Originally Posted by
Bodhisattva
And what you end up with, is a meta triangle. If Hearthstone was a well designed game, that'd be fine. Because if it were a well designed game, shit like Taunt Warrior vs. Face Hunter would require both players to make intelligent decisions to win. But it's not :c
Oh tell me about how people like savjz literally get top10 legend ranks with shit like recruit paladin. Of course there will be a meta structure in any given cardgame. Even RTS games like starcraft have a similar structure.
Sure pirate warrior and murlocs are a bit anti fun but the meta is currently super vibrant and so many things are viable. In the end there will always be hard counters, but complaining about counters in a TGC is like complaining about the sun getting up. That's the way cardgames work.
Ele shaman, pirate and taunt warrior, ele/jade shaman, quest and miracle rogue, midrange paladin and murloc architypes (and many more) are currently viable for ladder play. To say that hearthstone is not a well designed game while having so many viable decktypes is pure bs.
I'm currently playing with a version of recruit paladin and I am absolutely loving it. Teching the deck to counter most aggro (unless perfect draw) while still keeping lategame makes it possible to win against any deck type, granted I manage to play well. Complaining about the current meta just feels weird to me after only jade druid, renomage/lock and pirate warrior were a thing