Hearthpwn

As always, 1 single card is ruining the game. Zilliax has been such a powerful card thats in EVERY DECK and it can ltrly make or break the game. 
Such a horrible design and im sick of it

It is not a horrible design. It’s actually a really good design but it has become oppressive because of the support. It will be nerfed soon. Just because something is good doesn’t mean it’s killing the game. 

far worst problems than zillax imo

hes honestly the coolest legendary theyve ever put out 

Zilliax isn't one single card, he's a whole bunch. Comparing him to any other card isn't really valid.

Since he came out I've used:

stealth + double attack (mech rogue)
battlecry double + keywords (highlander warrior)
reborn elusive + keywords (res warrior, druid, control priest)
+1/+1 costs 1 less per minion (aggro decks)
deathrattle: shuffle into your deck (In some decks that probably didn't work)

The only thing these cards have in common is their name, tribal tag, and the fact that you can't use them with each other. They go in different decks because they're different cards. 

Some would have worked as standalone legendaries but then you'd have to buy more than one.

I bet one or both of the Elusive reborn or the multiple keywords module will be nerfed again, but Zilliax being versatile and fitting in many decks is great for players, that's small subset of adaptable cards working as intended.   

Its not zilliax only, its the entire meta. EVERY tier 1 and tier 2 deck is pure horror trash. When they nerf stuff new trash pops up to take over because the power creep is gone way too far.

I kinda liked handlock from classic and naxxramas or an older control warrior that was actually a counter to freeze mage.

It’s got nothing to do with power creep, there are always stronger decks than others and there are plenty of counters to all decks. Been the case for years and in other TCGs. 

It has a lot to do with powercreep but I take the sentiment about new decks. 

There's nothing more fun in a card game than being dead by turn 4 having drawn less than 30% of you deck.

Sadly I think the solution is more complicated than "nerf a few cards", because there will be new offensive decks that will kill you by turn 5 instead.  Painlock is already on the fringes and that's an extremely fun deck to play against.

I genuinely think Blizz has lost sight of what makes a game fun and has instead tried to make a game that's addictive.  Shame really.

Quote from Moonsorrow >>

It’s got nothing to do with power creep, there are always stronger decks than others and there are plenty of counters to all decks. Been the case for years and in other TCGs. 

The more powerful cards and card combos become the more impact they have on the game. From a scalar perspective the game is moving closer to "1 mana: you win the game".

The hero power is designed to classic powerlevel, while the cards have become better, So if you heropower now because you missed out on draws, it is too slow (more so than in the past), this is raising draw-RNG.

Ziliax was fine, until they decided to give Druid and Warrior 16 mana and 10 ways to resurrect Ziliax. Also its stupid that because of reborn, Ziliax dies twice.

The deck is basicly the cancer res priest deck from wild some years ago. Just that its even stronger and in standard lol.

But guess a nerf comes soon. Makes every other deck unplayable.

I think there's a bunch of clever ways to nerf the elusive-reborn Zilliax/hydration station/Inventor Boom combo without killing it as a card, and I hope that's what they do.  As a stand-alone card Zilliax with reborn module doesn't really represent a win condition and it wasn't a major problem before this expac.  He doesn't even apply much pressure on board. 

What he does do is give you a way back against aggro and maybe that's OK.  Aggro reaching turn 9 against a control deck really should mean that the aggro deck is likely to lose.  Facing 40 Zilliaxes in a game from as early as turn 5 isn't OK though...(but neither are the stupidly aggressive aggro decks that kill you by turn 4 and have a board every turn).

Truth is, it always comes down to the players.

If they ever printed a 1-cost 30/30 minion with charge and “starts in your opening hand”, as an April’s fool’s joke or as part of a social experiment, most players would play it, no questions about it.

And that says it all about the silliness of nerfs.

As long as the moral compass of this game’s community is as shallow as it is, there’s nothing nerfs will achieve.

period

I don't know if it's an issue related to morality but yeah, there's certainly a subset (or majority) of the community always on the lookout to play whatever's the most broken for easy wins. 

It's hardly surprising that most people play what's best.  People want to win - winning is fun (certainly more fun that losing all the time). 

That's why it's the Devs. responsiblity to ensure that the game is balanced and that there aren't these outliying decks which obliterate all other strategies.  The players will always use whats available to them.  Blizz have said in the past that they want to let the players "solve" the meta, and that's fine (to a point).  What it leads to is (imo) even less fun.  Tier 1 deck and teir 1 counter deck become the mainstay of what you see on ladder.

It's a shame really.  It used to be possible to play home-brew decks and have a decent chance of winning enough games for it to be fun.  That in turn makes the game more fun overall, because instead of seeing the same three decks you actually face some variety.  It's made even worse by the consistency decks have (and have had for a long time), so every game plays out exactly the same.  It more likely than not that warriors have Zilliax in hand by turn 3 (after playing one of the two tutors in deck that draw him).  Same with Rogues and Drilly the Kid.  That degree of consistency isn't good in a card game. 

I would also add that a lot of the problems with the game were highly predictable.  Blizz creates cards that look obviously broken in combination with other cards, and shock-horror,  they end up broken.  Brann and hydration station are perfect examples (as is concierge, though this is more problematic due to the interaction with the tourist mechanic). 

Inventor Boom - summon different mechs
Hydration Station - summon different highest cost taunt minions, cost 8 > cost 9 if not enough
Concierge - "but not less than 1"
Dark Pact - cost 1 > cost 3
Virus Module (reborn one) - 4 health > 2 health OR move the elusive to another module perhaps

BOOM BOOM BOOM healthy (-ish) meta

I disagree. It's kind of a chicken and the egg thing. 

''It's hardly surprising that most people play what's best.  People want to win - winning is fun (certainly more fun that losing all the time). ''

Kibler wins a lot of games, he's a really good card player. I've been watching him for quite a while now and I've never seen him play what's most broken in a meta. He tries to create his own deck which generally speaking are 'weaker' than what you can find on HSReplay. He still wins, a lot. But he doesn't default to playing Chalice Druid or Zilliax Warrior. He takes risks, tries things and provides his opponents with different gameplay experiences. He's the kind of player the community could use. He was asked on twitch ''Instead of playing meme decks you should play netdecks to reach high legend'' he replied: ''I don't give a shit to reach high legend, I just want to play fun and original decks.'' Sure, you could argue that the reason why players don't try anything is because the cards have been designed to discourage that. I would agree with that.

Like that other user said, if they printed a card ''Battlecry: win the game'' I guarantee you the same subset of players would play it. It would kill the game and suck the fun out of it but they would anyway, because they're desperate to win. 

When I watch games at legend (I haven't played this expansion) against pro players like Kibler, you see players at legend who play like bronze players with misplay over misplay over misplay. If it weren't for Chalice Druid, they'd still be banging their head at Silver 5. Legend should be for exceptionally good players who can consistently adapt to the game, I can't help but feel it's not much of an achievement now. 

''It's a shame really.  It used to be possible to play home-brew decks and have a decent chance of winning enough games for it to be fun. ''

When was that, which meta? 

''That in turn makes the game more fun overall, because instead of seeing the same three decks you actually face some variety.''

I couldn't agree more. I think it's combination of both, players who are desperate to win who wouldn't struggle to win five games a week without Zilliax Warrior, Lamplighter Rogue or Chalice Druid and also the game being designed that way.

I don't consider the dev particularly good at what they do, despite being told by streamers and Blizzard how amazing they are over and over again, but is it even possible to have a varied meta? Won't the community systematically constantly refresh HSReplay and copy/paste the three same deck on the top of their screen?

To be fair, I would sort of expect to have a single deck being played each meta, the one on top of the winning rate but we haven't quite reached that point yet. 

Could more cards in a deck (40/50?) increase variety and lead to more diverse games?

To sum up, I agree with you that the game isn't especially well designed but at the end of the day, the problem isn't just the dev, the community is part of the issue as well. 

Quote from Klaytonio >>

Inventor Boom - summon different mechs
Hydration Station - summon different highest cost taunt minions, cost 8 > cost 9 if not enough
Concierge - "but not less than 1"
Dark Pact - cost 1 > cost 3
Virus Module (reborn one) - 4 health > 2 health OR move the elusive to another module perhaps

BOOM BOOM BOOM healthy (-ish) meta

 Even just the different word being added would solve 99% of the zilliax belly acheying, but the problem is if (and when) zill is removed from the meta. The meta will get even worse with the turn 4 aggro.

Defensive: remove reborn

Aggro: limit discount to only your minions

Maybe compensate with a little mana discount in both cases 

Problems solved

Yep and the same people who complain every time they lose games will be back. ‘Oh my god I never win with my meme priest HS just isn’t cool anymore’ but what they’ll really say is entirely different. 

@Zizka - I'm not sure I follow.  You seem to be disagreeing with me, but your comments seem to agree with me?

To reply to your Kilbler part - I agree. Kibler can make good innovative decks that work well enough (for him).  But I think that comparison is slightly disingenuous if you look at what I said (about the player base in general).

Kibler is literally a proffesional card game player who's main objective when he streams is to entertain his audience (you stated this yourself - he's not interested in high legend).  That's a source of income (one of them at least) so he probably needs that as the focus for his decks.  The people that watch Kibler do so (I suspect) precisely because he doesn't play the current meta decks.  You know what Kibler (the successful pro card-gamer) doesn't tend to do?  Hit top 1000 legend (at least not in the streams I watch - I may be wrong here).  Now, that's not a criticism - I really like watching Kibler.  But it does reflect the fact that a pro card-gamer making his own decks cant break the current meta decks.

What chance do you think your average player has?  They may not have all the cards, they almost certainly dont have the same time and, I will say with some confidence, they don't have the skill.  To make up for that they use the "best" net decks. And based on what I see on the ladder, 90% of people do, because above all else they want to win.  Again - this is where the Devs should step in.  In a world where net-decking is always going to happen (and cant really be stopped) playing the decks should require some skill. 

Regarding your comment on home-brew decks.  It really did used to be viable to get to legend (or at least high diamond) using home-brew decks.  I don't know exactly when it changed, but it's been eroded over the last 3 of 4 expacs. to the point that it's basically near-impossible now if you have a decent mmr.  All you face is the same tier 1/2 decks which leads to the next point...

Finally - to your comment on a varied meta. I think it is possible, but not with the current design approach.  There will always be a "best" deck, but it doens't always have to be so much better than everything except the counter deck.  We've moved into a rock-paper-stone type game where one deck counters another with some certainty.  That doesn't lead to a varied meta.  Just deck and counter deck (and mirror).  If the Tier 1 decks could sometimes be beaten by other novel decks (or by playing better than your opponent) we would end up with more diversity in the game.  We would see decks like "Big Paladin" or "Control priest" (much to peoples disgust) or "Hunter" (seriously - has anyone seen a hunter recently) because you wouldn't be destined to lose every single game (except when you meet someone similarly hopeful with their own deck). 

Maybe it's a futile aspiration tainted with rose coloured glasses, but I don't remember the old days of Hearthstone being quite so polarised in the match-ups (with the excpetion of freeze mage vs control warrior).  It can be done...the Dev's are choosing not to in the cards they design.