Max McCall Talks About Combo Decks and Why They Can Be Problematic
Our friendly neighborhood Hearthstone developer Max McCall jumped on the forums again yesterday, sharing his thoughts about combo decks in the game. In short, they feel that while a combo deck might be a lot of fun for the person playing that deck, it isn't for the opponent, especially if those type of decks are very common on the ladder. Decks with the goal of minimizing interaction with your opponent and/or killing them instantly are not the type of decks they want to be on top of the meta, so they're careful with printing cards that make these type of decks too strong.
A lot of players disagree with him and think combo decks are some of the most fun and skill-intensive decks in the game. What do you think?
You can read his full thoughts below:
Quote from Max McCallHearthstone is fun because each game is a little different from the last. Combo decks make for very different types of games, where players can’t rely on their normal decision-making heuristics and have to reconsider their strategic approach to the game. So, in general, combo decks are good for Hearthstone because they add some texture to the ladder experience. But like any other deck, combo decks that become too popular cause issues.
When we make cards like Emperor Thaurissan and Counterfeit Coin, we’re aware that they tend to enable combo decks. We don’t usually set out to make a particular combo deck be a particular power level; we are always worried about missing and making a deck more powerful than we’d like – and that goes for any type of deck, not just combo decks - but that doesn’t mean that we don’t want any combo decks at all. We do want combo decks. We just want them at the same level that we want other decks.
Specific combo decks can be problems for the same reason that any other deck can be a problem: when a deck in Hearthstone gets too popular, you play against it so frequently that it stops being fun. Further, usually popular decks are powerful, so you are also likely to be losing more games than you win while also playing against the popular deck more often than you would like.
Powerful combo decks tend to exacerbate this problem because most combo decks aren’t trying to interact with their opponents on any axis that involves minions. It is cool when, once in a while, you play a game against a deck that is all card drawing and removal and you have to consider how you want to ration your threats instead of finding little victories in profitable trades. It is less cool when you start playing a substantial fraction of your games against “Frost Nova, Doomsayer, go” before getting Ice Lanced out of the game. Figuring out a good trade is more fun than making educated guesses about how your opponent will kill your minions over the next few turns.
I am not saying that some or all combo decks are inherently bad for Hearthstone. I am saying that when a deck is popular, it becomes less fun to play against. Popular combo decks have the further problem that they try to ignore opposing minions as much as possible, which is frustrating for most non-combo players.
This is true whether or not a deck is easy or hard to play, although the decks that are hard to play tend to be less popular because less skilled players don’t play them as often.
Also, saying that a combo deck is interactive because it has a bunch of removal is true only in the loosest sense of the word. Combo decks use their removal to try to reduce their interaction with their opponents as much as possible.
Cards are interactive when they generate strategic options for both players. Minions are interactive because their controller has options on how to leverage their threat and their opponent has options on how to remove it. Removal itself reduces the strategic options for both players: it reduces the amount of stuff in play that can be interacted with.
This isn’t to say that all removal is problematic – removal spells are very important for Hearthstone – but I see the idea of ‘this deck is interactive because it is really good at killing minions’ frequently and I wanted to challenge that assertion.
Most combo decks, in addition to trying to avoid interacting with minions, also try to avoid letting their opponent interact with them. The problem with OTKs isn’t so much ‘I was at 30, then I lost’ as much as it is ‘I was at 30, then I lost, and there wasn’t anything I could do about it.’ You can play a taunt minion against a Leeroy combo, but again, most combo decks are very good at killing minions, so the idea that a taunt minion will save you against a Miracle Rogue that’s drawn their whole deck is a stretch.
So, most combo decks try to avoid interacting with their opponents as much as possible, and then win in a way that is extremely difficult for their opponent to interact with in a meaningful way. It’s good when those types of decks pop up on ladder occasionally. But when those types of strategies are too popular and powerful, they are frustrating, and we nerf them.
When they are not popular, we tend to let them be. Usually they are less popular because they are less powerful; often they are less powerful because they have to interact with their opponent. For example, the Aviana-C’Thun combo has to play a lot of C’Thun minions, which facilitates interaction for both players. Combo decks that aren’t super popular or super powerful are great to have around; as I noted earlier, they do a lot to add variety to the ladder.
freeze mage is 'difficult' because it is such an unfavorable deck against certain other decks - you just don't have many options if your opponent's strategy doesn't fit what you are strong against.
I give you that there is skill to playing freeze mage effectively, but my point is that the early game and the frost nova doomsayer tricks are not very difficult to pull off (ok maybe getting the timing right is a minor skill, but it is as much a gamble as a skill).
Playing freeze effectively involves a lot more then the frost nova doomsayer combo. Your point is a weak one.
ok to elaborate then - finding the most effective of a half dozen stall techniques - then combo to the face.
I have a feeling that this is the same guy who removed Azure Drake from standard for being "too versatile" (a.k.a too well designed).
Azure drake was very well balanced and hardly over-statted. He is only super strong against priest.
I hear Blizzard was bending over backwards to appease Brian Kibler who is a big-time priest fan.
Take a look at Azure drake versus a card like doctor balanced or mysterious challenger - azure drakes mechanics are very ordinary and the stats are very in-line. Drake was mainly used to give up a little in stats for some mid game card draw which is sometimes hard to find in an otherwise decently statted minion.
The spell damage is often an afterthought or at most almost a mild boost to some low dmg AOE spells to fight off aggro.
Poor choice to nerf him IMHO - very few people have been screaming that he was OP OP, and mid-range dragon priest is slowly turning into the new menace of HS (mind you, dragon priest looses a little by also loosing him - but this guy was more a threat to dragon priest from opponents than an asset to dragon priest as an additional dragon).
Overall this all sounds like a load of crap that reads "Losing to decks they don't understand feels bad to pirate warrior players, so we're gonna tune that sh*t down even though they're already pretty bad decks already, let alone with the rotation coming in". If it's counterplay that worries you, Team 5, print solutions, don't delete the problem until nothing is left but vanilla minions everywhere. Loatheb was a very good card against Freeze mage and Miracle Rogue as it basically shut down their entire turn save for a few minions that will instantly eat your minion removal if you're not an aggro deck anyway. You're game designers, so stop acting like you can't do anything about the problems but deleting them.
+1.
C'thun druid kills by getting 10 mana crystals playing Aviana then Kun the Forgotten King giving you 10 mana crystals again. You play Brann Bronzebeard strong buffs like Dark Arakkoa to buff C'Thun 6 attack per one then play C'Thun to deal 40. When CW was popular you would have Youthful Brewmaster so you could deal 80 in 1 turn without even playing a card that buffed C'Thun previously. Although most games you would play 2-3 buffs before killing them before turn 10 from ramping up to 10 crystals.
Huh...When ? When has that deck ever been a thing ? And, okay, let's say it is a thing : My point still stands, stronger even.
Back when Gadgetzan first launched. Kolento played this deck to Legend and it was the only thing on the ladder until people figured out how good patches was.
I absolutely agree with your post. But there's more to add. Removal DOES NOT REDUCE the amount of interaction and strategic options. Removal itself is the most literal and the best interaction you can get in hearthstone. You literally use a card to interact with something on the board! Let alone as you've mentioned it's super strategic, too. Do you play around the hex or poly? Do you keep it? Etc.
Well, decks like Oil Rogue and Patron Warrior were way more interactive and interesting than curvestone decks. If the devs don't want combo decks to turtle until turn 12, then maybe they should weaken cards like Justicar Trueheart and Ice Block. Trading up minions and using removal to regain tempo every single game is repetitive, too, and I, for one, would rather they print more Loatheb-like cards that can by itself wreck a combo deck if played right.
Also, having the same viewpoint as the Hearthstone devs doesn't necessarily make your point more valid. Not to bash on them too much, but they've made many "meh" decisions to say the least - printing Purify at Priest's weakest, nerfing Warsong Commander right after the birth of Secret Paladin (yeah because you can react to Mysterious Challenger; that's not a combo deck), and killing all combo decks altogether by printing C'Thun.
Overall, though, I actually agree with the blue post that combo decks should be kept at mid to low tier (therefore a minion based deck is top tier).
With that logic, then, we should all learn to cook from the employees at McDonald's and learn to write scripts from Michael Bay. Just because the card game is popular doesn't mean that it's due to it's good design. In fact, it's usually the opposite - most things popular are dumbed down or simplified in one way or another, and the removal of Azure Drake from standard supports this. It's much easier for the viewing audience to see a Christmas Tree on top of Uther's head and 30 eyes popping out of a 30/30 minion to know that the Paladin/Druid player just did something powerful than it is for them to identify that the 6 mana 4/4 is a crucial target that needs to be killed and for them to remember that exactly 7 murlocs have died and they just drew Anyfin Can Happen.
I don't know how you manage to play "2-4 minute game"s as a player who "only play control or midrange decks", because I've played face Hunter mirrors that lasted for longer than that. Admittedly, the so-called combo decks of the current meta are actually more fast-paced than those in BrM or LoE - most of the time a combo vs control matchup would end with the combo player fatiguing - and even if they weren't, it's still not the fault of the concept of combo decks, but rather the stalling tools that they must use to fight against minion based decks. The point of a combo deck is to edge in that 9th or 10th turn to pull off a 20ish damage combo, emphasis on the 'edge in' part. What Hearthstone has right now are control decks, like Reno Mage and RenoLock, that have no way to finish off their opponent. In most other card games or even in previous metas, control decks' endgame was to have 3-4 large minions on the board that the opponent cannot easily get rid of (i.e. Sylvanas, Ysera and Cabal Shadow Priest), but instead the devs have printed budgeted versions of said cards, like 4 mana 7/7, thus making big-minion control decks less, or not at all viable.
The "cycle" of deck archetype should go as follows: control beats aggro, aggro beats combo, and combo beats control. However, in almost every expansion after TGT, control decks have been surviving way too well and aggro decks have been too difficult to grind out, thus making it necessary for any type of combo deck to include a ton of board clears to exist even in tier 3 or 4. Think of it this way, combo decks are actively using cards that do not draw them cards and make them pull off their combo faster like they should in this meta, and that's not the fault of combo decks, it's the fault of the sheer strength of low mana cost cards such as Tunnel Trogg and Swashburglar. So the "right", or healthy thing to do is to nerf aggro, which will make control and combo decks better against them, which in turn will make them appear more, which in turn will make combo decks run more card draw (to finish off the control decks) and less boring Frost Nova + Doomsayer-esque board clears.
On the note of playing a 20 minute game, if you're 10 minutes in and you know that you're not even close to beating your opponent, then why not just concede? You say that you lose said games anyway, right? And no-one gets to choose who they fight against in the ladder, so it's not up to you to say "I don't want to fight against slow decks, this is clearly an issue in game design. Since the games are too long for me to play my deck and do my stuff, it's obviously a flaw in game design; combo decks are so boring to play against." Again, yes, Ice Block, Frost Nova, Reno Jackson and other similar stall cards are very uninteractive, and those cards should be nerfed, removed, or (actually usable) counter cards should be printed like Unfreeze Nova or Ice Break or whatever, but that isn't the fault of the concept of combo decks, it's the flaw of those individual cards, as well as the necessity to put them in due to aggro decks being too effective. If anything, they should start supporting combo decks, not with Counterfeit Coin, Alexstrasza or Emperor Thaurissan, because these cards allow for any slow deck to run 4-5 combo pieces for burst damage, instead they should print more cards like Blade Flurry, Aviana and Charge, cards that are terrible in control decks, but are excellent combo tools. And no, combos aren't meant to be "countered", they're meant to be prevented
So, to conclude, if you want more interactive games, you should instead be supporting combo decks.
Hearthstone dev team doesn't like strong combo's, but makes a class that relies on combo's aka rogue. WTF blizzard
This is how you spot a newb.
Because Pirates are so fun and interactive, right? What a bunch of hypocrites.
Well they are nerfing pirates aren't they?
I kind of disagree with a lot of the sentiment here. I personally don't mind pirates, face hunter, aggro shaman, or whatever. I beat those types of decks far more often than I lose to them. But I just can't stand playing against freeze mage or Reno anything. I agree with the developer here: when you sit there trying to play YOUR deck's strategy, and all the while your opponent just lets you play (because he has double Ice Block + Reno + OTK) or just completely shuts you down over and over with Frost Novas or what have you until he can set up some infinite Antonidus combo, then that's not fun. It might be okay every once and a while to try to make a go of it and take one of these guys out, but if one of these decks becomes too strong and begins to account for 20-30% of what you see on ladder, then we're all just gong to hate life. For confirmation, just go back in time to when early Miracle Rogue was a thing and look at all of the forum posts about that mess. Blizzard is right: folks aren't happy about that crap.
I think that the line between control and combo is increasingly hard to draw. Other than 1000 Armor vs Not A Warrior and Jade Druid, there haven't been a control deck without a damage-based finisher since LoE (there was Priest, but they were tier 4 for not having a win condition...). 60 Health hero decks like Roulette Warlock and Blackjack Mage (and going a bit back in time, Count-to-14-Druid) don't deserve a combo finisher, but Anyfin Paladin (the one with Old Murk Eye) and almost every slow deck in the meta when everyone were still getting in there and blades were still thirsty were both difficult to play and easy to counter, and allowed for some less trading intensive decks like 4 Huffer Hunter and 1/1lock to co-exist with control and combo decks. imo combo decks are fun, it's the stalling mechanics like Ice Block and Frost Nova that aren't.
What a bunch of BS!! Almost every combo deck has control tools including its own minions and spells, weapons against opponent's minions. Every decent player - whether combo, aggro, midrange player or whatever - knows that there're some minions that MUST be cleared and you have to interact with them otherwise you simply lose the game. The player who don't care for opponent's board is not a good player. I'd love to hear what he has to say about the new (MSoG) reno mage and wlock. Mostly they run combo - Leeroy or Alexstrasza and Antonidas/Solia+piro, YET they have other ways to finish the game - kazakus pots, jaraxus, Medivh etc. Are those uninteractive as well ?!?! Why he speaks as if all combo decks are single player oriented? Pick any Malygos deck, Leeroy wlock/rogue , Anyfin - how are these one sided matches?
Those BS definitions applies way much more to ultra aggro decks, yet they are not bothered by those that much. It would be most interesting hearing him why they tolerate face decks more than combo.