Do people on this forum get hs information from this site alone? I can't even count how many times I see people say "in this aggro meta" when it clearly is not. Do you read the meta snapshot or any rankings or even track your games? It seems like most people just regurgitate bad information and sound stupid without even knowing it. Sorry, had to get this off my chest, so sick of hearing this. I swear some people have no idea what the word meta even means.
I agree with you to some extent. Some people do regurgitate what others tell them.
Just remember that there's a difference between "the overall meta" (difficult to track by anyone but Blizzard) and "the local meta" which is what a given player experiences on their server, around their rank, at a given point in the season, at a particular time of day. Local metas fluctuate wildly.
In general, I think the meta reports from Tempo Storm or Liquid'Hearth are written by players playing very high on the ladder, and may not reflect the lower ranks very accurately.
Also worth noting, it feels like losses to aggro "sting" a bit more because you generally struggle to stabilize and get angry that you only needed one more turn. It feels unfair. If you lose to a midrange or control deck, the losses are less memorable. So it seems like an aggro meta when you mostly remember your aggro losses.
What I'm saying is it clearly is not an aggro meta. Hunter is rare, of any decks in the top two tiers only tempo mage and the aggro version of Christmas tree pally are anything resembling aggro. But people keep saying stupid incorrect shit like "the meta is too fast". IF it's because people are playing at low ranks then why would they even be talking in the first place? Who wants advice from bad players?
What I'm saying is it clearly is not an aggro meta. Hunter is rare, of any decks in the top two tiers only tempo mage and the aggro version of Christmas tree pally are anything resembling aggro. But people keep saying stupid incorrect shit like "the meta is too fast". IF it's because people are playing at low ranks then why would they even be talking in the first place? Who wants advice from bad players?
Well for one, anyone is free to come here and speak their mind. There is no "you must be this rank!" requirement, nor would it be verifiable anyway. I could be struggling at rank 18 and nobody would know.
Second, there is plenty of aggro:
Patron can be played aggressively
Aggro Druid is super popular right now, even regular combo Druid tries to aggressively ramp, drop big minions, and win fast
Mech/Tempo Mage are aggressive
I've seen plenty of aggro Paladin (secret and non)
The occasional Zoo player
Hunters were common in the first week of the season
I wouldn't call it "an aggro meta," but I wouldn't fault someone for seeing mostly aggro and calling it such.
Do people on this forum get hs information from this site alone? I can't even count how many times I see people say "in this aggro meta" when it clearly is not. Do you read the meta snapshot or any rankings or even track your games? It seems like most people just regurgitate bad information and sound stupid without even knowing it. Sorry, had to get this off my chest, so sick of hearing this. I swear some people have no idea what the word meta even means.
I agree with you to some extent. Some people do regurgitate what others tell them.
Just remember that there's a difference between "the overall meta" (difficult to track by anyone but Blizzard) and "the local meta" which is what a given player experiences on their server, around their rank, at a given point in the season, at a particular time of day. Local metas fluctuate wildly.
In general, I think the meta reports from Tempo Storm or Liquid'Hearth are written by players playing very high on the ladder, and may not reflect the lower ranks very accurately.
Also worth noting, it feels like losses to aggro "sting" a bit more because you generally struggle to stabilize and get angry that you only needed one more turn. It feels unfair. If you lose to a midrange or control deck, the losses are less memorable. So it seems like an aggro meta when you mostly remember your aggro losses.
Feel free to add me if you play on NA! iMPose#1429
What I'm saying is it clearly is not an aggro meta. Hunter is rare, of any decks in the top two tiers only tempo mage and the aggro version of Christmas tree pally are anything resembling aggro. But people keep saying stupid incorrect shit like "the meta is too fast". IF it's because people are playing at low ranks then why would they even be talking in the first place? Who wants advice from bad players?
Well for one, anyone is free to come here and speak their mind. There is no "you must be this rank!" requirement, nor would it be verifiable anyway. I could be struggling at rank 18 and nobody would know.
Second, there is plenty of aggro:
I wouldn't call it "an aggro meta," but I wouldn't fault someone for seeing mostly aggro and calling it such.
Feel free to add me if you play on NA! iMPose#1429