He dropped it. In his Twitter account. Don’t ask for a link, I am too naughty for those privileges.
https://twitter.com/J_Alexander_HS
He’s the best dedicated Rogue player in the game. He wants more people to get better at Hearthstone. He wants to cut through the BS and give you the real story.
The big picture:
Hearthstone is a game about reducing your opponent’s health to 0.
I can agree people sometimes can just complain without reason though but this is not one of those times.
There is just one problem not everyone is a aggro player some streamers are value players so just because one streamer feels that the meta is ok does not mean it is sorry marco hard disagree here.
It is about reducing your opponents hp to zero some decks do it fast others slowly or in one turn.
Atm there is an over abundance of fast decks and decks that do it one turn.
What does that have to do with the Hanar point? Hanar isn’t an Aggro card.
Let me guess. You didn’t read it.
I though he was talking about the meta in general my apolgies what was i supposed to read marco.
I don’t think this will change anytime soon, this is by design, the dev team wants gameover/lethal between turn 6 to 8, the only way you can get this across the board is to make burn and otk prevalent.
The only possibility would be to oust otk for only burn or vice versa, burn but no otk. Either case there will be a significant population of players unhappy about state of game.
He’s been working on this for years.
Read the Thesis.
It’s linked in his Twitter.
Ok il will read the thesis but marco if he is advocating for just one playstyle i cant agree with the thesis i am saying this upfront and i feel that is a fair comment.
The problem with otks is simple i think mallenroh made an excellent point i agree with it.
Otk decks used to have limited draw and had to navigate awkward turns, if you couple that manacheat and powercreep otks are now faster and easier to pull off.
All they really need to do is nerf carddraw and manacheat and dmg from spells its that simple.
Nobody wants to go back to classic but we dont blowout turns early either or otks from turn 8 to 10 onwards either or to die to to aggro decks that can output massive amounts of dmg in the early turns by means of cheating out stats etc.
Otk combo and control need to be all viable but i feel that otks have become to fast and need to be slowed down it can only lead to a more diverse meta if all 3 playstyles are viable.
He’s advocating one play style:
Winning.
Firstly i have no issues with you but that does not mean i will agree to everyone you say and you dont have to agree with what i say but some things are written in stone that being that all 3 playstyles need to be viable they dont all have to be tier 1 but at least be viable.
I deleted my reply by accident so il make it short i just told you that some decks win fast and some win slower i am against fatigue control but some sort of slow deck should be viable,
Lastly aggro and otk has been slowly powerkreeping renthal just proved that the onlt way for slower decks to keep up was to have more health,
Faster decks an combo decks were still able to eat through the 40 health if i am corrent.
Point being that if aggro and otk have been powercrept then slower decks need some powercreep of their own or we dial powercreep and mana cheat back it is that simple really.
What does that have to do with having your play style be, “winning”.
Not aggro, not control, midrange, fishrange, one turn concede.
Winning.
This isn’t about today, last expansion, Stormwind, Knights of the Frozen Stone, it’s a years in the works paper about how to play Hearthstone.
I wish i could this specific thread of his i am reading his twitter profile hang on marco i will need some time to find it 
I did read one of his other posts it kind of at least to me feels that he is kind of saying peoples complains are unfounded idk its just how i interpret it but give me some time to scrounge twiiter lol also he is receiving some pushback from other people as well it seems.
It’s actually old.
From May last year.
Somehow Twitter put it on the top for me.
But again, it’s a universal approach and mindset that has nothing to do with a specific meta or decks.
Oh well that helps alot xd
I haven’t read his whole Google doc, but my take on what he wrote is that it’s both too verbose as well as too simplistic.
For example, he advocates for playing Hanar the shadow jeweler on turn 2, and goes into a very very long disposition about why that should be your default, or preferred play unless you have a reason not to. I think that misses the point, it’s far too simplistic… The correct answer is, you should make the decision completely based on the most likely set of outcomes by making the play.
So the correct answer in the Hanar case is, does playing him on turn two ultimately bring you closer to winning or not. He argues that putting stats on the board is enough reason to say it does. That’s yet again far too simple. A good player has to make the determination that if Hanar provides no additional value they have enough resources to win the game. This determination is not easy to make and is typically done using experience.
Anyhow, he spends far too much time on describing really really simple concepts and fails to explain the important minutia involved in making complex decisions such as those I just described.
He’s probably a good player, but that doesn’t automatically make him a good teacher.
Props to him for writing do much, however, and making it available, it will improve a certain class of lower ranked players abilities of they read it, I don’t doubt, but as far as I can tell, there isn’t some secret sauce or deep wisdom in his words.
My two cents.
For advanced players who play with a winning mindset, a lot is probably redundant.
That’s not the average person in this forum.
The main problem with him is that he plays just one class and also mainly one playstyle and that often influences how objective his viewpoint is now if you take bunnyhopper or jarla for example id be more interested in their opinion because they play all playstyles not just one.
You can agree with him but dont expect everyoen to agree with him just because he is high legend an as i pointed out other players and im sure other high legend players disagree with his viewpoint.
Each of these pro and high legend players have their preferences, some like JAlex like fast combo decks from UiS like garrote rogue, but in the end what will drive the balance changes is the player count. If many players dropped after the Renathal nerf I’m sure they’ll revert it.
What do you disagree with?
Its like a 10.000 word essay if not more?
It looks interesting and i might read it all. But it is not exactly all that accessible for many players,seeing the lenght of the thesis.
Is there a short version of it?