f2p players will just play aggro, and Blizzard will continue to cater to aggro players by releasing more and more 1-2 drop cards with insane value. Meanwhile control will be lucky to get a card that is playable.
There were actually quite a lot of control cards printed in gadgetzan. If there wasn't then aggro would have a much higher win rate against the reno decks, but reno decks have kazakhus, mistress, volcanic potion, blastcrystal, second rate bruiser, raza, abyssal, felfire, potion of madness, dirty rat. Those are ALL great control cards, and there are plenty of others in the other decks. In fact, mid range shaman in it's current version is much closer to a control deck because it runs board clears and heal and goes for value late game. Jade druid plays a complete control game against aggro decks until it can drop big body cards.
People seem to think that every card that isn't used in control warrior isn't a control card. The ironic part is Fib is running 3 gadgetzan cards in control warrior, showing that even that archetype got love in this expansion.
Reno decks are absolutely control decks.
There were upwards of 20 viable control cards printed in this set, which is quite a lot for one type of deck. You'd have to be fucking blind not to see that. Complain about aggro all you want, but when you say control decks get no cards you look like you haven't opened any gadgetzan packs.
@gabugga I'm looking for at least another view on improving ranked if you don't agree with the one posted, as I said in the post. If you've got nothing but reasons on why this isn't a good ideal tell me how you would improve ranked yourself.
Fixing ranked is vague. It depends on what you want to fix.
If your only issue is trying to fix variety of cards being played in ranked, then that's easily doable by making the power level of cards/decks relative across the board. Top decks will still be commonly played but you will see a lot more different decks. Right now 2 classes aren't even playable.
However that isn't even what people complain about. They just don't like aggro. Which is fixable by a million different ideas if people wanted it to be "fixed". I think its good to have strong aggro decks in a meta where 2 reno decks are top tier.
Me personally, I just want all classes to have a viable ranked deck.
I think you don't understand what "Ranked" means. The most important thing about ranked gameplay is skill. Right now there is no advanced deckbuilding. No new good decks have appeared scince like a month from the release of MSoG. And the most idiotic thing is that you will face Face Warrior from rank 20 to rank 5, where you will face Face Shaman or Jade Shaman or whatever. So, I guess skill doesn't matter in this game. Only your card collection and Deck winrate.
Ok? Do you think reno decks take no skill as well? Because this idea will be horrible for those.
This was a discussion of an idea for ranked play. If you want to complain about the meta theres hundreds of other posts for you. I'm not arguing about the meta.
What if the meta was entirely the most skillful decks in the game? Well fuck those, because no one wants to play the common decks, then the meta shifts to a bunch of easy skill decks.
Maybe try reading the original post and adding an original thought.
So you're saying this ideal would kill a deck that you can exchange out any of the 30 cards in it with another of the dozen so tech cards, and the deck wouldn't be playable???? What?
While reno decks exchange cards a good amount they still have at least a 20 card skeleton. Honestly this idea would hit every top deck. Reno decks also have the factor that some cards are played in multiple classes, making the problem worse.
I think you don't understand what "Ranked" means. The most important thing about ranked gameplay is skill. Right now there is no advanced deckbuilding. No new good decks have appeared scince like a month from the release of MSoG. And the most idiotic thing is that you will face Face Warrior from rank 20 to rank 5, where you will face Face Shaman or Jade Shaman or whatever. So, I guess skill doesn't matter in this game. Only your card collection and Deck winrate.
Ok? Do you think reno decks take no skill as well? Because this idea will be horrible for those.
This was a discussion of an idea for ranked play. If you want to complain about the meta theres hundreds of other posts for you. I'm not arguing about the meta.
What if the meta was entirely the most skillful decks in the game? Well fuck those, because no one wants to play the common decks, then the meta shifts to a bunch of easy skill decks.
Maybe try reading the original post and adding an original thought.
I think you don't understand what "Ranked" means. The most important thing about ranked gameplay is skill. Right now there is no advanced deckbuilding. No new good decks have appeared scince like a month from the release of MSoG. And the most idiotic thing is that you will face Face Warrior from rank 20 to rank 5, where you will face Face Shaman or Jade Shaman or whatever. So, I guess skill doesn't matter in this game. Only your card collection and Deck winrate.
Ok? Im not sure what your point is. Do you think reno decks take no skill? Because with this system no one would play them.
I'm going to politely ask you to stop berating everyone you don't agree with. There is no excuse for language choices like "Now you're just making yourself look stupid." They achieve nothing except making the discussion feel miserable for everyone else, and it's toxic.
Well if my opinion is right I can just ignore your post.
I kind of assumed this isn't the first time this ideal has been said, but I'm not sure why it's "idiotic". My best guess is you're just trolling.
You want to discourage people from playing the best decks in the RANKED play mode. Do you know what ranked means?
Keep thinking im trolling though. Get ready to call everyone else trolls when they tell you why it's a bad idea.
This idea mostly comes from people mad about getting rocked by the best decks over and over again in ranked play.
What's funny is this would actually be a fun thing in a different kind of game mode, but people always recommend their suggestions for ranked without even thinking.
I'm still curious about the responses to this topic tho. You said "again" as if it had already be debunked, do give me the link.
Probably not 100% the same ideas but always the same goal
It doesn't matter how it's done. There should be no incentivizing playing things in ranked mode. The goal is to get the highest rank possible through any means necessary. If you want variety, play casual mode. If you think casual mode has too little variety play wild casual mode. If you think that has too little variety get blizzard to add a mode without gold rewards, or play arena.
It's the competitive game mode. I don't know how I can explain this to you other then saying that. Competitive. Ranked play. I'm just going to keep repeating that until you get it.
Team 5 has already said they are looking at possibilities for changing ranked. If ranked at the moment was just fine they wouldn't have needed to say this. If in your world you're fine with how ranked is, that's you then. But if you have some actual constrictive criticism about this topic, and not your "feelings" do say so.
You realize the ways they are talking about fixing ranked mode has NOTHING to do with the cards being played right? They wanted to do things for the laddering process, like adding more ranks or having legend players not have to climb as much, or having winstreaks go to legend.
I also never said ranked mode was fine, just that your fix is terrible for the game. But put words in my mouth if you want if you think it makes your argument stronger.
@gabugga, I don't understand how repeating the phrase "Ranked play" over and over has any substance. It's just the name of the game mode. High level tournaments, which are far more competitive than ranked play, have been known to impose ban systems for decks and even individual cards.
Tournaments almost always don't ban actual decks and cards, and blizzard tournaments don't at all. Conquest mode allows players to ban a deck for matchups.
A post like yours looks extremely uninformed.
When they do ban cards it's usually ones that are extremely bad for competitive play (yogg being the most noticable one), not due to how common they are.
Now if you want to argue that tournaments are more competitive than ranked play, we could have an actual discussion, but probably try to watch a tournament before saying things like this. You know, one is going on right now. Tell me about all the cards and decks that are banned.
I could make a tournament and choose to do whatever I want. That doesn't make it the standard for competitive play.
0
There were actually quite a lot of control cards printed in gadgetzan. If there wasn't then aggro would have a much higher win rate against the reno decks, but reno decks have kazakhus, mistress, volcanic potion, blastcrystal, second rate bruiser, raza, abyssal, felfire, potion of madness, dirty rat. Those are ALL great control cards, and there are plenty of others in the other decks. In fact, mid range shaman in it's current version is much closer to a control deck because it runs board clears and heal and goes for value late game. Jade druid plays a complete control game against aggro decks until it can drop big body cards.
People seem to think that every card that isn't used in control warrior isn't a control card. The ironic part is Fib is running 3 gadgetzan cards in control warrior, showing that even that archetype got love in this expansion.
Reno decks are absolutely control decks.
There were upwards of 20 viable control cards printed in this set, which is quite a lot for one type of deck. You'd have to be fucking blind not to see that. Complain about aggro all you want, but when you say control decks get no cards you look like you haven't opened any gadgetzan packs.
0
I would say it's expected since we actually read the news and know that is what's happening.
0
welcome to 2 days ago
0
Because blizzard thinks the community is retarded, which this forum proves consistently.
0
Ragnaros is terrible for the game, good riddance.
2
6
Searching would of saved you from all the ridicule you're going to receive.
Your analogy is terrible too.
1
backseat game designer doesn't even know the history of hearthstone.
News at 11!
0
0
0
0
0
0
0