Maybe i just can't remember to the last rotation but it seems like this is the most broken the game has ever been. And whats unfortunate about it is it's mostly the sets from this last year which means they will be around a while longer. I think it's quite obvious why members of team 5 having been jumping ship over the last few years is that hearthstone peaked creatively. and it's not necessarily the fault of the current designers it's that they have to continually come up with new ideas and sometimes recycling old ones, within those new ideas though have been some of the most busted (when i say busted i probably just mean really powerful). Who know's i could be completely wrong, when the rotation happens maybe some decks will take a hit that we didn't expect but it seems to me that we will be seeing 7 plus zero cost cards a game and a bunch of cheap 4/4 boosted minions for a while longer, not to mention lackey's capable of producing miracles themselves. Another issue is will the next 3 expansions be really weak because of the major power creep in the last 3 expansions?Who knows? In the end I will still keep playing this game and trying to create something new that can succeed in the ladder.
Side Note: Maybe what i want more than anything is the developers to explain why certain decks are healthy for the game or don't need to nerf cards when the community disagrees at times. I believe our community's suggestions don't go ignored all the time but it seems like when we ask for change it comes too late.
Another side note: If the player base would stop playing follow the leader (streamers or pro player) and come up with their own decks that would be great.
The only problem with the current meta is the return of hunters. Nothing makes this game less enjoyable than playing against facerunning hunters over and over and over. It makes for a very stale meta where you will just have a very limited pool of viable decls because hunters lock out so many decks.
It’s the same on all ranks and in legend. Just a hunter fest.
I can’t remember which expansion it was, but for like 2-3 expansions last year hunters suffered and you never saw them. It made for the most diverse and most fun meta we’ve ever had.
in conclussion: They should keep hunters weak or implement tournament style bans for ladder play.
Just cuz you dont like Hunter doesn't mean it needs to be nerfed to the ground. Im enjoying the dragon Hunter and hate res priest. But im not complaining, cuz i run into a bad matchup from time to time. Git gud.
The only problem with the current meta is the return of hunters. Nothing makes this game less enjoyable than playing against facerunning hunters over and over and over. It makes for a very stale meta where you will just have a very limited pool of viable decls because hunters lock out so many decks.
It’s the same on all ranks and in legend. Just a hunter fest.
I can’t remember which expansion it was, but for like 2-3 expansions last year hunters suffered and you never saw them. It made for the most diverse and most fun meta we’ve ever had.
in conclussion: They should keep hunters weak or implement tournament style bans for ladder play.
Hunters never suffered. Either you mean year of the raven where Deathstalker Rexxar was still in standard or this year, where we had highlander hunter the whole time. Or do you mean mech hunter from year of the raven? The meta where magnetic meant you couldn’t let them have a 0/2 on the board. Hunter has always been and always will be strong.
Hunter is just a waste of time to play against cause u know ur going to lose by turn 5 people complaining bout ganklord rogue as stong deck to is laughable.
The only problem with the current meta is the return of hunters. Nothing makes this game less enjoyable than playing against facerunning hunters over and over and over. It makes for a very stale meta where you will just have a very limited pool of viable decls because hunters lock out so many decks.
It’s the same on all ranks and in legend. Just a hunter fest.
I can’t remember which expansion it was, but for like 2-3 expansions last year hunters suffered and you never saw them. It made for the most diverse and most fun meta we’ve ever had.
in conclussion: They should keep hunters weak or implement tournament style bans for ladder play.
Hunters never suffered. Either you mean year of the raven where Deathstalker Rexxar was still in standard or this year, where we had highlander hunter the whole time. Or do you mean mech hunter from year of the raven? The meta where magnetic meant you couldn’t let them have a 0/2 on the board. Hunter has always been and always will be strong.
Not sure if new to the game (well, or just 1 year into it), but I started during Year of the kraken and always thought it was in a pretty bad position during that year. Heck, I was even surprised when someone told me about old Face Hunter.
Did you know that there are cards tech or decks that can counter against a certain archetype. You just have to think about the moves that the opponent could play, the cards that you could use on your deck and plan your strategy. Can you play with a no-meta deck and reach a high rank? Yes, just consider the above and the meta.
The only problem with the current meta is the return of hunters. Nothing makes this game less enjoyable than playing against facerunning hunters over and over and over. It makes for a very stale meta where you will just have a very limited pool of viable decls because hunters lock out so many decks.
It’s the same on all ranks and in legend. Just a hunter fest.
I can’t remember which expansion it was, but for like 2-3 expansions last year hunters suffered and you never saw them. It made for the most diverse and most fun meta we’ve ever had.
in conclussion: They should keep hunters weak or implement tournament style bans for ladder play.
Disagree completely. Whats annoying is fucking Rogues and their unlimited card draw & lackey generation. They NEVER run out of cards or answers to everything. They sap your best guys, They always end up getting whatever lackey they need to stop lethal or get rid of your big threat. They somehow manage to keep the board fairly clean despite Rogue players whining about removal. then they Shadwstep the BS cards and/or magically discover another 3-4 Eviscerates. Hunter is fine - you can at keast fight back and not waste 30 minutes playing againt a Rogue where you're going to lose anyways.
Oh and Rogue is more braindead than anything - it makes facehunter seem "hard" to play by comparision.
Hunter is just a waste of time to play against cause u know ur going to lose by turn 5 people complaining bout ganklord rogue as stong deck to is laughable.
"Losing by turn 5" is the opposite of "wasting time". :)
Hunter is just a waste of time to play against cause u know ur going to lose by turn 5 people complaining bout ganklord rogue as stong deck to is laughable.
if you lose by turn 5 it is not a waste of time, is it?
They always end up getting whatever lackey they need to stop lethal or get rid of your big threat. They somehow manage to keep the board fairly clean despite Rogue players whining about removal.
My big issue with the game state right now is the prevalence of Galakrond decks. There always have been face hunters, but I think the Galakrond decks are on a level close to the Genn/Baku days, in terms of their appearance.
the bigger issue I think is that the Galakrond decks proscribe any other gameplay that isn’t related to Galakrond (Priest is sort of the exception, but then it’s the least played Galakrond deck) For being a game that is so excited to make these crazy random OMG moments, the devs spend a lot of effort making these cards that invite a very specific kind of play and do not support creative builds.
The only problem with the current meta is the return of hunters. Nothing makes this game less enjoyable than playing against facerunning hunters over and over and over. It makes for a very stale meta where you will just have a very limited pool of viable decls because hunters lock out so many decks.
It’s the same on all ranks and in legend. Just a hunter fest.
I can’t remember which expansion it was, but for like 2-3 expansions last year hunters suffered and you never saw them. It made for the most diverse and most fun meta we’ve ever had.
in conclussion: They should keep hunters weak or implement tournament style bans for ladder play.
Hunters never suffered. Either you mean year of the raven where Deathstalker Rexxar was still in standard or this year, where we had highlander hunter the whole time. Or do you mean mech hunter from year of the raven? The meta where magnetic meant you couldn’t let them have a 0/2 on the board. Hunter has always been and always will be strong.
Hunter was complete garbage during the Gadgetzan meta. Zalae tried to reach legend while playing hunter all season and he couldn't get higher than rank 3.
Side Note: Maybe what i want more than anything is the developers to explain why certain decks are healthy for the game or don't need to nerf cards when the community disagrees at times. I believe our community's suggestions don't go ignored all the time but it seems like when we ask for change it comes too late.
Just read the responses here, and you see why this is pretty much impossible. The "community" is not one organised bunch that agrees on something being "not healthy" that the developers could respond to. There's ALWAYS someone complaining about something, and EVERYTHING is complained about. I cannot even recall a deck of recent time that has not provoked someone to start a thread in the direction of "this is unhealthy" or "this is just broken" or "this is super unfun" or "this limits design space" or whatever crap reason someone comes up with.
Look at it! One guy here is saying "The only problem with the current meta is the return of hunters." and the next guy says "Whats annoying is fucking Rogues". Just give it some time and you'll see every single class and mechanic mentioned here. Except maybe Freeze Shaman.
The developers look at some data and then go by intuition what should or should not get nerfed/roated. There's no way to go with community suggestions, because they can't release a balance patch every 12 hours. They released a balance patch within a week after DoD got released, and another just a few weeks later, and to some people, this was not fast enough, because clearly "this should have never been released". The complaining usually starts before cards even come out. For example, read the card discussion for Frizz Kindleroost.
Anyway, as for how "limited" their design spectrum is, I'm sure that they can still do a lot more. Of course it's possible that Highlander and Galakrond decks will continue to dominate after the rotation, but we have been at that point before where everyone was wondering what could possibly beat the best decks, and most of the time, new cards have changed things. Un'goro had new decks even though everyone was convinced it would all be Jade Druid and Pirate Warrior, Witchwood brought new decks when everyone thought it would all be Deathknights and Cubelock, etc. Sure enough, there were also decks that ended up too powerful, or some new mechanic ended up being too strong, but don't be so pessimistic that it's just gonna continue like now. Some expansions were rather weak, yes, but even the worst sets ended up having some influence, even Rastakhan's Rumble.
And that's before we consider that they could improve the game system fundamentally. For example, imagine that a card could have 2 inputs instead of 1, like, instead of having Twin Tyrant hit 2 targets at random, you could select the two targets on the board. Or how about selecting discards? How about actively selecting a minion that gets pulled from your deck by Strength in Numbers? How about spells that have an effect across multiple turns? Clearly super broken bla bla, I know, but if they ever dare to make the game more complex, and allow more player input, there's a whole new world of possible designs to explore.
And as for meta solutions and the problem of "power creep": It's enough if new decks are good against what we are currently playing, in order to succeed. They don't need to necessarily be better than anything we've ever seen. The next expansion doesn't need to feature the most powerful cards of all time, just cards that support playstyles that beat decks that people play right now.
Maybe i just can't remember to the last rotation but it seems like this is the most broken the game has ever been. And whats unfortunate about it is it's mostly the sets from this last year which means they will be around a while longer. I think it's quite obvious why members of team 5 having been jumping ship over the last few years is that hearthstone peaked creatively. and it's not necessarily the fault of the current designers it's that they have to continually come up with new ideas and sometimes recycling old ones, within those new ideas though have been some of the most busted (when i say busted i probably just mean really powerful). Who know's i could be completely wrong, when the rotation happens maybe some decks will take a hit that we didn't expect but it seems to me that we will be seeing 7 plus zero cost cards a game and a bunch of cheap 4/4 boosted minions for a while longer, not to mention lackey's capable of producing miracles themselves. Another issue is will the next 3 expansions be really weak because of the major power creep in the last 3 expansions?Who knows? In the end I will still keep playing this game and trying to create something new that can succeed in the ladder.
Side Note: Maybe what i want more than anything is the developers to explain why certain decks are healthy for the game or don't need to nerf cards when the community disagrees at times. I believe our community's suggestions don't go ignored all the time but it seems like when we ask for change it comes too late.
Another side note: If the player base would stop playing follow the leader (streamers or pro player) and come up with their own decks that would be great.
Google search: Is Hearthstone free to play?
There have definently been stronger Metas. Don't know what you're on about.
The only problem with the current meta is the return of hunters. Nothing makes this game less enjoyable than playing against facerunning hunters over and over and over. It makes for a very stale meta where you will just have a very limited pool of viable decls because hunters lock out so many decks.
It’s the same on all ranks and in legend. Just a hunter fest.
I can’t remember which expansion it was, but for like 2-3 expansions last year hunters suffered and you never saw them. It made for the most diverse and most fun meta we’ve ever had.
in conclussion: They should keep hunters weak or implement tournament style bans for ladder play.
Just cuz you dont like Hunter doesn't mean it needs to be nerfed to the ground. Im enjoying the dragon Hunter and hate res priest. But im not complaining, cuz i run into a bad matchup from time to time. Git gud.
Hunters never suffered. Either you mean year of the raven where Deathstalker Rexxar was still in standard or this year, where we had highlander hunter the whole time. Or do you mean mech hunter from year of the raven? The meta where magnetic meant you couldn’t let them have a 0/2 on the board. Hunter has always been and always will be strong.
Hunter is just a waste of time to play against cause u know ur going to lose by turn 5 people complaining bout ganklord rogue as stong deck to is laughable.
“Ganklord” lol
Not sure if new to the game (well, or just 1 year into it), but I started during Year of the kraken and always thought it was in a pretty bad position during that year. Heck, I was even surprised when someone told me about old Face Hunter.
Click here to see my custom pirate adventure, The Treasures of VanCleef! https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/fan-creations/240766-expansion-competition-the-treasures-of-vancleef
Lol why bother with card creation , just print broken mana cheat cards and endless value discovers = call it new exp with fancy words
https://www.hearthpwn.com/decks/1333477-xskarmalock
Did you know that there are cards tech or decks that can counter against a certain archetype. You just have to think about the moves that the opponent could play, the cards that you could use on your deck and plan your strategy. Can you play with a no-meta deck and reach a high rank? Yes, just consider the above and the meta.
Disagree completely. Whats annoying is fucking Rogues and their unlimited card draw & lackey generation. They NEVER run out of cards or answers to everything. They sap your best guys, They always end up getting whatever lackey they need to stop lethal or get rid of your big threat. They somehow manage to keep the board fairly clean despite Rogue players whining about removal. then they Shadwstep the BS cards and/or magically discover another 3-4 Eviscerates. Hunter is fine - you can at keast fight back and not waste 30 minutes playing againt a Rogue where you're going to lose anyways.
Oh and Rogue is more braindead than anything - it makes facehunter seem "hard" to play by comparision.
"Losing by turn 5" is the opposite of "wasting time". :)
if you lose by turn 5 it is not a waste of time, is it?
Dead but dreaming
Can someone please tell me where the Face Hunters are? I haven't seen one in a while, and I miss making them run out of steam and concede.
I had to switch to face hunter because I got so incredibly sick of rogue. And I really dislike playing hunter, but I hate rogue all that much more
They always end up getting whatever lackey they need to stop lethal or get rid of your big threat. They somehow manage to keep the board fairly clean despite Rogue players whining about removal.
My big issue with the game state right now is the prevalence of Galakrond decks. There always have been face hunters, but I think the Galakrond decks are on a level close to the Genn/Baku days, in terms of their appearance.
the bigger issue I think is that the Galakrond decks proscribe any other gameplay that isn’t related to Galakrond (Priest is sort of the exception, but then it’s the least played Galakrond deck) For being a game that is so excited to make these crazy random OMG moments, the devs spend a lot of effort making these cards that invite a very specific kind of play and do not support creative builds.
Hunter was complete garbage during the Gadgetzan meta. Zalae tried to reach legend while playing hunter all season and he couldn't get higher than rank 3.
Just read the responses here, and you see why this is pretty much impossible. The "community" is not one organised bunch that agrees on something being "not healthy" that the developers could respond to. There's ALWAYS someone complaining about something, and EVERYTHING is complained about. I cannot even recall a deck of recent time that has not provoked someone to start a thread in the direction of "this is unhealthy" or "this is just broken" or "this is super unfun" or "this limits design space" or whatever crap reason someone comes up with.
Look at it! One guy here is saying "The only problem with the current meta is the return of hunters." and the next guy says "Whats annoying is fucking Rogues". Just give it some time and you'll see every single class and mechanic mentioned here. Except maybe Freeze Shaman.
The developers look at some data and then go by intuition what should or should not get nerfed/roated. There's no way to go with community suggestions, because they can't release a balance patch every 12 hours. They released a balance patch within a week after DoD got released, and another just a few weeks later, and to some people, this was not fast enough, because clearly "this should have never been released". The complaining usually starts before cards even come out. For example, read the card discussion for Frizz Kindleroost.
Anyway, as for how "limited" their design spectrum is, I'm sure that they can still do a lot more. Of course it's possible that Highlander and Galakrond decks will continue to dominate after the rotation, but we have been at that point before where everyone was wondering what could possibly beat the best decks, and most of the time, new cards have changed things. Un'goro had new decks even though everyone was convinced it would all be Jade Druid and Pirate Warrior, Witchwood brought new decks when everyone thought it would all be Deathknights and Cubelock, etc. Sure enough, there were also decks that ended up too powerful, or some new mechanic ended up being too strong, but don't be so pessimistic that it's just gonna continue like now. Some expansions were rather weak, yes, but even the worst sets ended up having some influence, even Rastakhan's Rumble.
And that's before we consider that they could improve the game system fundamentally. For example, imagine that a card could have 2 inputs instead of 1, like, instead of having Twin Tyrant hit 2 targets at random, you could select the two targets on the board. Or how about selecting discards? How about actively selecting a minion that gets pulled from your deck by Strength in Numbers? How about spells that have an effect across multiple turns? Clearly super broken bla bla, I know, but if they ever dare to make the game more complex, and allow more player input, there's a whole new world of possible designs to explore.
And as for meta solutions and the problem of "power creep": It's enough if new decks are good against what we are currently playing, in order to succeed. They don't need to necessarily be better than anything we've ever seen. The next expansion doesn't need to feature the most powerful cards of all time, just cards that support playstyles that beat decks that people play right now.
Yeah, I remember that meta, didn't help that Shaman, Rogue and Warrior were better as agro classes than hunter thanks to Patches the Pirate
Also, Hunter was low tier during Karazhan after the Call of the Wild nerf.