Hearthpwn

Quote from berat249 >>

Quote from Asylum_Rhapsody >>

Unless you're playing a fatigue deck, you want as few cards as legal because the more cards you have in your deck the less consistent it becomes. That's how it works for every other card game and Hearthstone would be no different.

Yep i agree with you thats why i didnt say it should be 45 or 60. 30-60 min-max in this way everybody can play in their style. And im pretty sure that there are a lot of players who find 30 limit is not enough for them just like me. İ mean even 35 or 40 can make difference even 1 card sometimes is important and you cant cut from deck so you have to choose which one you gonna cut. Especially in reno decks i need 1 certain card in deck but there is no card unnecessary so i cant play it and i lost because of it. İf i cut sthing and put it i lost a lot of because of cutting the other. Sometimes even 1 is also important.

I don't like playing against cancer aggro decks, but I would neither like a considerable perecentage of my games against other control players to last 1 hour or even more, LOL, you have to be kidding...

Quote from berat249 >>

İf you are not netdecking player you probably understand what im saying. When you create a new deck list you realize that there are a lot of cards cant find a space in deck just because of 30 card limit. This is a huge advantage for aggro players because games are not long for them at turn 10 they won or lost. But people who loves playing control/midrange deck have problem creating deck with 30 card. İf we have a limit that minimum 30 card and maximum X card it would be much more better i think. What do you guys think? 30 card limit is enough or not?

Agree strongly with ganashal, except I would add to the final paragraph by saying that the difficulty you are experiencing in "fitting everything in" is actually the difficulty of knowing what to cut to minimise your deck size.  It just so happens that in HS the min deck size is also the max deck size; if that weren't true you'd still be trying to streamline your deck down to as small as possible.  If the max deck size were 50, the strongest control decks would still run 30 cards, and if you were trying to make the best possible deck you would still have to make the difficult choices you are describing.

I think that would even be true for actual fatigue decks, as you would still prefer to have the consistency to the weight.

I think you never played Magic or any other card game before HS. Doesnt matter the Card limit, you Will allways have trouble to choose "the best" Card to your deck. And every Card game has an aggro type, with 60 cards, with 40, with 80, the number its not an advantage to aggro players 

When it comes to these type of card games, more cards is usually not better.  As people have tried to point out, every card you add decreases the chance that you will get the card you need when you need it. 

I've been playing CCG'S since MTG first came out, and one thing I've learned is that it's usually not possible to build a deck that has an answer for everything in it and still win consistently.   Instead of trying to counter everything you need to come up with a game plan that's designed to counter your most likely opponents while keeping your win condition on the board long enough to do the job.  

If you like control/midrange, there is a buff/taunt warrior deck posted on this  site that is actually really good right now against most of the agro decks.  Just don't be surprised if you get eaten alive by jade decks, since we're in a paper/rock/scissors kind of meta right now.

Quote from berat249 >>

İf you are not netdecking player you probably understand what im saying. When you create a new deck list you realize that there are a lot of cards cant find a space in deck just because of 30 card limit. This is a huge advantage for aggro players because games are not long for them at turn 10 they won or lost. But people who loves playing control/midrange deck have problem creating deck with 30 card. İf we have a limit that minimum 30 card and maximum X card it would be much more better i think. What do you guys think? 30 card limit is enough or not?

I think this type of question has been answered several times in the past. The reason you want as few cards in your deck is, consistency. 

Quote from jferrante831 >>

Quote from berat249 >>

İf you are not netdecking player you probably understand what im saying. When you create a new deck list you realize that there are a lot of cards cant find a space in deck just because of 30 card limit. This is a huge advantage for aggro players because games are not long for them at turn 10 they won or lost. But people who loves playing control/midrange deck have problem creating deck with 30 card. İf we have a limit that minimum 30 card and maximum X card it would be much more better i think. What do you guys think? 30 card limit is enough or not?

 I agree with this a lot. A play a lot of priest, and there are some great cards I would love to use in my reno deck, though I find room for them in my midrange deck, (talonpriest, mana geode, songstealer) to be consistent against the meta, which is too bad

As far as competitive-legal decks I don't think there's any reason to make a flexible deck size (increasing/decreasing the set deck size is a different story, but I'm personally just fine with 30 since we're not running lands or anything); I do think the deckbuilder should let you add in more than 30 however since I prefer overbuilding and then pruning, even if it's 5-10 cards over. 

The other thing is that it's not a good thing you can't fit every card you want in a deck; being able to analyze what cards are essential is one of the biggest aspects of any deckbuilding game, and most likely you're always going to have the problem of not being able to fit in what you'd like. 

I think removing the max is fine, since any deck that wants to be competitive will not go over 30.

If anything people would want decks with 20 cards if they had the option, not more.

I think if they ever do increase the deck size, I honestly think it shouldn't go any higher than 32, like  how a generic deck of cards irl is 52, that way we can fit in those extra 2 cards people feel they are missing, and not completely overthrow the balance of the game, With the introduction of so many new cards, I can see the desire of trying them out without losing your faves, so despite it seeming minuscule I feel 32 card decks would scratch the itch for many without creating an unbalanced mess. Thoughts?

Dear OP

Thanks for creating this topic. This is exactly what topics in here should be about!!

However I voted 30 cards because that us my opinion. I find it very, very interesting that fatigue is always lurking there in the distance compared to most other card games where it doesn’t feel like it is part of the game. 30 is perfect because fatigue rarely happens but happens sometimes.