Nature shaman is combo. Combo is an archetype.
It might be according to your definition or whatever, but I find it useless in practice.
Any archetype can be a combo deck. You can be aggro/combo as Shaman is (even sludgelock), you can be midrange/combo (as previous iteration of rainbow mage, the one with elemental inspirations) or you can be control/combo (as todaysâ rainbow mage is, Odyn warrior, Boomboss Warrior)
Combo is not an archetype, itâs literally just a win con.
If you approach it to be an archetype, good luck with classifying Zarimi Priest then. Itâs a hyper-aggro deck, usually, but it also has OTK 30-0 combinations possible, and itâs the only way to beat control decks. Obviously, you either have to concede that a deck can be 2 archetypes at the same time (which defeats the purpose of archetype classification) or you have to concede that combo is not a deck archetype.
1 Like
You are just objectively wrong here. Magic the Gathering basically created the CCG archetypes and they are: Aggro, Control, Combo, and Midrange
It has been this way for almost 30 years. Just because a combo can happen early does not stop it from being a combo.
As for your priest question, these archetypes can bleed together at times, but in every major card game these are the accepted archetypes.
The line you quoted literally outlines this already. I simply thought it was funny they said it over and over, but itâs hard to say anything with the nature of even the slightest of jabs in this place. Itâs something that stood out, and I was feeling a bit funny thus added it after saying I agreed with their post. Tho, I would add I donât think Reno is an âI Winâ card, but it is a card, as they say, doesnât feel good to have played against you, as the devs acknowledged in yesterdayâs post.
Not everyone needs to be on Cramerâs level of sensitivity, right? I have proof we both agree on this. Itâs okay to have a little fun.
Careful with the usage of that word. I do have arguments, logical ones, which you ignored.
I donât care if Galileo Galileli created it. That game is history. Weâre playing Hearthstone now, you know, the game with Zarimi Priest and other decks which prove my point?
OK, so youâre stuck 30 years in history. Noted. Have fun in the 90s!
Magic the Gathering is not history. You are again, just objectively wrong. MTG is more popular than Hearthstone and has withstood the test of time. You are trying to say that 30 years of competitive players and designers are wrong and you are right.
Those are the accepted archetypes. You got to learn something today.
1 Like
Yep, things like that happen from time to time. Now, I donât know a thing about MTG (and I donât care), but I know a lot about Hearthstone and history. Things are considered to be like this and 30+ years later it changes. Itâs just how progress goes.
Either way, Iâm not going to argue over something that insignificant to me. My division works for me. If your works for you, itâs fine by me.
1 Like
Judging by this guyâs short comment history, I wouldnât try to have any sort of levelled debate with them. They seem to consider themselves on a pedestal higher than anyone else, so anything they say is 100% gleaning with undeniable truth. Try to bring it into question, here come the insults and condescension.
Or Iâm completely off
1 Like
Could be, I just didnât realize it before because I agreed with most of their statements.
He could even be right in this case, but the tone and condescension and the way he did it proves your point nicely.
Iâm just glad my short history here taught me when to give up the fight xD Iâm happy to say this forum taught me that, when noone else could in 30+ years of my life 
I like to debate, especially video games; HS provides a decent level of it, too, tho, Iâve grown tired of the conspiracy theories.
Anyway, as I also stated earlier, I agree OP is correct in their list (tho, I still donât consider Reno an âI Winâ card as they say), but there is a certain way to go about it so people listen to what youâre saying as opposed to how youâre saying it. Something Iâve admittedly learned through trial and more than one error.
False. Michael Flores created the deck archetypes, and there were exactly two: âbeatdownâ and control.
And yet, you felt the need to troll the guy for one (to you) out of place mention of his time away from the game.
One.
Both the print and online versions disagree.
missed the point entirely.
But enlighten us: what are the current deck archetypes?
Most people would. The internet wasnât great, but Holy Light, everything was more affordable.
Three guesses for what game.
From a Designers/Testers perspective in the CCG market MTG is one of if not the most flawed designs in CCG or card games like it in general. When you can simply lose by not drawing a type of card form your deck that is just bad design 101. Sure we put up with it for a few years when it released but other games quickly realized that it had an inherent flaw and moved to better designs where that wasnât a possibility.
It may still be around and popular but itâs not a good design.
Even a Broken Clock is right twice a day. Predicting that the power creep couldnât keep up isnât anything special anyone that predicted such would be right when the inevitable happens.
Considering a number of people laughed off that it even existed, itâs nice to see some vindication for those who were calling the anime style power jumps finally being dealt with.