You need to learn to recognize there's some people you shouldn't bother with. It's like trying to talk a racist into equality.
Interesting analogy, and one you have entirely backwards. In this discussion, I'm the one trying explain why black lives matter. But I can't be bothered to try anymore, they have made up their mind and there is no room for reason.
It's not OP at all, it's very inconsistent. Most decent control decks counter it.
Consistency has nothing to do with it. Imagine situation where referee rolls the dice before the game. One dot means team A won. Two dots means team B won. Any other result means normal play. What are the chances of getting 1 or 2 dots? Not that big, but you think such a system would be fair?
Consistency has everything to do with making a high roll dependent deck fair. And you're suggesting that the high roll isn't counterable, which it is. Priest pretty consistently beats Druid. I'd imagine Bomb Warrior does well against it too.
So you think this (first game) is acceptable?
Druid won coin toss as early as turn 3 and the game was over. That's fine, right? So why wouldn't Blizzard just print a card with such mechanic: If you draw it before turn 4, you win the game? It's basically the same thing, game decided by RNG.
You're using a worst case scenario and implying that it's the norm, which it isn't. There are plenty of decks that go off with seemingly nothing you can do about it if the cards come out exactly right.
I get the impression that you have made your mind up that it's especially oppressive (it's not) and no amount of logic or historical evidence to the contrary will change your mind. And I have no interest in arguing with you about it.
It's not OP at all, it's very inconsistent. Most decent control decks counter it.
Consistency has nothing to do with it. Imagine situation where referee rolls the dice before the game. One dot means team A won. Two dots means team B won. Any other result means normal play. What are the chances of getting 1 or 2 dots? Not that big, but you think such a system would be fair?
Consistency has everything to do with making a high roll dependent deck fair. And you're suggesting that the high roll isn't counterable, which it is. Priest pretty consistently beats Druid. I'd imagine Bomb Warrior does well against it too.
Interesting analogy, and one you have entirely backwards. In this discussion, I'm the one trying explain why black lives matter. But I can't be bothered to try anymore, they have made up their mind and there is no room for reason.
You're using a worst case scenario and implying that it's the norm, which it isn't. There are plenty of decks that go off with seemingly nothing you can do about it if the cards come out exactly right.
I get the impression that you have made your mind up that it's especially oppressive (it's not) and no amount of logic or historical evidence to the contrary will change your mind. And I have no interest in arguing with you about it.
Consistency has everything to do with making a high roll dependent deck fair. And you're suggesting that the high roll isn't counterable, which it is. Priest pretty consistently beats Druid. I'd imagine Bomb Warrior does well against it too.
It's not OP at all, it's very inconsistent. Most decent control decks counter it.