Hearthpwn

Quote from dedoporno >>Quote from Splatacleze Not only that. More often than not these decks are on the cheap side so they are more accessible to newer players with lesser collections. Everyone wants to play a competitive deck but no everyone can afford the premium ones.

Regarding the level of involvement the developers will have to come up with all kinds of complex algorithms which probably doesn't make much sense business wise considering they are aiming for more casual and faster games anyway.

Rounds played or match length alone is nowhere near a good solution. I doubt anyone would choose 30 minutes worth of roping just to lose because of other annoying factors such as RNG or random disconnects.

I understand why a lot of people play super quick aggro decks: They either want to rank fast or mine gold. I'm not saying that is a good (or bad) reason; I'm just saying I understand why people do it, but what if Blizzard reworked how it awarded gold and ranks?

WHAT?!?! you say...

My suggestion: Rather than just a straight: 1 win = one star. 3 stars = 10 gold, what if there was a calculation that went into how involved the game was that determined how many stars you got? That could be the case for gold, but it could also work toward laddering.

Right now, there is a clear disincentive to play longer matches. I think Blizzard should tweak the reward system to say: sure, you can play fast games, but you'll get greater reward if you play a more involved game, then... maybe more people would be willing to play slower deck styles. You can still play lots of quick games and get rewarded, too (NOTE: I'm not talking about decrease the amount of reward from where it currently is, just upping it for more involved games).

Yes, this idea, is contingent on a good formula, but I think that can accomplished. It shouldn't just be the duration of a game, but maybe similar to how they calculate character rank experience...? The more spells and minions you play, the more minions you kill, the more damage to your opponent, the more you heal yourself, etc. the more 'valuable' the game becomes.

Thoughts?

All I can say is: Dirty Rat FTW!

Quote from Ilavios >>

i got him in a pack hahaha so happy with him :-D

I'll say this much: I seem to win more often when I get him out turn 3 or 4...

Don't underestimate this card. I thought it was TOTAL garbage when I saw it before I got to play it. It's very possible to revive this 2-5 times a game. Yeah, it's fragile at 5/3, but it sure does trade up well.

So far, this gets my vote for "most underrated/wrongly written off card".

Don't underestimate this card. I thought it was TOTAL garbage when I saw it before I got to play it. It's very possible to revive this 2-5 times a game. Yeah, it's fragile at 5/3, but it sure does trade up well.

So far, this gets my vote for "most underrated/wrongly written off card". 

Quote from gabugga >>

Very little experimentation? Ok, let's see the decks I've seen streamers play and on ranked ladder.

 

Rogue

Quest Rogue with slight variations 

Miracle Plant Rogue

Paladin

Elemental HandBuff Paladin

Murloc/Aggro Paladin

Hunter (Variations Throughout)

Quest Hunter

Hybrid Hunter

Midrange Hunter 

Warrior

Pirate Warrior (Still the same build but slight new additions)

Quest Warrior

Warlock

Zoo, Discard/Regular/Quest. There is also quests that run more midrange

Control Lock (Handlock, with tons of variations)

Mage

Quest Mage (with 2 variations)

Secret Mage

Elemental Mage

Druid

Druid is all over the place. I can't get a handle on all the decks they are playing. Variations of quest, midrange, murloc, aggro, token, etc etc.

Priest

Also tons of variation and experimentation here. Quest, purify, elemental, control variations throughout. Yes silence priest is a real thing and it's viable.

Shaman

Quest Shaman

Elemental Shaman

Midrange and Jade is still a thing as well, and crosses over with Elemental.

 

In conclusion there are tons of different decks that are playable and tons of experimentation at high end play. The meta has insane amounts of variety. Complaining about netdecking is getting really old, because this meta has the most deck types I have ever seen get played in hearthstone.

 

Quote from jokujunahi >>

Meta is good, every good card being legendary and or epic is not. Atm I can only play cancer decks because interesting / fun (quest) decks are behind pay wall.

Quote from 1xbenx1 >>

Quote from SchruteBucks >>

My biggest criticism is that it seems like there's very little exploration in deck construction. A few streamers make some decks; they work, so lots and lots of people copy them.

That happens in every meta and not just Un'Goro.  This at least feels refreshing and new, and like there's actual strategy and counterplay, and not just "durrrr pirates counter greedy jades, jades counter greedy reno, reno counters pirates, so it's balanced!"

 No. Instead, now, it is "durrr Pirates counter combo rogues, combo rogues counter greedy control, greedy control counters pirates, so it's balanced!" ;)

Personally, I still don't think there is much of a "meta" to speak of. It's the skeleton of a metagame - but most midrange and control decks are far from streamlined.

I know there's been a lot of strong feels about this meta, already, and I'll add myself to that list. I LOVE it. What's surprising me the most is there actually seems to be a couple viable archetypes shaping up for each class. It seemed like there was a lot of chatter about there only being one viable deck type for several classes. Sure, I've lost to Quest Rogues and Mages in obscene ways, but I've also trounced those deck (with totally different decks). Yeah, the Quest Paladin is... underwhelming (at best), but things finally feel fresh. I am one of those people who was REALLY tired of hearing "We're gonna be rich!" over and over again.

My biggest criticism is that it seems like there's very little exploration in deck construction. A few streamers make some decks; they work, so lots and lots of people copy them. THAT seems to be the root of new meta issues, not the expansion itself. I know, I know... hey, if it works, why not go with it? Answer: Cause it leads to a stale meta super quickly. Sure, I netdeck too, but I am also enjoying tinkering around and creating my own. All I'm saying is: we're just a few days in... don't give up on the meta just quite yet.

When I drew a golden out of one of my packs, I was like: Are you KIDDING ME!! THAT'S the golden legendary I get. Then I decided to put a deck together before dusting him. Oh boy was I surprised. I've consistently played games where I revive him 2-4 times. And a 5/3 trades up very well.

This is my MVP sleeper card of the expansion so far. Makes for a great, viable alternative to the Quest Rogue.

Agreed. Force of Nature + Savage Roar was the gold standard of Druid, but got boring to play fast (for me). Beast looks straight forward to play, but I'm telling you: Malygos with the addition of cards like Arcane Giant + Barnes = LOTS of fun to play AND effective!

So glad to see lots of people (especially the pros ;) playing priest again. Amazing that three cards seem to have turned a class around: Priest of the Feast, Onyx Bishop, and (at the core of Ben Brode's "missing priest deck") Resurrect.

Having tinkered around with a few priest variants, I have to day they are a lot of fun to play... and effective.

Trying playing one of the Malygos decks out there. Not the token decks, but the spell damage ones. Hands down my favorite deck to play!