In early February, I asked the HS community the question “how is Standard now?”
The answers that I got back were:
So has the new mini-set changed anything? Has it made Standard a better format to play?
I have stopped playing and financially supporting Standard because it suffers too much from poor balance, power creep, over-tuned archetypes, non-interactive game play, and cards or mechanis that “cheat out” cards and conditions, which make it impossible for a player to respond to before incurring an inevitable loss.
The reason that I pose questions to others about Standard is to envoke the kind of player feedback that can help the devs identify the problems that they should address most to improve Standard (and other constructed modes).
So what did they get right with the MotLK mini-set and where did they go wrong? Is the current direction of Standard’s development one that you support or disagree with? How can the devs make Stanard better or more fun to play?
So, you have direct access to send such information to the devs? Or, you’re just asking to verify that you made the correct decision to quit playing standard?
Personally, I think it’s fine, but I’m okay with playing decks that win, and don’t pigeon hole myself in to playing some silly deck that gets destroyed and then complains because my idea didn’t work.
Within months of Hearthstone’s release, I started using to official forums to influence the devs to incorporate suggestions into the game in order to make it better. The number of things that I have suggested or wished for, which have became a part of the game is quite significant.
Now, I understand that the official forums are intentionally nearly dead as compared to what they once were, but I have reason to believe that it’s still possible to use them to influence the devs.
On the other hand, there have been limits to what I have been able to use these forums to accomplish—I could also create significant list of past suggestions that the devs never heeded, but certainly should have.
I regularly check on Standard’s health to check if there is any reason for me to invest time again into the format. So ya, getting feedback from those who are actually competing on the Standard ladder is a part of sorting out if my assumptions are correct or not.
Ultimately, I am this ^ kind of player as well—so I am more of a Spike, than a Johnny or a Timmy—and you will not hear me complaining about net-decking, since those decks are often the best found solutions for the current meta.
Although I do not mind playing a deck from one tier below the S-tier list, if it’s more my style or just more fun to play. I also cannot help trying to tweak a deck-list with 1-3 alternative cards, in attempt to gain a bit more of an advantage.
LOL it is like some net deckers can’t pass up the chance to rag on homebrews…I get it, homebrewers are sometimes nasty on the forums but net deckers don’t behave any better.
You might want to consider that some homebrewers who complain are more annoyed by net decks because they make the play experience more boring for the homebrewer. Personally, thats my annoyance in addition to having a lot of my wild collection made useless across multiple modes. Much of which is because of cards released during the last 3 expansions.
Every time new cards are introduced in the available card pool there is a process to discovering which combination of cards and strategies will yield the most consistent win results as one deck opposes the other decks that exist in a meta.
New metas get “solved” and the best performing decks emerge and become net-decks. It’s absurd to complain about players who play the decks which have proven to be the top decks in a competitive environment, just because such top tier decks typically have high win rates against poorer performing home brew decks.
If a meta lacks diversity that’s a design problem, but if a meta has a lot of diversity, but a home brew deck struggles to maintain a acceptable win rate—then that’s a player’s problem and a sign that they should be playing something different.
There are three common points when playing home brew or “snow flake” decks can be both a smart and a fun choice:
1). When the meta is new and completely unsolved, because an obscure deck idea might have the potential to be tweaked into becoming one the best decks, but if this proves true, then the home brew deck will inevitably become a net deck.
2). When the vast majority of players are playing the same 2-3 high tier decks, then creating a deck that is favored against at least of two of those most popular decks is an appropriate option, even if the deck is easily beaten by less commonly played decks on the ladder.
3). When any thing triggers a shift from what was the most popular and successful decks played on the ladder, which could be caused by things like:
When a well followed streamer or tournament winner influences a rise in a deck’s popularity.
When one or more top tier decks have suppressed or chased away decks that a particular home brew deck would normally be vulnerable too, but such a home brew deck is able to hold its own against several of the most popular top tier decks.
When new nerfs or buffs are made, opening up an opportunity for some new home brew decks to now out perform some other good decks, but again if this happens, these new home brew decks will quickly become net decks.
In environment of 30 card decks, any deck that proves to be among the best decks in the meta will quickly become a net deck.
I didn’t mean to imply that it is dumb to play optimized decks, simply that facing the same couple decks repeatedly is bound to cause frustration. I think it is even more painful for the kind of homebrewer who wants to compete in a varied field. I know I get frustrated even when I am winning if I face the same decks over and over again. That’s why I try to stay in lower than D4 rank in Wild and have a hard time getting myself to climb Standard…heck I have been aiming even lower than D4 in Wild due to the increased number of net decks there the last couple expansions.
So my complaint is not so much that net decks exist as I know people will play them even if I don’t get the appeal (It is personally a meaningless win for me and feels very strange to play something I didn’t customize, so a personal taste thing I guess.). My complaint is that there is not enough different decks to face…
If that’s the case, then Standard must currently be suffering from some design and balance issues. I would not know, since I have not been playing Standard for quite some time now.
Looking at HSReplay, Shaman (mostly Evolve Shaman) and DK (mostly Frost, but also Unholy and Blood) have been enjoying about a 4 to nearly 5 percent lead or better against 8 of the other classes. Hunter looks dead, without a dog in the fight.
Evolve Shaman looks like it’s been the most popular deck, but a recent nerf that removed Neptulon the Tidehunter from the pool of cards that some cards could be transformed into will possibly topple Evolve Shaman from being the best deck. I would expect to see even more DK players this week.
I have seen complaints about turn 6 OTKs in the forums, and while the meta may be fresher, it might also have bigger problems than it did before the mini-set—IDK—which is a reason I was looking for feedback about how Standard is right now.