So then, should all Control decks be favored against all types of decks?
Because being favored in some matchups and unfavored in others is generally how it works. Obviously polarization could be reduced, but only to an extent. In a fatigue match, whichever deck packs the most solid inevitability will win, pretty much every time. Variance outside of discovery/generation isn’t really a factor when both decks can play out their full toolkit.
I’ve said it before, but control players like to be Batman: having an answer for everything. Just need to pull it out of their utility belt.
Even when their brain tells them the game can’t let any one deck beat everything else for balance’s sake, their heart still wants their precious unicorn snowflake deck to be the Batman.
They get jealous of each other when they see other control decks do better. So they complain about each other. It’s like crabs in a bucket.
Consider the tick complaints. Or almost anytime priest gets to out value/out fatigue most control decks. It’s mostly other control players who complain about them. Why can’t their control deck/class be the ones at the top of the control food chain?
Nope, never said Control Decks should be favored against everything else.
Just pointing out the reason they are all tier 3 or lower.
A lot of people complain how aggro/mid-range decks are controlling the meta but these decks are easily countered… it’s just control decks keep each other down more than beating more aggressive stuff.
I wonder if that’s a byproduct of the power ceiling being as high as it is, on both fronts?
Aggressive decks can crank out damage in a frick’n hurry, and Control needs to be able to deal with that. As such, it’s really no surprise that Control v Control matchups wind up scooting straight into fatigueville, which wraps back around to my point regarding inevitability.
The idea that some of them are naturally better at it than others has been a pretty constant thing, though tweaks can often be made to help with that. Like for Warrior, Rattlegore can straight up win Control matchups if their opponent isn’t hanging on to silence or yoinky cards. It isn’t forever doomed to lose out to Control matches.
This is why for the most part I’m on board with Ayala’s take on Control decks. They should be able to work more towards large, game-ending power spikes (of their OWN tools) rather than just lock down the board and watch fatigue damage tick up.
The trouble is if they’re too good at controlling until then, they invalidate all other deck types. If they aren’t good enough at it, then they get steamrolled into Tier 3/4. If they’re good at it, but the most limiting factor is only having 30 cards and trying to fit in enough controlling AND game-ending cards, then draw variance becomes a larger determining factor in wins/losses, which increases the value of card draw.
It is odd that every control deck is tier 3 or lower.
I think Iksar made a comment at one point on twitter that there were a lot of negative reactions when control was strong so they’ve been steering away from that.
I’m not sure what we have now is a great answer though.
Many players are dissatisfied with the current state of things.
Speaking for myself, I enjoy strategy and making impactful decisions.
Definitely haven’t found this meta to be very riveting on that front.
I dunno… aggro players are often called the bandwagoners, who just jump from one aggro deck to the other, whichever one is the top atm. There is less dedication to one class or deck to insist that that one class or deck be the #1.
Generally speaking, Control can be a bit harder to pilot optimally than Aggro.
The old “play your minions and attack on curve is the same as play removal on curve” comparison will always yield better net results in the Aggro deck’s favor. Control games can require you to allow a minion or turn to slide for more impactful removal afterward, and against stronger midrange and other control decks, the game can get very swingy in later turns, requiring you to plan ahead for what your opponent has in their arsenal so you don’t get caught with your pants down.
Don’t get me wront, Aggro often isn’t as easy as people make it out to be either, but this isn’t about that
One thing to keep in mind is player sentiment - that super subjective thing we all hate lol. Player sentiment also happens to drive player population, which directly affects the game’s bottom line.
A player who played a solid game and hit their power play to close it may feel that they cleverly made impactful decisions, “solved the puzzle” and rightfully won the match, whereas their opponent may see that game-ending power swing as completely invalidating all of their efforts up to that point.
The longer the match goes on, the more that game-ending swing impacts the mentality of the losing player, the more negative sentiment it can generate. Is it even possible to design resource-focused archetypes that don’t feel as bad to lose to? I have no idea lol
i think that is some major bias…i mean what is the wincondition of aggro decks? to punch you fast. The only decks that have a clear wincon are combo/OTK decks like lifesteal DH, every other deck be it aggro or control has nothing but a plan to eventually run the oppoennt out of ressources and life.
It´s just that aggro does this much faster than control, but both are equally “uninteractive/unfun/wahtever yozu wish to associate the lack of a proper wincon with”.
I personally find zero enjoyment in the current “oh he hit the curve guess i´ll surrender turn 4/5” hearthstone, and it´s probably the very same reason people despise control so much, it just never feels like you got to play the game, but as people are biased they forget all the 4min losses vs a godd*** hunter with the horseguy+coin into mankirk into barrak while they hang on to 27min loses in a priest mirror.
So aggro is just as limiting as control is, probably more so as there´s lower variance in finding creative outs in shorter games where you only draw 1/3 of your deck, either they do their “job” too good and you die without a fair chance, thus invalidating all other decks or they just crumble into tier 3++.
I never said Aggro decks don’t put limits on Control decks. My comments were regarding the topic of this thread - Control vs Control.
Aggro decks keep Control decks honest, because if you go full greed you WILL lose to a Face Hunter smorcing you into the ground every time.
On that note though, I refer back to my point about player sentiment - folks (on average) seem to react less harshly to getting blown up on turns 5-7 than they do getting killed by fatigue or a turn 16 power explosion.
I’ll say it’s harder to make a meta with multiple control decks but the idea in balancing control decks is that there should be a sorta equilibrium of being better vs aggro making them worse vs other control decks and vice versa.
I think we will see more viable control decks with stormwind though because tradeable adds the ability to tech for key matchups without costing the deck dead draws in other matchups and there’s a fair bit of neutral healing so far too.
just wanted to point out that aggro is mostly the same problem as control, just to the other extreme. The debate is just way too often too one-sided towards control, as people i think mostly don´t like playing games where it feels like you have no impact/agency at all but forget that it´s often the same problem with aggro just because it´s over far quicker then watching someone remove your board 12times in a row.
so it´s really an iffy situation for the designers, but i´d appreciate more combo/midrange and less curvestone/“pure” control for the future for sure.
agroo sells tickets.as simple as that.
but very boring only strategy is overwhelm the opponent.
imagine a normal card game where you play 1 card and the opponent plays 3 every turn,it would be a short evening.
so yes agroo is the problem,way to mutch dmg.
shaman have you dead by turn 5 often.
I think the best solution would be to make an as close as possible to 50-50% situation between control and aggro. There should be proper healing and AoE but you should have smart enough moves in order to win against an aggro/midrange’s burst.
Even tho secret mage is insane in wild, I think it is a great example of how should aggro/tempo vs control be. As a control player, you have to know how to play around Counterspell/Explosive Runes, how much damage to expect from mage’s hand, when is time to heal, when is risky to get killed, etc. (And the same for mage, knowing how much burst to keep, when to use Counterpsell, when is safe to draw, how to play around a big healing like Reno, etc). The secret mage vs. control is literally a skill-based matchup IMO cause the deck that played around better will be the winner most of the time(of course, excluding the games where one got insanely blessed by RNGesus).
Like this, a control deck with a good win-condition won’t fully dominate the game cause the win-con will only matter against other control enemies(there coming another type of skill-requiring), while against agressive decks it should be an equal match rewarding the better player.
Sadly, I feel like neither aggro or control decks are designed around that idea : both archetypes work more with “Haha I win!” type of cards. Shaman just burst you with Doomhamer without giving the opponent any choice, Hunter just burst you with minions and some damage spells without giving the opponent any choice, Priest just spams generated heals/AoE as much as possible with few to no planing without giving the opponent any choice, Warrior use as much armor as possible (And the list goes on and on). The game should be designed much more with cards that give the opponent choices to do instead of sudden damage/heal, balancing the control archetype problem, making the game more fun and skill-requiring. Cause I feel like people don’t get frustrated because a game is too short/long or whatever, but because players barely have anything to say to what their opponents do which is toxic, uninteractive and pedestrian.
Aggro decks cannibalize each other even worse. They only have one axis: speed. Playing a slower aggro deck is just playing a worse aggro deck.
Control decks can have many flavors, and are designed at being better against different types of decks. Some control is anti-aggro, and some is anti-control, which makes for more niches for control to occupy.