The Real Issue: We're all Lazy Players at Times

Play Mode Discussion
02/24/2019 10:49 AMPosted by ReaprOfSouls
1) Your guilt forces you to say there is bad game design/lack of tech choices since you're trying to portray yourself as an honest person. However, your support over the current status quo also implies you indeed like the current system as is as it furthers your own "agenda".

I like the current state of the game? Not in the slightest. I am playing WAY more MtG: Arena than HS and have publicly stated MANY times I have (and will be) significantly lowering my spend (or removing it completely) so you're presenting a false narrative there

02/24/2019 10:49 AMPosted by ReaprOfSouls
2) Limiting people to using "anti-meta/combo" decks further restricts deck building.

Agree, but isn't that aprt fo deck building. Designing a deck around a win condition and then figuring out how to implement that win condition through disrupting or hindering your opponent's?

To me that balancing act is the very definition of deck building

02/24/2019 10:49 AMPosted by ReaprOfSouls
3) I haven't kept exact numbers but this month alone since coming back from a 7 month long break from the game and playing for about a week, I'm running into combo decks nearly half the time. It's that widespread, so widespread I'm having to add tech cards to my decks to even stand a chance.

Half would probably be in the right neighborhood. Just looking at HSR I think it'd be roughly a 1/3rd but a half would be within the realm of error.

02/24/2019 10:49 AMPosted by ReaprOfSouls
5) "I win" cards with no counter measures is a broken archtype, adding more "broken" archtypes to compete with aforementioned ones isn't fixing the problem, it's adding layers to already existing problem ;). Bubbles burst once they've become overinflated, this anti-current meta sentiment running rampant among a lot of forum goers is just the icing on the cake. Imagine how many more exist that DON'T frequent these forums ;). This current problem with the current meta is being understated to the extreme IMHO for whatever that's worth to you.

I agree with some of the "I Wins" being an issue in the combo deck world. On the flip side though both Priest and Warrior have access to such a strong fatigue game that there is a "two side" coin issue where Exodia almost needs to exists at the moment because two classes have such a ridiculously strong fatigue game.

02/24/2019 10:49 AMPosted by ReaprOfSouls
This game desperately needs balancing, they got 'til April to do so otherwise, more players will leave. Then the question becomes, how many players have to quit before HS ultimately reaches its demise? A video game shouldn't be this polarizing, at least that's my opinion on the matter.

I think April/May will be a VERY important months for HS. Not only for myself if I choose to stay or not but I think for how much HS's leadership position (numbers wise) remains.
hate aggro, hunters, (re)cheating out minions and combo and that is what this 'meta' is so maybe players are lazy and wont adapt or maybe the 'meta' just isn't fun so people would rather it adapt to them (*cough* nerf).

edit:2 downvotes instantly, has to be how you word it, the meta sucks and people are upvoting that all over the place.
This isn't magic the gathering. What you see week 1 of the meta is what you see week 12 of the mta. Very few things change. They don't give answers to the meta as there aren't actual counters etc. to "adapt" to the meta.

You can't adapt to a 6 cost DK that creates new beasts every turn. To say otherwise is absolutely absurd.

I've been playing since 2014 and always hear the same things - "adapt, the meta will evolve, find a counter". But it never does any of those things. Really good decks emerge week 1 and maybe 1 new deck (2 if lucky) start to emerge before the next set releases.
Basically every deck has to be super aggro or has to have an specific win condition these days.

Cards generating more than 30 to 40 mana of stuff with 1 card.
(Gul'dan, Zul'jin, rexxar over time, Jaina over time)
Lynessa too although she is more counterable.

It's not that people don't want to tech against the decks that their deck is weak against, but you can't tech against all the absurdly high power level cards spread over the classes in the game.

And against some decks you can barely tech.
I tried playing hakkar vs mech'thun decks and they were already to their last card before i even had hakkar in my hand, and i ran myself alot of card draw.
Basically the same with zihi if your zihi is on the bottom you have lost against decks like these because you couldn't draw the 1 of card in your deck in time.
02/24/2019 11:24 AMPosted by MoarRNGplz
I've been playing since 2014 and always hear the same things - "adapt, the meta will evolve, find a counter". But it never does any of those things. Really good decks emerge week 1 and maybe 1 new deck (2 if lucky) start to emerge before the next set releases.

Some cards have that problem, DK Rexxar is a good example.

Some cards do have tools to disrupt the strategy though (Resurrect, Mecha'thun for Priest, Warlock has some disruption). That is why I don't think all the issues are merit-less but the degree to which EVERY above power card is being griped about spurred the post.
You can't build new stuff on old stuff and expect it to stand up.

Imagine if the latest Tier armor in Wow had to be designed around weapons aquired from lvl 1-20 starter quests...

I suggested long ago "Year play"

You can only use cards from the year of the kraken, for example. No classic cards. Raven and so on.

I think the classic and basic cards pollute the new stuff and are poorly designed and hence we get equality and hunters mark nerfs etc.

IS SOMEONE INJURED?

Yes Northshire Cleric. We are all injured by seeing your stupid face turn 1 by every GD priest for the last how many YEARS.

and so on...

OP. The only people who are LAZY are the friggin game designers
Lykotic.
I agree that this is an issue.
But certainly not even close to the "Real Issue".
The developers do not plan ahead well, at all.
Sure.
The rotation is coming closer.
But the core issues remain.
02/24/2019 12:12 PMPosted by Paf
You can't build new stuff on old stuff and expect it to stand up.

Imagine if the latest Tier armor in Wow had to be designed around weapons aquired from lvl 1-20 starter quests...

I suggested long ago "Year play"

You can only use cards from the year of the kraken, for example. No classic cards. Raven and so on.

I think the classic and basic cards pollute the new stuff and are poorly designed and hence we get equality and hunters mark nerfs etc.

IS SOMEONE INJURED?

Yes Northshire Cleric. We are all injured by seeing your stupid face turn 1 by every GD priest for the last how many YEARS.

and so on...

OP. The only people who are LAZY are the friggin game designers

We did need a rotational core set or the ditch of a core set.

If you ditch the core set idea and go to Magic's system the game will become more expensive more than likely. There is a double-edged sword. I think it is worth it personally but I think it is something to note.
I think the problem is in the past each card had a score. Stats were worth 1 point, effects worth half a point ect.

They've totally seem to have abandoned that so you have 5 mana 12/12s (formerly 6) with a 4 mana conditional. Or a bunch of other stuff that just blows up the formally balanced around stat score cards.
02/24/2019 01:27 PMPosted by Lykotic
02/24/2019 12:12 PMPosted by Paf
You can't build new stuff on old stuff and expect it to stand up.

Imagine if the latest Tier armor in Wow had to be designed around weapons aquired from lvl 1-20 starter quests...

I suggested long ago "Year play"

You can only use cards from the year of the kraken, for example. No classic cards. Raven and so on.

I think the classic and basic cards pollute the new stuff and are poorly designed and hence we get equality and hunters mark nerfs etc.

IS SOMEONE INJURED?

Yes Northshire Cleric. We are all injured by seeing your stupid face turn 1 by every GD priest for the last how many YEARS.

and so on...

OP. The only people who are LAZY are the friggin game designers

We did need a rotational core set or the ditch of a core set.

If you ditch the core set idea and go to Magic's system the game will become more expensive more than likely. There is a double-edged sword. I think it is worth it personally but I think it is something to note.


Theres no denying new players need a basic core set while they level up. But those cards should soon be overshadowed by cards that do equivalent, but better "things".

So, new players get a set a players health to 1, eventually they get equality and wont use the 1st one again (for the most part)

Im not going to sit here and redesign it all but you get the idea.

I dont have an answer to should classic packs exist at all? My instincts say it should just be basic and expansions but basic should be refilled with some of the classic set and gut the rest of classic.
It does take two to tango. While players are certainly responsible when they ignore the tools that the game provides, it is on the heads of the game designers when they fail to make options that are compelling enough for players to use.

It's not as easy a balance to strike as some people imply. If you make cards that are too useful/powerful then they dominate a meta and make it bland & boring. If you don't make the cards useful/powerful enough then no one uses them because they aren't worth slotting.

Some people are acting like it's as simple as flipping a switch. It isn't. It's hard to do well, and in some metas it just doesn't ever gel into a balanced state. CCGs are games where sometimes the pendulum swings and tilts things a bit. I get some players out there get salty when that happens, but they really should learn to weather these peaks and troughs better, because they're inevitable.
When I stop having fun in a game EVEN WHEN I WIN, I would say the real issue is the game, there is simply no way around it.

Standard is just broken atm, I only play it when I rest between games in wild (yes, where big priest exists)
I made the antithesis to this post already. The short version is that I've tried very hard to tech and adapt to this meta, but I simply can't. In previous metas, I could make a deck with 40-50% winrate. That's still not a positive winrate, but at least I can get some close games and wins sometimes.

This meta is very polarized between a weird aggro/midrange/burn hybrid and OTK decks which are heavy control, draw, and stall. If I tech against the early game decks, I basically have to run a full on stall deck with some sort of late game combo or value engine. If I tech against OTK decks, I basically have to run a really aggressive deck backed up with some midrange and burn. If I try to balance the two, I end up with an absolutely miserable winrate against the two meta archetypes.

The point is, there is no teching against the meta, there is playing the meta or get run over by it. Previously, teching in some early game taunts and healing might be enough to stall out aggro. This meta's version of aggro is impossible to stall out because it is casually backed up by powerhouse midrange cards like DK Rexxar. It used to be that you could play middling decks more aggressively to kill OTK and other late game decks before they kill you. In this meta, the OTK decks are tier 1 due to an extreme amount of stall
You know guys, I kind of agree with the OP on this a little.

I posted a few salty comments about wall priest/OTK priest, when I was frustrated going up against them. And you know what? I sat down, thought about the main decks in the meta, thought about the best cards to use in a deck to counter them, and came up with a new deck. Now I'm consistently 3+ levels higher on the ladder than where I was and feel confident of having a good chance to win each game (I'm no pro, but getting past where I was where it felt like a glut of copy/paste net decks feels great). And I've been having a ton of fun on the ladder now like I haven't in ages.

And I've beaten tons of priests and the last zujin I've played recently (I haven't seen him much recently).

So i guess I feel the meta is at a point now where if you stop and think for a few minutes, you can at least start to counter some of the meta decks and have some fun (before I couldn't stand hunter spellstone, that nerf opened up the game for me). My 2 cents.
At first, I didn't want to agree with you but I read what you said and I feel you are headed in the right direction and I agree. Many of us just don't go the extra step needed to readjust our decks to adapt and we just expect our decks to "work".

But, I have to agree with Swift as well. I have been tweaking and playing my Hakkar Quest Priest since it was released. As you know, I have probably revised my deck 200 different times. I've probably played around with the deck in over 1000 games easily.

The problem as I see it is that the tech that exists is either weak or non-existent. I fully believe that after EVERY single game I lose, I should be able to step back and say "What could I have done differently to win?" and often times, there is no answer. The answer is "nothing, you need to play a completely different deck".

The game is at such a polarizing spot that nearly ALL of the decks that exist right now are so polarized and lopsided against other deck types. For example, people can whine and complain about Mecha'thun and they could tech in Zihi and just stop being lazy, right? But then there are still 8 other deck types out there that are polarizing vs you. You can't tech vs all these deck types because then you aren't even playing your own deck type, you're just playing some frankenstein deck that is trying to do nothing but survive vs all the polarization.

So, the best you can hope for in this meta right now is to develop the style deck you want to play and just accept that there are going to be 5-8 decks out there that will not just crush you mercilessly, but you have nearly 0% chance to win. The more you try to tech against that polarization the more you open up yourself to other polarizing decks.

I think the overall power of decks is just too strong and that's what makes them all feel so polarizing. When rotation happens, we're going to really be set back to just a few decks running amok and teching against a few decks is fine and acceptable. Asking people to tech vs 20 different deck types just feels wrong.

This is partially why I brought up the idea of multi-tech cards so you wouldn't have to tech vs so many decks with so many cards.
02/24/2019 11:14 AMPosted by Tari
hate aggro, hunters, (re)cheating out minions and combo and that is what this 'meta' is so maybe players are lazy and wont adapt or maybe the 'meta' just isn't fun so people would rather it adapt to them (*cough* nerf).

edit:2 downvotes instantly, has to be how you word it, the meta sucks and people are upvoting that all over the place.


You basically just told us that you hate aggro, mid range (hunter) and combo decks and that’s the reason the meta sucks.

And you wonder why you got downvoted?
02/24/2019 04:02 PMPosted by Schyla

So, the best you can hope for in this meta right now is to develop the style deck you want to play and just accept that there are going to be 5-8 decks out there that will not just crush you mercilessly, but you have nearly 0% chance to win. The more you try to tech against that polarization the more you open up yourself to other polarizing decks.


Thats sound advice for this moment.

I just worry that it's just going to keep being the same comedy of errors and unbalance in the future.

Not so much the next expansion. I think the meta will be great when we lose these three past xpacs. But then by the next 2 xpacs will we have the same power creep polarizing stuff we are talking about now because Blizzard doesn't learn?

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum