I see this term thrown around a lot. It has come to the point, unfortunately, that players use this argument typically against decks they lose to. These decks also often don’t run many if any minions. These decks, however, will usually interact with your minions and yet are deemed uninteractive. This seems contradictory to me. I’d appreciate some help in understanding what this term really means in regard to Hearthstone.
And so, how do you define uninteractive?
I play cards, they don’t care and keep playing their cards.
They play cards, I can’t stop them with my cards.
Simple.
But they do interact with your minions. They do care if those minions pose enough of a threat.
If two 1 mana spells are enough for them while 10 mana worth of healing and armor can’t stop them, it’s uninteractive (if that’s actually the case, which it often isn’t).
I’m not familiar with any deck that does that in standard. Maybe Lifesteal Demon Hunter, but that’s not really played anymore. You can outheal and out armor these decks, usually, while you also kill them actively.
I just think it’s a shame that the only class that can counter spells is the class that doesn’t play any of its secrets.
I agree. I believe we need more disruption. I know we haven’t been seeing it, but I imagine that it’s possible for a viable Secret Paladin to exist.
Edit: I’d also like to thank you for commenting your view.
Yes, because your deck is interactive.
Their deck is not. You aren’t doing anything to interact with their deck. Take Mozaki for example. They’re interacting with you. You aren’t interacting with them. You play a card, they play a spell on it. They get to interact with your deck. On your turn, what cards of theirs are you interacting with? None. Almost never.
Watching GMs often kill their own minions is rather telling, imo.
Pretty much this, although I’d say that cards are what are fundamentally interactive or not. A deck is most likely going to place somewhere on an interactivity spectrum, based on the cards, and some draws are more interactive than others. I wouldn’t consider Mozaki Mage to be a completely uninteractive deck so much as one that scores very low on interactivity.
If Mozaki Mage is interactive then the word is meaningless. The only thing less interactive is probably Fatigue Warlock, because it’s an untouchable Quest.
Sometimes Mozaki Mage Primordial Studies into a Thalnos or something and ends the turn with it on the board.
I’m not trying to make out like that’s super interactive, but it’s nonzero.
I define it as OTK combo decks. I absolutely hate them, won’t play them. Losing to Kazakusan treasures feels better than losing to Mozaki mage or shudder DH OTK combo. At least with Kazakusan there’s a CHANCE they get crappy treasures and I get great draw and pull it out in a turn or two.
Imo battlegrounds are uninteractive, which is one reason I don’t play battlegrounds.
Uninteractive means that the enemys gameplay makes no difference on your gameplay. So no matter what the enemy does you just ignore it and cast spells on face, as it makes no difference what the enemy does
When someone complains “I keep losing to this deck and their is nothing I can do about it, WTF!”, they are exaggerating. Just about all decks CAN be interacted with on some level. People don’t want to do it because adding the available options or switching decks to have a better matchup isn’t what they want. They want to keep playing the list they have and for everything else to be beatable.
My definition might not be a common one. For me, it’s decks like Spell Priest and Deck of Lunacy Mage before thy were nerfed. Highly competitive decks that win solely through random generation can’t really be interacted with IMO. I can’t really change a few cards to have a better matchup when 75% of the cards they play didn’t even start in their deck.
Uninteractive decks are decks which the win conditions are held in hand until it is time to otk. They stall and interact with you as @Schyla mentioned, but they protect their win condition by not allowing the opportunity to counter them before the turn they actually do the thing. Galvanger otk is a lot like this also, granted I personally think it’s not a very good deck.
Optimally these kind of strategies should have their consistency limited by draw and the amount of combo pieces needed to assemble. This is why Galvanger charge warrior is far less offensive than something like Mozaki mage. The mage deck has flexibility in the amount of burn and draw cards available. The charge warrior deck needs to assemble a very specific set of 6 or so cards with limited card draw.
The consistent complaint seems to be that some decks are uninteractive, and decide when and if to interact with you while you have no way of interacting with them.
It’s time for more disruption. We have so very little, and I believe that is becoming a problem. Moreover, without any disruption, these uninteractive decks are able to run rampant and turn Hearthstone into solitaire.
Uninteractive is sitting there and not playing any cards.
Which is often only to advance their win con and they would kill their own minions to do same if mine weren’t on the board.
Exactly.
Uninteractive means short of lethal to your opponent, nothing you do stops their win con.