even in tournaments.
Mana cheating? Dragonqueen pales in comparison to what decks could do with N'zoth.
We had Cube Warlock with Skull, Possessed Lackeys, Cubes, Gul'dan and N'zoth. We had a period of a meta that was full Control, with tournament lineups being N'zoth Mage, N'zoth Paladin, Cube/Control Warlock and one more.
We had a meta with Cube/Control Lock at the same time with Spiteful Summoner Priest/Druid summoning Deathwing on turns 5/6 and 4 mana Call to Arms Paladin. And even around/later a meta with Spell Hunter that was pretty much Barnes Hunter, with the known interaction with Y'sharrj (however is spelled). Now THAT was a RNG and mana cheating meta. All those ended up nerfed.
We had a meta with Shudderwock Shaman where the Shaman winning depended purely on the order which battlecries happened first, Odd Taunt Warrior having Ragnaros hero power as a win condition and Deathrattle Hunter abusing Cubes with extremely cheap activators to cheat stuff, Kathrena Winterwisp and infinite with the ultimate RNG/Discover card in Deathstalker Rexxar.
Then we had a meta tyrannized by the near infinite RNG/Discover of 7 mana Dr.Boom, Mad Genius for months to the point in non-official tournaments Elysiana was banned and every tournament Specialist format was 95% mirror matches.
Then we had the extreme clown fiesta meta with 3 mana Conjurer's Calling and 5 manaLuna's Pocket Galaxy, a true meta and matches/mirrors where people were rolling dices to win.
And how can we forget the latest event, with Hare Evolve Shaman? Paired with Quest and Lackey generators, it was the ultimate RNG/Discover fiesta.
So no, the current meta is nowhere near those levels.
As for Zephrys and Dragonqueen, you pointed the frequency. By "every highlander deck out there" you mean Highlander Hunter and Mage, with a very small splash of Warrior. Lock uses it in Galakrond Control, but they are the clunkiest cards in the deck, by far, sometimes costing matches, but recently they are less than 2%. HL Hunter and Mage and Warrior combined barely make 12% of the meta, according to stats. Highlander Rogue is almost non-existant and inferior to Galakrond Rogue. So in other ~88% of matches, you are not seeing Zeph or Dragonqueen at all.
Dragon and Face Hunter together account for 20%, Galakrond Rogue for another ~12%, Ress Priest for 7%, Embiggen for 8%, Gala Warrior for ~8%, etc.
Except for Rogue, the RNG, Discover and cheating in the other matchups is very low.
You also pointed out which decks are being played the most and the amount of Discover. Again, the most popular decks (from 5-1) are Dragon Hunter (by far, with almost 16%), Galakrond Rogue (11%) , Embiggen Druid (8%), Mech Paladin (7%), Ress Priest (7%), Highlander Hunter (6%), Highlander Mage (6%), Galakrond Warrior (6%). Gala Rogue gets 11%, HL Mage barely makes 6%, as HL Hunter. The others combined have nowhere the amount of RNG and neither Zeph/Dragonqueen and make almost 50%.
As for my rank, I'm a multiple time Legend. This month I finished Rank 2 as I only played ladder for ~4 days. Sure, Galakrond Rogue frequency is ridiculous, specially at Legend, where it's almost mirrors all day, and while I can see that having one, two decks more reliant on random value generation might be a necessity for the meta or for certain groups of players, I can relate that perhaps it should have a lower power level.
Then again, you have Hunter and Druid doing very well against it, and Paladin and Warrior aren't bad either. Mage is a race for who cheats mana and swings first. Control Warlock is favoured. It's not a polarizing deck, as it isn't heavily favoured or heavily unfavoured, and the amount of Discover allows it the chance to find outs for every match up, which is a good attractive quality for many players.
Calling quest druid Mana cheating 'tame'. Hilarious, every 'choose one' card played after quest IS Mana cheating, sir.
Well, that's true, but there are also 2 other things to consider:
First is that you play the first 4 turns extremely sub-optimally, which is near suicidal against a lot of decks. There is a reason Quest Druid bounces between near Tier 1 in one meta and in another meta is near Tier 4.
The second is the extreme build around of the deck, far more heavy than Highlander. You have to put lots of Choose One cards to make it worth, and like I said, the variance from being near T1 in some metas and near T4 in others shows it isn't consistent, so when it is, it should feel very powerful, for all the restrictions of the deck building.
This guy knows what he's talking about, we are not at unprecedented levels of rng and Mana cheating.
Yeah we are. You cant be playing the same game. It is almost silly at this stage when you factor in that you have NO idea whats in your opponents hand at any given time and this applies to almost every class too. Cards like Zephyrs are just terrible. A Tirion Fordring for Mage? A Flamestrike for Hunter? A Mass Dispel for Druid? No effing way thats right. The whole idea behind strategy and planning out things is that you know against certain classes or decks that you arent going to have to deal with xxxxxxx card or spell. It snt even just Zephyrs - thats the tip of the iceberg. Its the endless discovery, the numerous copies of busted cards like 4-5 Shadowsteps or 4-5 legendaries from whatever class. Its getting stupid now guys. C'mon. How the !@#$ do you even play this game and actually feel as if you have any control over the outcome? Its quite simple that you dont. None. Zero.
Hey, if this is what the majorty wants then so be it. But realize that when you win its nothing you did at all. Just like losses are 99.99999995% not your fault either. Guess Im right, Its a casino. Too bad we cant bet on the decks or hands? That'd be fun at least. ;)
Yeah we are. You cant be playing the same game. It is almost silly at this stage when you factor in that you have NO idea whats in your opponents hand at any given time and this applies to almost every class too. Cards like Zephyrs are just terrible. A Tirion Fordring for Mage? A Flamestrike for Hunter? A Mass Dispel for Druid? No effing way thats right. The whole idea behind strategy and planning out things is that you know against certain classes or decks that you arent going to have to deal with xxxxxxx card or spell. It snt even just Zephyrs - thats the tip of the iceberg. Its the endless discovery, the numerous copies of busted cards like 4-5 Shadowsteps or 4-5 legendaries from whatever class. Its getting stupid now guys. C'mon. How the !@#$ do you even play this game and actually feel as if you have any control over the outcome? Its quite simple that you dont. None. Zero.
Hey, if this is what the majorty wants then so be it. But realize that when you win its nothing you did at all. Just like losses are 99.99999995% not your fault either. Guess Im right, Its a casino. Too bad we cant bet on the decks or hands? That'd be fun at least. ;)
Sure, you can keep the mentality of "99,9% of my losses aren't my fault" while everyone plays and improves with a better mentality. But it's easier to whine.
Sure, Rogue and Mage have a lot of Discovery, RNG and cheat, and combined they barely have 16% of the total population at the most popular ranks. Mage has the winrate of a Tier 3 deck. Rogue is not even the highest winrate deck out there, by far. At Legend it's barely keeping a 50% winrate.
If all these RNG and cheating were so broken, they would both be Tier S and everyone would be playing them and getting easy Legend. Including you. But that's not happening, is it?
I don't know what game you have been playing these past years where you could "strategy and not face xxx card" in these past metas of full clown fiesta with 3 mana ConJ Mage, Hare Evolve Shaman, Deathstalker Rexxar and Dr.Boom infinite generation? Barnes + Y'sharraj on 3? Ragnaros shots hero power? How did you feel you had "control over the outcome" then?
Zeph is far from being problematic, and if Hunter is wasting Zeph on a Flamestrike they are seriously doing it wrong... and besides, just because they don't have a specific card like Flamestrike, doesn't mean classes can't do similar effects in different ways. I mean, Veranus + Unleash accomplishes even better, as it isn't restricted by 4 health minions, uses the same amount of mana and leaves a 7/6 on board, for example.
Even if there was absolute 0 discover/rng/cheating, you probably would still be crying about luck of the draw and losing top deck wars as the "lack of control over the outcome" and "losing wasn't my fault".
If OP could stop using his alt accounts to praise himself and call his detractors clowns that'd be great
I won't call you a clown, but I still think OP isn't entirely wrong. The degree to which RNG can impact the game at this stage is unprecedented. I don't think anyone is saying that HS just became a game where luck is a significant factor, nor do I see anyone suggesting that there is a "collective conspiracy" like Tyrantum said. It's fascinating to me how violently opposed some people are to OP's particular line of reasoning, but I suppose he did go a little far when he said that HS is now a "100% randomized casino".
With that said, Lanko was the only person that provided a rational counterargument to the original post; everyone else that doesn't like it is either misrepresenting those who agree with it or making ad hominem attacks. To Lanko, I appreciate the effort you went to to demonstrate that random effects and RNG do not dominate the meta, but you failed to take into account the rate at which decks are played as opposed to how many decks make little use of discover effects. I'm not sure what rank you're playing at, and I can't speak to lower ranks, but in my experience from rank 5 to legend practically half of my opponents are gala rogue for the last several months. A disproportionate portion of the meta is represented by hunter variants and rogue, which makes extremely heavy use of discover effects. It's also worth stating that every highlander deck that exists utilizes extremely powerful discover effects (read: zephyrus and alex), so while the cards in question that provide these effects may make up a relatively small part of said highlander decks, they have the capability to single handedly swing a game in one's favor. So making a purely quantitative argument on the basis of how many decks do not use or make little use of discover effects is a bit narrow-minded: there are other factors that need to be considered (i.e. which decks are being played the most, what is the power level of the discover cards that these decks employ).
Alex is not a discover effect. And now the swing happens at turn 9, just a few months ago we were having shaman swing the game at turn 3/4/5. Hunter does not use many discover effects, rogue does.
Dragonqueen Alex is essentially discover. You make a fair point with hare evolve being an earlier swing, but alex is just one component of highlander swing. You have alex, zephyrus, dinotamer brann, reno the relicologist, etc, and all of those cards (with the exception of alex on a lowroll) have effects that cannot "go wrong" so to speak. Hare evolve had the potential to super lowroll and give you 3 terrible 4 drops, which is hardly a game deciding swing. I never said hunter used discover effects btw, I said that it and rogue (which does have a lot of discover effects) represent a large part of the meta
Yeah we are. You cant be playing the same game. It is almost silly at this stage when you factor in that you have NO idea whats in your opponents hand at any given time and this applies to almost every class too. Cards like Zephyrs are just terrible. A Tirion Fordring for Mage? A Flamestrike for Hunter? A Mass Dispel for Druid? No effing way thats right. The whole idea behind strategy and planning out things is that you know against certain classes or decks that you arent going to have to deal with xxxxxxx card or spell. It snt even just Zephyrs - thats the tip of the iceberg. Its the endless discovery, the numerous copies of busted cards like 4-5 Shadowsteps or 4-5 legendaries from whatever class. Its getting stupid now guys. C'mon. How the !@#$ do you even play this game and actually feel as if you have any control over the outcome? Its quite simple that you dont. None. Zero.
Hey, if this is what the majorty wants then so be it. But realize that when you win its nothing you did at all. Just like losses are 99.99999995% not your fault either. Guess Im right, Its a casino. Too bad we cant bet on the decks or hands? That'd be fun at least. ;)
Sure, you can keep the mentality of "99,9% of my losses aren't my fault" while everyone plays and improves with a better mentality. But it's easier to whine.
Sure, Rogue and Mage have a lot of Discovery, RNG and cheat, and combined they barely have 16% of the total population at the most popular ranks. Mage has the winrate of a Tier 3 deck. Rogue is not even the highest winrate deck out there, by far. At Legend it's barely keeping a 50% winrate.
If all these RNG and cheating were so broken, they would both be Tier S and everyone would be playing them and getting easy Legend. Including you. But that's not happening, is it?
I don't know what game you have been playing these past years where you could "strategy and not face xxx card" in these past metas of full clown fiesta with 3 mana ConJ Mage, Hare Evolve Shaman, Deathstalker Rexxar and Dr.Boom infinite generation? Barnes + Y'sharraj on 3? Ragnaros shots hero power? How did you feel you had "control over the outcome" then?
Zeph is far from being problematic, and if Hunter is wasting Zeph on a Flamestrike they are seriously doing it wrong... and besides, just because they don't have a specific card like Flamestrike, doesn't mean classes can't do similar effects in different ways. I mean, Veranus + Unleash accomplishes even better, as it isn't restricted by 4 health minions, uses the same amount of mana and leaves a 7/6 on board, for example.
Even if there was absolute 0 discover/rng/cheating, you probably would still be crying about luck of the draw and losing top deck wars as the "lack of control over the outcome" and "losing wasn't my fault".
Not really, but if thats how you see it. Legend is a function of the deck you play and the time you grind. Nothing else. If it was skill then the alleged best players could get there with just about any deck but they dont. Thet get there with the best busted decks & time spent - hence the cards and RNG simply favored them. When these ridiculous decks meet head to head its all draw and matchup dependent. Thats fine if you think your "plays" matter. They dont but thats cool. The skill has been long gone in this game for a while now. It is what it is. You can try to *splain* it away all you want but its not working. ** Cue up response throwing around useless stats from arbitrary websites that have no basis in accuracy at all ** :)
If OP could stop using his alt accounts to praise himself and call his detractors clowns that'd be great
I won't call you a clown, but I still think OP isn't entirely wrong. The degree to which RNG can impact the game at this stage is unprecedented. I don't think anyone is saying that HS just became a game where luck is a significant factor, nor do I see anyone suggesting that there is a "collective conspiracy" like Tyrantum said. It's fascinating to me how violently opposed some people are to OP's particular line of reasoning, but I suppose he did go a little far when he said that HS is now a "100% randomized casino".
With that said, Lanko was the only person that provided a rational counterargument to the original post; everyone else that doesn't like it is either misrepresenting those who agree with it or making ad hominem attacks. To Lanko, I appreciate the effort you went to to demonstrate that random effects and RNG do not dominate the meta, but you failed to take into account the rate at which decks are played as opposed to how many decks make little use of discover effects. I'm not sure what rank you're playing at, and I can't speak to lower ranks, but in my experience from rank 5 to legend practically half of my opponents are gala rogue for the last several months. A disproportionate portion of the meta is represented by hunter variants and rogue, which makes extremely heavy use of discover effects. It's also worth stating that every highlander deck that exists utilizes extremely powerful discover effects (read: zephyrus and alex), so while the cards in question that provide these effects may make up a relatively small part of said highlander decks, they have the capability to single handedly swing a game in one's favor. So making a purely quantitative argument on the basis of how many decks do not use or make little use of discover effects is a bit narrow-minded: there are other factors that need to be considered (i.e. which decks are being played the most, what is the power level of the discover cards that these decks employ).
I'll disagree again with the "unprecedent level of RNG meta".
We had metas where Ragnaros and Sylvanas were in almost all decks, so much that they had to be Hall of Famed.
We had a meta where the best win condition in the game was nothing less than Yogg-Saron, Hope's End, even in tournaments.
Mana cheating? Dragonqueen pales in comparison to what decks could do with N'zoth.
We had Cube Warlock with Skull, Possessed Lackeys, Cubes, Gul'dan and N'zoth. We had a period of a meta that was full Control, with tournament lineups being N'zoth Mage, N'zoth Paladin, Cube/Control Warlock and one more.
We had a meta with Cube/Control Lock at the same time with Spiteful Summoner Priest/Druid summoning Deathwing on turns 5/6 and 4 mana Call to Arms Paladin. And even around/later a meta with Spell Hunter that was pretty much Barnes Hunter, with the known interaction with Y'sharrj (however is spelled). Now THAT was a RNG and mana cheating meta. All those ended up nerfed.
We had a meta with Shudderwock Shaman where the Shaman winning depended purely on the order which battlecries happened first, Odd Taunt Warrior having Ragnaros hero power as a win condition and Deathrattle Hunter abusing Cubes with extremely cheap activators to cheat stuff, Kathrena Winterwisp and infinite with the ultimate RNG/Discover card in Deathstalker Rexxar.
Then we had a meta tyrannized by the near infinite RNG/Discover of 7 mana Dr.Boom, Mad Genius for months to the point in non-official tournaments Elysiana was banned and every tournament Specialist format was 95% mirror matches.
Then we had the extreme clown fiesta meta with 3 mana Conjurer's Calling and 5 manaLuna's Pocket Galaxy, a true meta and matches/mirrors where people were rolling dices to win.
And how can we forget the latest event, with Hare Evolve Shaman? Paired with Quest and Lackey generators, it was the ultimate RNG/Discover fiesta.
So no, the current meta is nowhere near those levels.
As for Zephrys and Dragonqueen, you pointed the frequency. By "every highlander deck out there" you mean Highlander Hunter and Mage, with a very small splash of Warrior. Lock uses it in Galakrond Control, but they are the clunkiest cards in the deck, by far, sometimes costing matches, but recently they are less than 2%. HL Hunter and Mage and Warrior combined barely make 12% of the meta, according to stats. Highlander Rogue is almost non-existant and inferior to Galakrond Rogue. So in other ~88% of matches, you are not seeing Zeph or Dragonqueen at all.
Dragon and Face Hunter together account for 20%, Galakrond Rogue for another ~12%, Ress Priest for 7%, Embiggen for 8%, Gala Warrior for ~8%, etc.
Except for Rogue, the RNG, Discover and cheating in the other matchups is very low.
You also pointed out which decks are being played the most and the amount of Discover. Again, the most popular decks (from 5-1) are Dragon Hunter (by far, with almost 16%), Galakrond Rogue (11%) , Embiggen Druid (8%), Mech Paladin (7%), Ress Priest (7%), Highlander Hunter (6%), Highlander Mage (6%), Galakrond Warrior (6%). Gala Rogue gets 11%, HL Mage barely makes 6%, as HL Hunter. The others combined have nowhere the amount of RNG and neither Zeph/Dragonqueen and make almost 50%.
As for my rank, I'm a multiple time Legend. This month I finished Rank 2 as I only played ladder for ~4 days. Sure, Galakrond Rogue frequency is ridiculous, specially at Legend, where it's almost mirrors all day, and while I can see that having one, two decks more reliant on random value generation might be a necessity for the meta or for certain groups of players, I can relate that perhaps it should have a lower power level.
Then again, you have Hunter and Druid doing very well against it, and Paladin and Warrior aren't bad either. Mage is a race for who cheats mana and swings first. Control Warlock is favoured. It's not a polarizing deck, as it isn't heavily favoured or heavily unfavoured, and the amount of Discover allows it the chance to find outs for every match up, which is a good attractive quality for many players.
Calling quest druid Mana cheating 'tame'. Hilarious, every 'choose one' card played after quest IS Mana cheating, sir.
Well, that's true, but there are also 2 other things to consider:
First is that you play the first 4 turns extremely sub-optimally, which is near suicidal against a lot of decks. There is a reason Quest Druid bounces between near Tier 1 in one meta and in another meta is near Tier 4.
The second is the extreme build around of the deck, far more heavy than Highlander. You have to put lots of Choose One cards to make it worth, and like I said, the variance from being near T1 in some metas and near T4 in others shows it isn't consistent, so when it is, it should feel very powerful, for all the restrictions of the deck building.
You make some good points, so I'm going to more clearly qualify my argument (which I admittedly should've done in the first place). The state in which the game has been since the introduction of lackeys and even more so with zephyrus, and I believe I did say this in my first post on this thread, has generally been an rng clown fiesta. That is not to say that lackeys and zephyrus are primarily responsible for aforementioned state (although they are certainly contributors), but rather that they denote the beginning of a period of particularly rng oriented metas/gameplay. I'm going to sequentially address your argument as it addresses RNG oriented metas in prior expansions as well.
First, Nzoth. Nzoth is not particularly representative of RNG in that you know exactly what he's going to summon, so not a great example to compare with Alex. He might be more powerful, but he's certainly not more random.
Rag and Sylvanas. Again, you know exactly what they're going to do, even if you don't know what they're going to target. Plus they can be dealt with far more easily than lackeys or highlander cards bc they have to be played and you typically have to wait at least a turn in order to realize their effects. Rag can be destroyed, sylvanas can be silenced: you can't silence zephyrus, and you can't prevent lackeys from using their battlecries.
Yog. This is one card. Admittedly its a card that does a lot, but we have the exact same thing now with puzzle box, and you can have more than one in the deck. Yog is nothing compared to the current meta.
Cube/Guldan meta. This is not representative of RNG, lol. You know what cube does, you know what Guldan can summon. These things can be played around. You can't play around zephyrus every turn and you can't play around random lackey effects.
Spiteful summoner priest/druid. This is quality over quantity. Sure, spiteful summoner can summon ONE crazy card. We have random effects from infinite 1 drops now. We have a card that can provide the perfect out for any situation at any time. Spiteful summoner is nothing compared to what we have now.
4 mana call to arms paladin. I'm going to repeat myself again: this is not RNG. This is a card that summons creatures from your deck that you know are there, that you deliberately chose to be summoned by call to arms.
Shudderwock shaman. Another poor example of non-rng. All shudderwock does is replicate battlecries of minions that you already played. Nothing about it is random, not even the order of the battlecries. Not to mention that its still played today and has been made even more potent with shaman quest.
Dr. Boom/Elysiana control warrior. The issue with this deck is that it ideally needs to survive for 30 cards in order to make optmal use of Elysiana, or 7 turns (at the time) to activate Dr. Boom. Obviously that's what the deck is made for, but still. Gala rogue and highlander decks don't need to wait 7 turns or an entire game to make use of their randomly generated effects. Even so, this archetype came to exist after rise of shadows, so it doesn't contradict my argument that the game has been a clown fiesta beginning with the intro of lackeys (in rise of shadows).
Conj mage. Here you might have an argument for an RNG oriented deck that would be potentially higher in power level than current top tier decks. With that said, the RNG aspect of this deck essentially revolves around a single card, and that is conj. Even highlander decks have more potentiality with regard to randomness, and forget about decks that generate lackeys. This is another archetype that was introduced in rise of shadows, so still in keeping with my argument.
Hare evolve shaman. This is a deck that is admittedly entirely focused on maximizing RNG. I'm still not sure if it makes use of as much RNG as decks like gala rogue, but since so many played it it may have been representative of a more RNG focused meta than the current meta. I'll give this one to you. Still a very recent development, so doesn't contradict my argument.
To conclude, I'd like to note that while not every deck in the current meta is predicated on making use of RNG, the statistics you quoted show that 3 of the 6 most popular decks are either highlander or gala rogue, and make up 23 percent of all decks played. Needless to say, that is a pretty significant portion.
Not really, but if thats how you see it. Legend is a function of the deck you play and the time you grind. Nothing else. If it was skill then the alleged best players could get there with just about any deck but they dont. Thet get there with the best busted decks & time spent - hence the cards and RNG simply favored them. When these ridiculous decks meet head to head its all draw and matchup dependent. Thats fine if you think your "plays" matter. They dont but thats cool. The skill has been long gone in this game for a while now. It is what it is. You can try to *splain* it away all you want but its not working. ** Cue up response throwing around useless stats from arbitrary websites that have no basis in accuracy at all ** :)
Ok, this is where I'm going to have to disagree with you. I don't blame you for thinking this way, it's natural for people to want to think of things like this simplistically and say "it's all luck, no skill is required", etc. But you are fundamentally incorrect. Luck might be a larger component of winning, relatively speaking, than it was several years ago in standard. But that does not mean that skill is not needed to achieve high rank. If skill weren't required, everyone in the game would be rank 5 and up and brand new players could claim that they're just as good as pros. Obviously this is not the case and will never be the case; HS is not a slot machine. It sure as hell isn't chess, but it definitely is not a slot machine either.
Yeah we are. You cant be playing the same game. It is almost silly at this stage when you factor in that you have NO idea whats in your opponents hand at any given time and this applies to almost every class too. Cards like Zephyrs are just terrible. A Tirion Fordring for Mage? A Flamestrike for Hunter? A Mass Dispel for Druid? No effing way thats right. The whole idea behind strategy and planning out things is that you know against certain classes or decks that you arent going to have to deal with xxxxxxx card or spell. It snt even just Zephyrs - thats the tip of the iceberg. Its the endless discovery, the numerous copies of busted cards like 4-5 Shadowsteps or 4-5 legendaries from whatever class. Its getting stupid now guys. C'mon. How the !@#$ do you even play this game and actually feel as if you have any control over the outcome? Its quite simple that you dont. None. Zero.
Hey, if this is what the majorty wants then so be it. But realize that when you win its nothing you did at all. Just like losses are 99.99999995% not your fault either. Guess Im right, Its a casino. Too bad we cant bet on the decks or hands? That'd be fun at least. ;)
Sure, you can keep the mentality of "99,9% of my losses aren't my fault" while everyone plays and improves with a better mentality. But it's easier to whine.
Sure, Rogue and Mage have a lot of Discovery, RNG and cheat, and combined they barely have 16% of the total population at the most popular ranks. Mage has the winrate of a Tier 3 deck. Rogue is not even the highest winrate deck out there, by far. At Legend it's barely keeping a 50% winrate.
If all these RNG and cheating were so broken, they would both be Tier S and everyone would be playing them and getting easy Legend. Including you. But that's not happening, is it?
I don't know what game you have been playing these past years where you could "strategy and not face xxx card" in these past metas of full clown fiesta with 3 mana ConJ Mage, Hare Evolve Shaman, Deathstalker Rexxar and Dr.Boom infinite generation? Barnes + Y'sharraj on 3? Ragnaros shots hero power? How did you feel you had "control over the outcome" then?
Zeph is far from being problematic, and if Hunter is wasting Zeph on a Flamestrike they are seriously doing it wrong... and besides, just because they don't have a specific card like Flamestrike, doesn't mean classes can't do similar effects in different ways. I mean, Veranus + Unleash accomplishes even better, as it isn't restricted by 4 health minions, uses the same amount of mana and leaves a 7/6 on board, for example.
Even if there was absolute 0 discover/rng/cheating, you probably would still be crying about luck of the draw and losing top deck wars as the "lack of control over the outcome" and "losing wasn't my fault".
Not really, but if thats how you see it. Legend is a function of the deck you play and the time you grind. Nothing else. If it was skill then the alleged best players could get there with just about any deck but they dont. Thet get there with the best busted decks & time spent - hence the cards and RNG simply favored them. When these ridiculous decks meet head to head its all draw and matchup dependent. Thats fine if you think your "plays" matter. They dont but thats cool. The skill has been long gone in this game for a while now. It is what it is. You can try to *splain* it away all you want but its not working. ** Cue up response throwing around useless stats from arbitrary websites that have no basis in accuracy at all ** :)
Again, the best busted decks lists are available for everyone to play them. Why then isn't everyone getting an easy free Legend with them instead of being stuck between ranks 20-5?
If you ever reached Legend, and played it regularly around, say, at least between 600-100 over some period of time, you would notice a lot of names appearing over and over as your opponents.
These regularly reach top ranks with the same list you, me and the guy at rank 20 are using. The difference being just time spent is ridiculous, as they get Legend from Rank 4 in a matter of a few days, and yet people with the same lists can't in 30. With the added fact that, as the month passes by, the easier it becomes to climb as more people reached Legend and leave the ranks 4-1 grind battle.
Even very busy people can at least reach Dad Legend (Rank 5), with jobs, children to care and etc, and reach it regularly at the absolute minimum. And yet, even with the same busted decks and having full 30 days, people still can't reach Rank 5 as well.
Like I said before, like I knew you would say, you could remove all "Discover", "Random" words from cards all forms of mana cheating, and you would still cry because of luck of the draw and topdecks not favoring you. Even if you could choose specific cards to draw each turn, you would still whine about it in some way.
The last line is really cute. "Random arbitrary stats"... what really is solid knowledge and stats are rants like "99,9% of my losses are due to RNG only", conspiracy theories about matchmaking, and "just play busted decks to climb with a lot of time to spare, even though I can't myself because of RNG over 30 full days". Sure, sure... :)
This is all cool, but some people actually want to reach Legend once in this game.
Pendling around between rank 2 and 5 for half a month straight because you can't break even due to the fixed matchmaking in ranked is not fun, and will never be funny.
Blizzard has to monitor the amount of times that one gets outcountered in matchmaker already as well as improve ranked Rewards.
Dude, rank 5-legend is a hard grind. Rank 2-legend is even harder and also stressed grind, cause if you lose 1 game, you need to win 2 in a raw to advance. Believe me , this is not fun at all if not on a winning streak.
About matchmaking: some of the pro players and me personally noticed tons of times the strange thing while laddering - when you are on the winning streak, and reached for example rank 5 , 5 stars, the game to jump to the next rank is like fighting a boss level. You always face counter deck. Every rank. So you start to think that this shit is rigged and you never reach legend. But even if this mm thing is true, why thousands of people are reaching legend every month? Because the power of randomness is never should be underrated. You just play your game and try to have fun, all in all games are all about fun.
You make some good points, so I'm going to more clearly qualify my argument (which I admittedly should've done in the first place). The state in which the game has been since the introduction of lackeys and even more so with zephyrus, and I believe I did say this in my first post on this thread, has generally been an rng clown fiesta. That is not to say that lackeys and zephyrus are primarily responsible for aforementioned state (although they are certainly contributors), but rather that they denote the beginning of a period of particularly rng oriented metas/gameplay. I'm going to sequentially address your argument as it addresses RNG oriented metas in prior expansions as well.
First, Nzoth. Nzoth is not particularly representative of RNG in that you know exactly what he's going to summon, so not a great example to compare with Alex. He might be more powerful, but he's certainly not more random.
Rag and Sylvanas. Again, you know exactly what they're going to do, even if you don't know what they're going to target. Plus they can be dealt with far more easily than lackeys or highlander cards bc they have to be played and you typically have to wait at least a turn in order to realize their effects. Rag can be destroyed, sylvanas can be silenced: you can't silence zephyrus, and you can't prevent lackeys from using their battlecries.
Yog. This is one card. Admittedly its a card that does a lot, but we have the exact same thing now with puzzle box, and you can have more than one in the deck. Yog is nothing compared to the current meta.
Cube/Guldan meta. This is not representative of RNG, lol. You know what cube does, you know what Guldan can summon. These things can be played around. You can't play around zephyrus every turn and you can't play around random lackey effects.
Spiteful summoner priest/druid. This is quality over quantity. Sure, spiteful summoner can summon ONE crazy card. We have random effects from infinite 1 drops now. We have a card that can provide the perfect out for any situation at any time. Spiteful summoner is nothing compared to what we have now.
4 mana call to arms paladin. I'm going to repeat myself again: this is not RNG. This is a card that summons creatures from your deck that you know are there, that you deliberately chose to be summoned by call to arms.
Shudderwock shaman. Another poor example of non-rng. All shudderwock does is replicate battlecries of minions that you already played. Nothing about it is random, not even the order of the battlecries. Not to mention that its still played today and has been made even more potent with shaman quest.
Dr. Boom/Elysiana control warrior. The issue with this deck is that it ideally needs to survive for 30 cards in order to make optmal use of Elysiana, or 7 turns (at the time) to activate Dr. Boom. Obviously that's what the deck is made for, but still. Gala rogue and highlander decks don't need to wait 7 turns or an entire game to make use of their randomly generated effects. Even so, this archetype came to exist after rise of shadows, so it doesn't contradict my argument that the game has been a clown fiesta beginning with the intro of lackeys (in rise of shadows).
Conj mage. Here you might have an argument for an RNG oriented deck that would be potentially higher in power level than current top tier decks. With that said, the RNG aspect of this deck essentially revolves around a single card, and that is conj. Even highlander decks have more potentiality with regard to randomness, and forget about decks that generate lackeys. This is another archetype that was introduced in rise of shadows, so still in keeping with my argument.
Hare evolve shaman. This is a deck that is admittedly entirely focused on maximizing RNG. I'm still not sure if it makes use of as much RNG as decks like gala rogue, but since so many played it it may have been representative of a more RNG focused meta than the current meta. I'll give this one to you. Still a very recent development, so doesn't contradict my argument.
To conclude, I'd like to note that while not every deck in the current meta is predicated on making use of RNG, the statistics you quoted show that 3 of the 6 most popular decks are either highlander or gala rogue, and make up 23 percent of all decks played. Needless to say, that is a pretty significant portion.
Looking forward to reading your response.
First, some clarification. While I quoted you, I was also addressing other people talking about mana cheating meta. So when I mentioned Call to Arms, Spiteful Summoner, Cubelock, I was addressing mana cheating (I even specified saying "Now THAT was mana cheating"), though it looked a like quoted responde only to you. I know they aren't RNG, and that was mostly to Rag/Sylv effects, Yogg meta, but I mistakenly put RNG near other descriptions, so my bad.
Though I would like to address some points:
- Rag and Sylvanas were used in almost all decks. Except for Rogue, no one else is using Lackeys. Highlander Control Warrior, if we want to be really pedantic about it, and very tamely. You can play Boompistol to really slow them down, but most importantly, sure you can't prevent the lackey, but just like Rag and Sylv, you can destroy and silence whatever non-spell they generate.
- "Yog is nothing in the current meta". First, tournaments were played relying purely on Yog to bring opponents from 30 to 0 by casting random spells. They had to fundamentally nerf the card to stop casting when dead to put a stop to this and put the game back on track. You can't get more reliance on RNG to win than this.
- Spiteful decks did have RNG involved as well, and wasn't low impact, though I was mainly addressing the mana cheating of it. Highrolling Deathwing or lowrolling 5/5 C'thun on turns 5/6 decided games. And it wasn't the only element of RNG involved in those decks. A great part of it was also RNG'ing with Grand Archivist and what it hit from Free From Amber, Mind Control and Ultimate Infestation.
- You're mistaken with Shudderwock Shaman when you said "the order of the battlecries wasn't random". The order is totally random, and you could lose if Grumble procced before Saronite, and people lost even in tournaments with a bazillion battlecries played because of it. Wins/losses were basically decided on "I played a lot of battlecries, but let's pray Grumble doesn't proc before Saronite". A rare ocurrence? Perhaps, but you could never play it without this risk.
- About Dr.Boom and Elysiana. Dr.Boom pushed every other Control deck out simply because of it's near infinite Discover RNG generation. Plus Omega Assembly. Can't get more RNG when even what hero power you get is random! Some tournaments were 100% mirror matches, and of course, what decided them? Who Discovered better, and who got a better Elysiana card generation.
- About Conj.Mage: No, it wasn't just Conjurer's, and calling it a single card is... stretching it, since it was a Twinspell and at the apex of its power it also ran Magic Trick and Mana Cyclone to regularly get more and of course, for even more RNG. So they could conjure it 4 times, or maybe a dozen. And you could get full hands with random spells by Cyclone (including spells that discovered more spells). You were complaining about Lackeys, and this deck used none and it probably had more RNG involved.
- Hare Evolve Shaman didn't use as much RNG as Rogue? Rogue regularly kills you from the 0 cost cards bursting you more often than Lackey RNG. It was not only Hare Evolve, but Mogu + Mutate, and if all the evolve plays somehow failed, you still had the Quest for double lackey creation and double discoveries, then Shudderwock for another random board and random full hand refill. Rogue is no way comparable to this fiesta.
- Last point: I don't think you can put HL Hunter in the same spot as RNG fiesta as Gala Rogue and HL Mage just because of Zephrys and Dragonqueen (and the 3 mana discover a dragon). It's 3 out of 30 when these other two are pretty much half their decks. And HL mage far less popular than Rogue and with a far inferior winrate. So it's far less than 23%, and even if it was 23%, you can also make a case for not seeing them for the other 77% of your matches.
Besides, they both suffer with Hunter, Rogue also with Druid. Both Paladin and Warrior can blow them both out of air as well.
Also, important to notice, is that Galakrond Rogue and Highlander Mage are actually the only ones keeping Ressurrection Priest in check. Ress Priest can feast on Hunters, Warriors, Mech Paladins and even Druids, as their generation is way too low, or in the case of current Gala Warrior, Mech Paladin, Quest Hunter, non-existant.
But they can't cope with both the mana-cheating and the near infinite generation (or high value generation in case of Mage, plus Reno and Poly for their Ress Pool), even when they just replaced Quest with their own Galakrond.
The purpose of high extra value/resource generation strategies is there to exactly keep Control in check. Gut Rogue/Mage and Priest has its two worse matchups off the map while being favoured against the rest of the field, leading to an unbalanced meta.
Except for Shaman, every class is playable and has a decent deck. Rogue overall is barely keeping a 50% winrate despite all the RNG, and Mage is even below it, with an overall Tier 3 winrate.
That said, I don't disagree that they have a bit too much randomness in them, but I also recognize their purpose and that we had much worse than this.
If OP could stop using his alt accounts to praise himself and call his detractors clowns that'd be great
I won't call you a clown, but I still think OP isn't entirely wrong. The degree to which RNG can impact the game at this stage is unprecedented. I don't think anyone is saying that HS just became a game where luck is a significant factor, nor do I see anyone suggesting that there is a "collective conspiracy" like Tyrantum said. It's fascinating to me how violently opposed some people are to OP's particular line of reasoning, but I suppose he did go a little far when he said that HS is now a "100% randomized casino".
With that said, Lanko was the only person that provided a rational counterargument to the original post; everyone else that doesn't like it is either misrepresenting those who agree with it or making ad hominem attacks. To Lanko, I appreciate the effort you went to to demonstrate that random effects and RNG do not dominate the meta, but you failed to take into account the rate at which decks are played as opposed to how many decks make little use of discover effects. I'm not sure what rank you're playing at, and I can't speak to lower ranks, but in my experience from rank 5 to legend practically half of my opponents are gala rogue for the last several months. A disproportionate portion of the meta is represented by hunter variants and rogue, which makes extremely heavy use of discover effects. It's also worth stating that every highlander deck that exists utilizes extremely powerful discover effects (read: zephyrus and alex), so while the cards in question that provide these effects may make up a relatively small part of said highlander decks, they have the capability to single handedly swing a game in one's favor. So making a purely quantitative argument on the basis of how many decks do not use or make little use of discover effects is a bit narrow-minded: there are other factors that need to be considered (i.e. which decks are being played the most, what is the power level of the discover cards that these decks employ).
Alex is not a discover effect. And now the swing happens at turn 9, just a few months ago we were having shaman swing the game at turn 3/4/5. Hunter does not use many discover effects, rogue does.
Dragonqueen Alex is essentially discover. You make a fair point with hare evolve being an earlier swing, but alex is just one component of highlander swing. You have alex, zephyrus, dinotamer brann, reno the relicologist, etc, and all of those cards (with the exception of alex on a lowroll) have effects that cannot "go wrong" so to speak. Hare evolve had the potential to super lowroll and give you 3 terrible 4 drops, which is hardly a game deciding swing. I never said hunter used discover effects btw, I said that it and rogue (which does have a lot of discover effects) represent a large part of the meta
I'm gonna repeat, Alex is not a discover. Discover is discover. Alex is a random value generator coupled with a swing component and a condition. Apologies if I misread your comments about Hunter.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Calling quest druid Mana cheating 'tame'. Hilarious, every 'choose one' card played after quest IS Mana cheating, sir.
İ don't like the way you worded the topic. The game is fun. İt's what I'm paying for every now and then.
Moron is a term once used in psychology and psychiatry to denote mild intellectual disability.
Horrorwolf, this aint no salt and tears thread,so... heres your answer :
You 've been playing since beta and you are sad you spend like 10.000 hours try to prove you have skills. Blizzard, fanboys and ordinary morons like me support this RNG and Discover mechanic so much that you may think we don't love you.
i don't know about the others, i do love you. So here is an advise, find something in your life that worths about caring and trying and salting so much, this is just a moneymaking RNG infested game!!!
chess is boring i know, no golden heroes...just 1 class in black and white variance...bad design, no updates,no fairytales.no dragons..no packs....but its pure focus and concetration and play around without guessing,assuming and knowledge of Quantum mechanics.
yeah, I dislike that, think it also ruined class identity when almost every class can have access to other classes' cards...
You can't stop the signal.
Pretty sure its the legend cardback they want
Don't worry about it we all make mistakes
I'll disagree again with the "unprecedent level of RNG meta".
We had metas where Ragnaros and Sylvanas were in almost all decks, so much that they had to be Hall of Famed.
We had a meta where the best win condition in the game was nothing less than Yogg-Saron, Hope's End, even in tournaments.
Mana cheating? Dragonqueen pales in comparison to what decks could do with N'zoth.
We had Cube Warlock with Skull, Possessed Lackeys, Cubes, Gul'dan and N'zoth. We had a period of a meta that was full Control, with tournament lineups being N'zoth Mage, N'zoth Paladin, Cube/Control Warlock and one more.
We had a meta with Cube/Control Lock at the same time with Spiteful Summoner Priest/Druid summoning Deathwing on turns 5/6 and 4 mana Call to Arms Paladin. And even around/later a meta with Spell Hunter that was pretty much Barnes Hunter, with the known interaction with Y'sharrj (however is spelled). Now THAT was a RNG and mana cheating meta. All those ended up nerfed.
We had a meta with Shudderwock Shaman where the Shaman winning depended purely on the order which battlecries happened first, Odd Taunt Warrior having Ragnaros hero power as a win condition and Deathrattle Hunter abusing Cubes with extremely cheap activators to cheat stuff, Kathrena Winterwisp and infinite with the ultimate RNG/Discover card in Deathstalker Rexxar.
Then we had a meta tyrannized by the near infinite RNG/Discover of 7 mana Dr.Boom, Mad Genius for months to the point in non-official tournaments Elysiana was banned and every tournament Specialist format was 95% mirror matches.
Then we had the extreme clown fiesta meta with 3 mana Conjurer's Calling and 5 mana Luna's Pocket Galaxy, a true meta and matches/mirrors where people were rolling dices to win.
And how can we forget the latest event, with Hare Evolve Shaman? Paired with Quest and Lackey generators, it was the ultimate RNG/Discover fiesta.
So no, the current meta is nowhere near those levels.
As for Zephrys and Dragonqueen, you pointed the frequency. By "every highlander deck out there" you mean Highlander Hunter and Mage, with a very small splash of Warrior. Lock uses it in Galakrond Control, but they are the clunkiest cards in the deck, by far, sometimes costing matches, but recently they are less than 2%. HL Hunter and Mage and Warrior combined barely make 12% of the meta, according to stats. Highlander Rogue is almost non-existant and inferior to Galakrond Rogue. So in other ~88% of matches, you are not seeing Zeph or Dragonqueen at all.
Dragon and Face Hunter together account for 20%, Galakrond Rogue for another ~12%, Ress Priest for 7%, Embiggen for 8%, Gala Warrior for ~8%, etc.
Except for Rogue, the RNG, Discover and cheating in the other matchups is very low.
You also pointed out which decks are being played the most and the amount of Discover. Again, the most popular decks (from 5-1) are Dragon Hunter (by far, with almost 16%), Galakrond Rogue (11%) , Embiggen Druid (8%), Mech Paladin (7%), Ress Priest (7%), Highlander Hunter (6%), Highlander Mage (6%), Galakrond Warrior (6%). Gala Rogue gets 11%, HL Mage barely makes 6%, as HL Hunter. The others combined have nowhere the amount of RNG and neither Zeph/Dragonqueen and make almost 50%.
As for my rank, I'm a multiple time Legend. This month I finished Rank 2 as I only played ladder for ~4 days. Sure, Galakrond Rogue frequency is ridiculous, specially at Legend, where it's almost mirrors all day, and while I can see that having one, two decks more reliant on random value generation might be a necessity for the meta or for certain groups of players, I can relate that perhaps it should have a lower power level.
Then again, you have Hunter and Druid doing very well against it, and Paladin and Warrior aren't bad either. Mage is a race for who cheats mana and swings first. Control Warlock is favoured. It's not a polarizing deck, as it isn't heavily favoured or heavily unfavoured, and the amount of Discover allows it the chance to find outs for every match up, which is a good attractive quality for many players.
Well, that's true, but there are also 2 other things to consider:
First is that you play the first 4 turns extremely sub-optimally, which is near suicidal against a lot of decks. There is a reason Quest Druid bounces between near Tier 1 in one meta and in another meta is near Tier 4.
The second is the extreme build around of the deck, far more heavy than Highlander. You have to put lots of Choose One cards to make it worth, and like I said, the variance from being near T1 in some metas and near T4 in others shows it isn't consistent, so when it is, it should feel very powerful, for all the restrictions of the deck building.
Right now you run consistently into quest druid, which implies itself is being consistent if it's getting played as much. Quest Druid probably cheats most mana besides galakrond rogue and highlander mage currently.
As for the deckbuilding restrictions, the ability to innervate, play treeno jackson, 10-10 with rush for 5 mana, besides Loti, Floop and the anubisaths, i'd say those more than make up for it.
This guy knows what he's talking about, we are not at unprecedented levels of rng and Mana cheating.
Alex is not a discover effect. And now the swing happens at turn 9, just a few months ago we were having shaman swing the game at turn 3/4/5. Hunter does not use many discover effects, rogue does.
Yeah we are. You cant be playing the same game. It is almost silly at this stage when you factor in that you have NO idea whats in your opponents hand at any given time and this applies to almost every class too. Cards like Zephyrs are just terrible. A Tirion Fordring for Mage? A Flamestrike for Hunter? A Mass Dispel for Druid? No effing way thats right. The whole idea behind strategy and planning out things is that you know against certain classes or decks that you arent going to have to deal with xxxxxxx card or spell. It snt even just Zephyrs - thats the tip of the iceberg. Its the endless discovery, the numerous copies of busted cards like 4-5 Shadowsteps or 4-5 legendaries from whatever class. Its getting stupid now guys. C'mon. How the !@#$ do you even play this game and actually feel as if you have any control over the outcome? Its quite simple that you dont. None. Zero.
Hey, if this is what the majorty wants then so be it. But realize that when you win its nothing you did at all. Just like losses are 99.99999995% not your fault either. Guess Im right, Its a casino. Too bad we cant bet on the decks or hands? That'd be fun at least. ;)
Sure, you can keep the mentality of "99,9% of my losses aren't my fault" while everyone plays and improves with a better mentality. But it's easier to whine.
Sure, Rogue and Mage have a lot of Discovery, RNG and cheat, and combined they barely have 16% of the total population at the most popular ranks. Mage has the winrate of a Tier 3 deck. Rogue is not even the highest winrate deck out there, by far. At Legend it's barely keeping a 50% winrate.
If all these RNG and cheating were so broken, they would both be Tier S and everyone would be playing them and getting easy Legend. Including you. But that's not happening, is it?
I don't know what game you have been playing these past years where you could "strategy and not face xxx card" in these past metas of full clown fiesta with 3 mana ConJ Mage, Hare Evolve Shaman, Deathstalker Rexxar and Dr.Boom infinite generation? Barnes + Y'sharraj on 3? Ragnaros shots hero power? How did you feel you had "control over the outcome" then?
Zeph is far from being problematic, and if Hunter is wasting Zeph on a Flamestrike they are seriously doing it wrong... and besides, just because they don't have a specific card like Flamestrike, doesn't mean classes can't do similar effects in different ways. I mean, Veranus + Unleash accomplishes even better, as it isn't restricted by 4 health minions, uses the same amount of mana and leaves a 7/6 on board, for example.
Even if there was absolute 0 discover/rng/cheating, you probably would still be crying about luck of the draw and losing top deck wars as the "lack of control over the outcome" and "losing wasn't my fault".
Dragonqueen Alex is essentially discover. You make a fair point with hare evolve being an earlier swing, but alex is just one component of highlander swing. You have alex, zephyrus, dinotamer brann, reno the relicologist, etc, and all of those cards (with the exception of alex on a lowroll) have effects that cannot "go wrong" so to speak. Hare evolve had the potential to super lowroll and give you 3 terrible 4 drops, which is hardly a game deciding swing. I never said hunter used discover effects btw, I said that it and rogue (which does have a lot of discover effects) represent a large part of the meta
Not really, but if thats how you see it. Legend is a function of the deck you play and the time you grind. Nothing else. If it was skill then the alleged best players could get there with just about any deck but they dont. Thet get there with the best busted decks & time spent - hence the cards and RNG simply favored them. When these ridiculous decks meet head to head its all draw and matchup dependent. Thats fine if you think your "plays" matter. They dont but thats cool. The skill has been long gone in this game for a while now. It is what it is. You can try to *splain* it away all you want but its not working. ** Cue up response throwing around useless stats from arbitrary websites that have no basis in accuracy at all ** :)
You make some good points, so I'm going to more clearly qualify my argument (which I admittedly should've done in the first place). The state in which the game has been since the introduction of lackeys and even more so with zephyrus, and I believe I did say this in my first post on this thread, has generally been an rng clown fiesta. That is not to say that lackeys and zephyrus are primarily responsible for aforementioned state (although they are certainly contributors), but rather that they denote the beginning of a period of particularly rng oriented metas/gameplay. I'm going to sequentially address your argument as it addresses RNG oriented metas in prior expansions as well.
First, Nzoth. Nzoth is not particularly representative of RNG in that you know exactly what he's going to summon, so not a great example to compare with Alex. He might be more powerful, but he's certainly not more random.
Rag and Sylvanas. Again, you know exactly what they're going to do, even if you don't know what they're going to target. Plus they can be dealt with far more easily than lackeys or highlander cards bc they have to be played and you typically have to wait at least a turn in order to realize their effects. Rag can be destroyed, sylvanas can be silenced: you can't silence zephyrus, and you can't prevent lackeys from using their battlecries.
Yog. This is one card. Admittedly its a card that does a lot, but we have the exact same thing now with puzzle box, and you can have more than one in the deck. Yog is nothing compared to the current meta.
Cube/Guldan meta. This is not representative of RNG, lol. You know what cube does, you know what Guldan can summon. These things can be played around. You can't play around zephyrus every turn and you can't play around random lackey effects.
Spiteful summoner priest/druid. This is quality over quantity. Sure, spiteful summoner can summon ONE crazy card. We have random effects from infinite 1 drops now. We have a card that can provide the perfect out for any situation at any time. Spiteful summoner is nothing compared to what we have now.
4 mana call to arms paladin. I'm going to repeat myself again: this is not RNG. This is a card that summons creatures from your deck that you know are there, that you deliberately chose to be summoned by call to arms.
Shudderwock shaman. Another poor example of non-rng. All shudderwock does is replicate battlecries of minions that you already played. Nothing about it is random, not even the order of the battlecries. Not to mention that its still played today and has been made even more potent with shaman quest.
Dr. Boom/Elysiana control warrior. The issue with this deck is that it ideally needs to survive for 30 cards in order to make optmal use of Elysiana, or 7 turns (at the time) to activate Dr. Boom. Obviously that's what the deck is made for, but still. Gala rogue and highlander decks don't need to wait 7 turns or an entire game to make use of their randomly generated effects. Even so, this archetype came to exist after rise of shadows, so it doesn't contradict my argument that the game has been a clown fiesta beginning with the intro of lackeys (in rise of shadows).
Conj mage. Here you might have an argument for an RNG oriented deck that would be potentially higher in power level than current top tier decks. With that said, the RNG aspect of this deck essentially revolves around a single card, and that is conj. Even highlander decks have more potentiality with regard to randomness, and forget about decks that generate lackeys. This is another archetype that was introduced in rise of shadows, so still in keeping with my argument.
Hare evolve shaman. This is a deck that is admittedly entirely focused on maximizing RNG. I'm still not sure if it makes use of as much RNG as decks like gala rogue, but since so many played it it may have been representative of a more RNG focused meta than the current meta. I'll give this one to you. Still a very recent development, so doesn't contradict my argument.
To conclude, I'd like to note that while not every deck in the current meta is predicated on making use of RNG, the statistics you quoted show that 3 of the 6 most popular decks are either highlander or gala rogue, and make up 23 percent of all decks played. Needless to say, that is a pretty significant portion.
Looking forward to reading your response.
Ok, this is where I'm going to have to disagree with you. I don't blame you for thinking this way, it's natural for people to want to think of things like this simplistically and say "it's all luck, no skill is required", etc. But you are fundamentally incorrect. Luck might be a larger component of winning, relatively speaking, than it was several years ago in standard. But that does not mean that skill is not needed to achieve high rank. If skill weren't required, everyone in the game would be rank 5 and up and brand new players could claim that they're just as good as pros. Obviously this is not the case and will never be the case; HS is not a slot machine. It sure as hell isn't chess, but it definitely is not a slot machine either.
Again, the best busted decks lists are available for everyone to play them. Why then isn't everyone getting an easy free Legend with them instead of being stuck between ranks 20-5?
If you ever reached Legend, and played it regularly around, say, at least between 600-100 over some period of time, you would notice a lot of names appearing over and over as your opponents.
These regularly reach top ranks with the same list you, me and the guy at rank 20 are using. The difference being just time spent is ridiculous, as they get Legend from Rank 4 in a matter of a few days, and yet people with the same lists can't in 30. With the added fact that, as the month passes by, the easier it becomes to climb as more people reached Legend and leave the ranks 4-1 grind battle.
Even very busy people can at least reach Dad Legend (Rank 5), with jobs, children to care and etc, and reach it regularly at the absolute minimum. And yet, even with the same busted decks and having full 30 days, people still can't reach Rank 5 as well.
Like I said before, like I knew you would say, you could remove all "Discover", "Random" words from cards all forms of mana cheating, and you would still cry because of luck of the draw and topdecks not favoring you. Even if you could choose specific cards to draw each turn, you would still whine about it in some way.
The last line is really cute. "Random arbitrary stats"... what really is solid knowledge and stats are rants like "99,9% of my losses are due to RNG only", conspiracy theories about matchmaking, and "just play busted decks to climb with a lot of time to spare, even though I can't myself because of RNG over 30 full days". Sure, sure... :)
Dude, rank 5-legend is a hard grind. Rank 2-legend is even harder and also stressed grind, cause if you lose 1 game, you need to win 2 in a raw to advance. Believe me , this is not fun at all if not on a winning streak.
About matchmaking: some of the pro players and me personally noticed tons of times the strange thing while laddering - when you are on the winning streak, and reached for example rank 5 , 5 stars, the game to jump to the next rank is like fighting a boss level. You always face counter deck. Every rank. So you start to think that this shit is rigged and you never reach legend. But even if this mm thing is true, why thousands of people are reaching legend every month? Because the power of randomness is never should be underrated. You just play your game and try to have fun, all in all games are all about fun.
First, some clarification. While I quoted you, I was also addressing other people talking about mana cheating meta. So when I mentioned Call to Arms, Spiteful Summoner, Cubelock, I was addressing mana cheating (I even specified saying "Now THAT was mana cheating"), though it looked a like quoted responde only to you. I know they aren't RNG, and that was mostly to Rag/Sylv effects, Yogg meta, but I mistakenly put RNG near other descriptions, so my bad.
Though I would like to address some points:
- Rag and Sylvanas were used in almost all decks. Except for Rogue, no one else is using Lackeys. Highlander Control Warrior, if we want to be really pedantic about it, and very tamely. You can play Boompistol to really slow them down, but most importantly, sure you can't prevent the lackey, but just like Rag and Sylv, you can destroy and silence whatever non-spell they generate.
- "Yog is nothing in the current meta". First, tournaments were played relying purely on Yog to bring opponents from 30 to 0 by casting random spells. They had to fundamentally nerf the card to stop casting when dead to put a stop to this and put the game back on track. You can't get more reliance on RNG to win than this.
- Spiteful decks did have RNG involved as well, and wasn't low impact, though I was mainly addressing the mana cheating of it. Highrolling Deathwing or lowrolling 5/5 C'thun on turns 5/6 decided games. And it wasn't the only element of RNG involved in those decks. A great part of it was also RNG'ing with Grand Archivist and what it hit from Free From Amber, Mind Control and Ultimate Infestation.
- You're mistaken with Shudderwock Shaman when you said "the order of the battlecries wasn't random". The order is totally random, and you could lose if Grumble procced before Saronite, and people lost even in tournaments with a bazillion battlecries played because of it. Wins/losses were basically decided on "I played a lot of battlecries, but let's pray Grumble doesn't proc before Saronite". A rare ocurrence? Perhaps, but you could never play it without this risk.
- About Dr.Boom and Elysiana. Dr.Boom pushed every other Control deck out simply because of it's near infinite Discover RNG generation. Plus Omega Assembly. Can't get more RNG when even what hero power you get is random! Some tournaments were 100% mirror matches, and of course, what decided them? Who Discovered better, and who got a better Elysiana card generation.
- About Conj.Mage: No, it wasn't just Conjurer's, and calling it a single card is... stretching it, since it was a Twinspell and at the apex of its power it also ran Magic Trick and Mana Cyclone to regularly get more and of course, for even more RNG. So they could conjure it 4 times, or maybe a dozen. And you could get full hands with random spells by Cyclone (including spells that discovered more spells). You were complaining about Lackeys, and this deck used none and it probably had more RNG involved.
- Hare Evolve Shaman didn't use as much RNG as Rogue? Rogue regularly kills you from the 0 cost cards bursting you more often than Lackey RNG. It was not only Hare Evolve, but Mogu + Mutate, and if all the evolve plays somehow failed, you still had the Quest for double lackey creation and double discoveries, then Shudderwock for another random board and random full hand refill. Rogue is no way comparable to this fiesta.
- Last point: I don't think you can put HL Hunter in the same spot as RNG fiesta as Gala Rogue and HL Mage just because of Zephrys and Dragonqueen (and the 3 mana discover a dragon). It's 3 out of 30 when these other two are pretty much half their decks. And HL mage far less popular than Rogue and with a far inferior winrate. So it's far less than 23%, and even if it was 23%, you can also make a case for not seeing them for the other 77% of your matches.
Besides, they both suffer with Hunter, Rogue also with Druid. Both Paladin and Warrior can blow them both out of air as well.
Also, important to notice, is that Galakrond Rogue and Highlander Mage are actually the only ones keeping Ressurrection Priest in check. Ress Priest can feast on Hunters, Warriors, Mech Paladins and even Druids, as their generation is way too low, or in the case of current Gala Warrior, Mech Paladin, Quest Hunter, non-existant.
But they can't cope with both the mana-cheating and the near infinite generation (or high value generation in case of Mage, plus Reno and Poly for their Ress Pool), even when they just replaced Quest with their own Galakrond.
The purpose of high extra value/resource generation strategies is there to exactly keep Control in check. Gut Rogue/Mage and Priest has its two worse matchups off the map while being favoured against the rest of the field, leading to an unbalanced meta.
Except for Shaman, every class is playable and has a decent deck. Rogue overall is barely keeping a 50% winrate despite all the RNG, and Mage is even below it, with an overall Tier 3 winrate.
That said, I don't disagree that they have a bit too much randomness in them, but I also recognize their purpose and that we had much worse than this.
I'm gonna repeat, Alex is not a discover. Discover is discover. Alex is a random value generator coupled with a swing component and a condition. Apologies if I misread your comments about Hunter.