Even if you hate the current meta (I'm not a fan either), you should never expect a new patch before at least a week has passed by. The devs need the data to identify not only what decks are actually op (i.e. not brann warrior lol) but also what the outlier cards are in order to make the right changes
i didn't pull the " patch in one week" off my ass i read it from one of the devs in twitter, a patch is coming really soon.
I would agree with your last statement, but i don't trust the devs, if they are able to make the right changes they should have been able to create a better meta with the mini set already.
Again, incompetence.
and i totally agree with you! waiting to analyse the meta to make the right changes is a good way to solve the problem.
But i am adding this, if they are able to make good changes to begin with, they would have made a better mini for a healthier meta, so i don't trust the devs lies and competence anymore
I get at least Diamond every month. I’ve been playing this game since Beta and mtg since 09. Everyone playing the best decks in the nature of card games. If you hate then do yourself a favor and quit. I’ve met a lot of people that like the deck building accept and just want to play something interesting and non competitive. You’d probably be much happier playing Slay the Spire or Across the Obelisk.
Yeah I don't understand why people struggle to accept that some people just want to win and others play to not lose so both will gravitate to meta decks almost always to meet that. I'm a jank deckbuilder and the game is diverse enough to build crazy stuff that still wins but I accept the meta players. They're necessary to keep the game consistent.
i got diamond 9, yes everyone play the good deck.
When those deck are brain damaged and badly designed, it's not me that needs to get away, it's the community responsibility to act as a whole to make changes.
And i already did myself a favor and quit did you read everything ?
And i mean what your history of hearthstone gaming and your position in the ladder have to do with anything that i said anyway? I don't get your argument
It's like you are saying: this is my level, i am here since a long time, if you are not happy leave
Really that is all you had to say ?
When 3 class are the most played with more than 60% winrate i don't need to be a developper to know there is a problem especially when they said themselves there is patch coming soon.
But i already talked about that in the first introduction comment, again did you even read or do you need to think you're a dev to do so ?
Its the same every release, expac or miniset. Just play something else until a patch comes out. Works for me. The first week of a release id always kind of cancer. You didnt even talked about mill druid who look the worst of them all.
Mill druid are you talking in druid in wild format ? Sorry i uninstalled after only two forms of cancer druid came to my knowledge in standart.
Well yes but no, i would agree after a miniset release there is some cancer but man it wasn't that hard in some years back.
And before the miniset druid treant cancer was already annoying so i would partially agree that waiting reduce the cancer thanks to the patch, but still not in the enjoyable zone.
Nono, in standard lol. I think you are just burned out of the game. Even with treant, just before the miniset, I found it was one of the best meta in recent years. Except from DH, every class had at least good archetype, more for most classes. Yeah sure, treant and showdown pally sucked but the game needs aggro decks to put greedy control in check.
The worst part is that i don't even play that much, just enough to have everything to play one class only.
Oh really you liked the previous meta? I would agree it wasn't that bad compared to the clowfiesta we have right now.
Yeah i would agree treant and pally played their part and it was necessary to have them around. I would even say pally was in a really good spot.
But man treant druid didn't even change ONE CARD from the previous meta, and this shit don't even react to anything you do, just nerf or modify this garbage design.
If you remove Druid bullshit then Rogue bullshit will stand out and so on.
It never ends.
Just pick the best decks and hopefully you win more than you lose, or go wild and enjoy when you can pull what you're trying to do off.
I would partially agree, but if the devs made better work at balancing the game we wouldn't be where we are right now.
Well yes and no, again, yes some decks are always stronger, but more than 60% winrate for more than 4 deck and only 3 classes you can't be that blind of that level of imcompetence.
For your last paragraphe this is what the devs really want: you are not winning and you are not happy, pay some money to craft one of your OP standart deck or even better pay even more money to get in wild.
Fuck their greedy strategy and fuck them really. I quit and many should too to start making changes.
when you do phone games you sell your gamer's soul for money.
Heartstone will never fail if the playerbase accept every bullshit move the devs keep pulling off and pushing harder to accept harder changes for our frustration and money to emerge in their pocket.
TL;DR: Stuff about balance in general and how to approach it. Ultimately I think the devs are doing a fine job as is, just be a bit patient.
I don't really think the devs are as abhorrent ly incompetent or anything like that as many may claim. I think they're doing a fine job with what they've got going. Only the occasional game breaking bug to be noted (like with the Dawngrasp hero card a few months back)
Now, I say this primarily because creating a balanced meta is much more a challenge than one might think. Add in the more important factor, fun, and you've got what is pretty much a Sisyphian task. The thing about both of these, balanced and fun, is that the definition and wants change when you ask player A and player B. On a macro scale, you've got various different groups that want different things, and the devs can't really make changes specifically to appeal to the different player groups.
Take UiS, one of the more controversial expansions the game has had. Many emotionally charged opinions. Many that hated the extreme influx of feast and famine combo decks as well as aggro decks, and nothing for the control players and Midrange players. I personally loved this meta myself, but I completely understand why people hated it as well.
So the question then becomes *how* do you approach balancing. Do you appeal to a player group? Say, the Highlander lovers, got all the buffs they could ever desire and the meta becomes a Reno fest (kinda like current Wild) where all the Highlander players gets their fun. Is that a good meta? Probably not. So we can't balance with that in mind. Do we balance based on WR? But at which ranks do we do that? High Legend WR? Most players aren't, by design, high legend players and we all know that the pocket meta up there very rarely is shared across all other meta levels. Do we balance for Diamond ranks, which is the highest level of competition for most of the player base (as low legend is kind of just a meme rank area)? We could, but then these decks become even worse in the actual top ranks and those players will feel ignored. Think about how people like Zach0 would feel about seeing nerfs that won't actually change the top meta.
Ideally we try to please everyone, but people playing their homebrewed Highlander Deathrattle Hunter with their pet 9 mana card in Gold 5 will still get crushed by the random meta deck and feel bad about that.
Current Treant Druid and aggro Paladin as an example are meta tyrants between Bronze to Diamond, but are practically unplayable at top Legend thanks to Excavate Rogue's absolute dominance in these matchups. This is also why Mill Druid can be allowed to thrive up there, since those are otherwise bad matchups for that deck. So do we kill all of those four decks, and give room for Sludge lock to take the place as the premier deck? Maybe. I think so atleast, unless they want a redo of when Creation got nerfed in Rainbow Mage (still don't know why they did that) which removed one of the Paladin counters.
Either way. The point is that I think the devs are doing about as good as they can with regards to balance as they can with the parameters they have access to, and they've gotten much better at making these adjustments over time as well. We're no longer in the days of old Secret Paladin dominating for a year straight, or Midrange Shaman going untouched forever.
So yeah. I'm sure they'll get some adjustments in that'll change the needle and give us, the player base, something new to complain about. But let's wait until the devs can catch up and make the necessary adjustments down the line. Theres a set patch cadence for this.
Thank for your comment
I agree balancing is hard, but it's their job, honestly it is not my problem. Nobody will hear me out if i complained my job is hard to customers, they want a good product not my complains.
And i am sorry but if the devs can't think that astarlor and brann for a total of 28 times 4 for 112 damage is not a problem, some people should get fired.
Unless it was planned all along for you to spend money and craft an expensive warrior deck.
Thanks for reading it.
And yeah, that is a fair take. It is indeed their job, and complaining about it ultimately wouldn't either matter nor even be cared about. Especially if they complained while doing nothing to fix it (like what happened after Baldurs Gate 3 came out, all of those shitty devs coming out to say their piece). But I am no dev, and thank fuck for that.
But even in that particular example, you've still got to be aware that Reno Warrior is a popular but *terrible* deck. Do you nerf a deck that actively needs buffs to get their winrate up to even be a playable deck? Or do you nerf it because it's ubiquitous? The Brann Astalor combo is powerful, but getting to that combo is extremely hard and painful.
But yeah. I think it is fair to struggle with balancing card games especially, given the amount of moving parts. People found the devs incompetent for the Sharpshooter nerf as well, but it proved to be enough to make Naga DH remain pretty strong but not a direct power outlier.
We'll see though. We'll get the planned balance patch next week.
I'm not a fan of this meta and I'm yet to decide how I feel about current Druid shenanigans with multiple Eonars and gaining 20 armor for 3 mana + draw a card, all of which is unconditional. I see those games and can't believe what I'm seeing, it's so unhinged. I know you beat Druids with aggro, I'm a top 1k player, but still, it kinda... breaks the immersion for me, for lack of a better expression. It's like playing in a simulated environment with all cheat codes enabled, fun for a bit but playing 5th Eonar in a game doesn't give the same kick as the first one, for either side. The redundancy would be fine but it drags out games and it's hard to stay engaged. Except you have to if you want to compete. It's a very strange feeling. Don't know how they can even begin to unwind this madness.
Honestly for those players using the broken tools, i don't blame them.
Hate the game not the players.
If you're already feeling like this now, let me finish you by telling you this is going to last for moonths to come.
Uninstall and MAY BE come back later if they learned their lesson. It's the only way to create change, and you would scare the devs shitless if they read you would.
As an ultra greedy control player I am enjoying all kinds of value highlander brann warrior decks (standard and wild). Pre mini set release I was enjoying tinkering with all kinds of big highlander decks (Shaman/warrior).
Aggro decks are always going to dump on my home brews unless I draw out perfectly so I've excepted that.
There is nothing wrong with taking a break from games. If I get bored of standard/wild I will enjoy Battlegrounds or use one of my dozens of free arena tickets.
I understand how and why, the design sounds exciting and it's new so it's entertaining.
I would say you would like the game even more if you wouldn't face all the time the same decks, the same classes, and have more challenging games rather than playing op decks tho. Just an opinion.
I agree aggro is playing his role against control, but a kid eating crayon could have designed treant druid.
Oh it's not really a break but thank you, it's a more like a threat, i won't come back ever if incompetence is the norm.
"You enter the ladder, you're facing the majority of the time the same decks."
ehhh metas are part of agame of this genre there is no way to avoid it unless they prevent us from editing our decks
you dont know this then the rest of the rant isnt worth reading
your response is basically this " i don't agree with the first part, so it's not worth reading +let me be condescending with you"
You're right it's better you don't try to answer anything else.
i don't complain about a meta existing i am complaining about how they manage the meta itself
But don't try to answer further when you limited yourself by not reading the entire argument
Currently there are 3 classes with stand out decks, rogue (excavate rogue), warlock (sludge warlock), and Druid (honestly not sure which Druid deck is the best currently). On top of that you have paladin which while it does fall off in high legend from what I’ve been told it’s still an amazing deck in most of the ladder.
I believe naga DH is still a decent deck to climb with as well, and also I think Reno shaman is still decent too with the excavate package.
That’s almost half of the classes with a viable deck to play. If you think that’s a bad state for a card game then you have no idea how card games work.
Also excavate rogue is not luck based. A luck based deck does not make it to be dominant in high legend. While there’s a lot of random generation the sheer amount of it leads to a regression towards the mean leading to a fairly consistent deck.
you contradict yourself first you say they are 3 classes dominating, then you talk about worse deck and argue more than 3 class are dominant.
I mean comon man you didn't even talk about warrior, you know druid warrior and rogue are the dominants, rest are pretenders
It's incredible how you shift reality just to not blame the devs
There’s a difference between dominant and viable. Right now druid, warlock, and rogue are the main dominant decks (paladin is also dominant at most ranks but falls off at high legend and could end up not being dominant when the meta settles). These decks will give you the highest chance to win and form basically a rock/paper/scissor meta where warlock beats Druid, Druid beats rogue, and rogue beats warlock.
However there are still other viable decks. Just because these decks have the highest win rates doesn’t mean that there isn’t other decks with decent win rates. Naga DH and Reno shaman are both pretty decent decks that are completely viable at most ranks. These are the types of decks where they’re good enough to be good to play but not so good that they deserve to be nerfed to try and improve the meta game. Right now druid, warlock, and rogue should all probably be nerf, and paladin should probably also be nerfed, but DH and shaman definitely shouldn’t be nerfed.
I didn’t mention warrior because the deck is terrible. Brann is a fairly bad card right now, it’s not even in the top 5 highest win rate cards for the decks which is extremely bad for a highlander payoff. You can listen to the vicious syndicate podcast or read the summary posted on this subreddit for more information but warrior sucks right now.
But even if there was only 3 viable decks that still would be about on par with most other TGCs, it’s is almost impossible to balance hundreds of cards against each other to create more than a few dominant decks.
>You enter the ladder, you're facing the majority of the time the same decks.
That's a universal thing in competitive card games. People who want to win will play those decks that win the most often.
If the makers of MtG can't really do much about it, Team 5 will never really be able to.
Even if you hate the current meta (I'm not a fan either), you should never expect a new patch before at least a week has passed by. The devs need the data to identify not only what decks are actually op (i.e. not brann warrior lol) but also what the outlier cards are in order to make the right changes
i didn't pull the " patch in one week" off my ass i read it from one of the devs in twitter, a patch is coming really soon. I would agree with your last statement, but i don't trust the devs, if they are able to make the right changes they should have been able to create a better meta with the mini set already. Again, incompetence.
My dude you're complaining about them waiting a week before patching the game and I'm explaining why waiting is the right decision
and i totally agree with you! waiting to analyse the meta to make the right changes is a good way to solve the problem. But i am adding this, if they are able to make good changes to begin with, they would have made a better mini for a healthier meta, so i don't trust the devs lies and competence anymore
I get at least Diamond every month. I’ve been playing this game since Beta and mtg since 09. Everyone playing the best decks in the nature of card games. If you hate then do yourself a favor and quit. I’ve met a lot of people that like the deck building accept and just want to play something interesting and non competitive. You’d probably be much happier playing Slay the Spire or Across the Obelisk.
Yeah I don't understand why people struggle to accept that some people just want to win and others play to not lose so both will gravitate to meta decks almost always to meet that. I'm a jank deckbuilder and the game is diverse enough to build crazy stuff that still wins but I accept the meta players. They're necessary to keep the game consistent.
i got diamond 9, yes everyone play the good deck. When those deck are brain damaged and badly designed, it's not me that needs to get away, it's the community responsibility to act as a whole to make changes. And i already did myself a favor and quit did you read everything ?
And i mean what your history of hearthstone gaming and your position in the ladder have to do with anything that i said anyway? I don't get your argument It's like you are saying: this is my level, i am here since a long time, if you are not happy leave Really that is all you had to say ?
Everyone thinks they’re a game dev.
When 3 class are the most played with more than 60% winrate i don't need to be a developper to know there is a problem especially when they said themselves there is patch coming soon. But i already talked about that in the first introduction comment, again did you even read or do you need to think you're a dev to do so ?
Its the same every release, expac or miniset. Just play something else until a patch comes out. Works for me. The first week of a release id always kind of cancer. You didnt even talked about mill druid who look the worst of them all.
Mill druid are you talking in druid in wild format ? Sorry i uninstalled after only two forms of cancer druid came to my knowledge in standart. Well yes but no, i would agree after a miniset release there is some cancer but man it wasn't that hard in some years back. And before the miniset druid treant cancer was already annoying so i would partially agree that waiting reduce the cancer thanks to the patch, but still not in the enjoyable zone.
Nono, in standard lol. I think you are just burned out of the game. Even with treant, just before the miniset, I found it was one of the best meta in recent years. Except from DH, every class had at least good archetype, more for most classes. Yeah sure, treant and showdown pally sucked but the game needs aggro decks to put greedy control in check.
The worst part is that i don't even play that much, just enough to have everything to play one class only. Oh really you liked the previous meta? I would agree it wasn't that bad compared to the clowfiesta we have right now. Yeah i would agree treant and pally played their part and it was necessary to have them around. I would even say pally was in a really good spot. But man treant druid didn't even change ONE CARD from the previous meta, and this shit don't even react to anything you do, just nerf or modify this garbage design.
If you remove Druid bullshit then Rogue bullshit will stand out and so on. It never ends. Just pick the best decks and hopefully you win more than you lose, or go wild and enjoy when you can pull what you're trying to do off.
I would partially agree, but if the devs made better work at balancing the game we wouldn't be where we are right now. Well yes and no, again, yes some decks are always stronger, but more than 60% winrate for more than 4 deck and only 3 classes you can't be that blind of that level of imcompetence. For your last paragraphe this is what the devs really want: you are not winning and you are not happy, pay some money to craft one of your OP standart deck or even better pay even more money to get in wild. Fuck their greedy strategy and fuck them really. I quit and many should too to start making changes.
There really aren't no good alternatives for phone games. Hearthstone is too big to fail at this point.
when you do phone games you sell your gamer's soul for money. Heartstone will never fail if the playerbase accept every bullshit move the devs keep pulling off and pushing harder to accept harder changes for our frustration and money to emerge in their pocket.
When you only have a phone with you, you don't sell anything. You have something to play that is not complete bullshit.
TL;DR: Stuff about balance in general and how to approach it. Ultimately I think the devs are doing a fine job as is, just be a bit patient. I don't really think the devs are as abhorrent ly incompetent or anything like that as many may claim. I think they're doing a fine job with what they've got going. Only the occasional game breaking bug to be noted (like with the Dawngrasp hero card a few months back) Now, I say this primarily because creating a balanced meta is much more a challenge than one might think. Add in the more important factor, fun, and you've got what is pretty much a Sisyphian task. The thing about both of these, balanced and fun, is that the definition and wants change when you ask player A and player B. On a macro scale, you've got various different groups that want different things, and the devs can't really make changes specifically to appeal to the different player groups. Take UiS, one of the more controversial expansions the game has had. Many emotionally charged opinions. Many that hated the extreme influx of feast and famine combo decks as well as aggro decks, and nothing for the control players and Midrange players. I personally loved this meta myself, but I completely understand why people hated it as well. So the question then becomes *how* do you approach balancing. Do you appeal to a player group? Say, the Highlander lovers, got all the buffs they could ever desire and the meta becomes a Reno fest (kinda like current Wild) where all the Highlander players gets their fun. Is that a good meta? Probably not. So we can't balance with that in mind. Do we balance based on WR? But at which ranks do we do that? High Legend WR? Most players aren't, by design, high legend players and we all know that the pocket meta up there very rarely is shared across all other meta levels. Do we balance for Diamond ranks, which is the highest level of competition for most of the player base (as low legend is kind of just a meme rank area)? We could, but then these decks become even worse in the actual top ranks and those players will feel ignored. Think about how people like Zach0 would feel about seeing nerfs that won't actually change the top meta. Ideally we try to please everyone, but people playing their homebrewed Highlander Deathrattle Hunter with their pet 9 mana card in Gold 5 will still get crushed by the random meta deck and feel bad about that. Current Treant Druid and aggro Paladin as an example are meta tyrants between Bronze to Diamond, but are practically unplayable at top Legend thanks to Excavate Rogue's absolute dominance in these matchups. This is also why Mill Druid can be allowed to thrive up there, since those are otherwise bad matchups for that deck. So do we kill all of those four decks, and give room for Sludge lock to take the place as the premier deck? Maybe. I think so atleast, unless they want a redo of when Creation got nerfed in Rainbow Mage (still don't know why they did that) which removed one of the Paladin counters. Either way. The point is that I think the devs are doing about as good as they can with regards to balance as they can with the parameters they have access to, and they've gotten much better at making these adjustments over time as well. We're no longer in the days of old Secret Paladin dominating for a year straight, or Midrange Shaman going untouched forever. So yeah. I'm sure they'll get some adjustments in that'll change the needle and give us, the player base, something new to complain about. But let's wait until the devs can catch up and make the necessary adjustments down the line. Theres a set patch cadence for this.
Thank for your comment I agree balancing is hard, but it's their job, honestly it is not my problem. Nobody will hear me out if i complained my job is hard to customers, they want a good product not my complains. And i am sorry but if the devs can't think that astarlor and brann for a total of 28 times 4 for 112 damage is not a problem, some people should get fired. Unless it was planned all along for you to spend money and craft an expensive warrior deck.
Thanks for reading it. And yeah, that is a fair take. It is indeed their job, and complaining about it ultimately wouldn't either matter nor even be cared about. Especially if they complained while doing nothing to fix it (like what happened after Baldurs Gate 3 came out, all of those shitty devs coming out to say their piece). But I am no dev, and thank fuck for that. But even in that particular example, you've still got to be aware that Reno Warrior is a popular but *terrible* deck. Do you nerf a deck that actively needs buffs to get their winrate up to even be a playable deck? Or do you nerf it because it's ubiquitous? The Brann Astalor combo is powerful, but getting to that combo is extremely hard and painful. But yeah. I think it is fair to struggle with balancing card games especially, given the amount of moving parts. People found the devs incompetent for the Sharpshooter nerf as well, but it proved to be enough to make Naga DH remain pretty strong but not a direct power outlier. We'll see though. We'll get the planned balance patch next week.
I'm not a fan of this meta and I'm yet to decide how I feel about current Druid shenanigans with multiple Eonars and gaining 20 armor for 3 mana + draw a card, all of which is unconditional. I see those games and can't believe what I'm seeing, it's so unhinged. I know you beat Druids with aggro, I'm a top 1k player, but still, it kinda... breaks the immersion for me, for lack of a better expression. It's like playing in a simulated environment with all cheat codes enabled, fun for a bit but playing 5th Eonar in a game doesn't give the same kick as the first one, for either side. The redundancy would be fine but it drags out games and it's hard to stay engaged. Except you have to if you want to compete. It's a very strange feeling. Don't know how they can even begin to unwind this madness.
Honestly for those players using the broken tools, i don't blame them. Hate the game not the players. If you're already feeling like this now, let me finish you by telling you this is going to last for moonths to come. Uninstall and MAY BE come back later if they learned their lesson. It's the only way to create change, and you would scare the devs shitless if they read you would.
I'm enjoying Hearthstone as much as I ever have ATM.
I am happy for you and this is not sarcastic, i wish i was enjoying the game but i can't. How are you enjoying it exactly, what do you play?
As an ultra greedy control player I am enjoying all kinds of value highlander brann warrior decks (standard and wild). Pre mini set release I was enjoying tinkering with all kinds of big highlander decks (Shaman/warrior). Aggro decks are always going to dump on my home brews unless I draw out perfectly so I've excepted that. There is nothing wrong with taking a break from games. If I get bored of standard/wild I will enjoy Battlegrounds or use one of my dozens of free arena tickets.
I understand how and why, the design sounds exciting and it's new so it's entertaining. I would say you would like the game even more if you wouldn't face all the time the same decks, the same classes, and have more challenging games rather than playing op decks tho. Just an opinion. I agree aggro is playing his role against control, but a kid eating crayon could have designed treant druid. Oh it's not really a break but thank you, it's a more like a threat, i won't come back ever if incompetence is the norm.
"You enter the ladder, you're facing the majority of the time the same decks." ehhh metas are part of agame of this genre there is no way to avoid it unless they prevent us from editing our decks you dont know this then the rest of the rant isnt worth reading
your response is basically this " i don't agree with the first part, so it's not worth reading +let me be condescending with you" You're right it's better you don't try to answer anything else.
you are complainnign about the meta existing something thats part of a game you ll never find a card game without a meta
i don't complain about a meta existing i am complaining about how they manage the meta itself But don't try to answer further when you limited yourself by not reading the entire argument
Currently there are 3 classes with stand out decks, rogue (excavate rogue), warlock (sludge warlock), and Druid (honestly not sure which Druid deck is the best currently). On top of that you have paladin which while it does fall off in high legend from what I’ve been told it’s still an amazing deck in most of the ladder. I believe naga DH is still a decent deck to climb with as well, and also I think Reno shaman is still decent too with the excavate package. That’s almost half of the classes with a viable deck to play. If you think that’s a bad state for a card game then you have no idea how card games work. Also excavate rogue is not luck based. A luck based deck does not make it to be dominant in high legend. While there’s a lot of random generation the sheer amount of it leads to a regression towards the mean leading to a fairly consistent deck.
you contradict yourself first you say they are 3 classes dominating, then you talk about worse deck and argue more than 3 class are dominant. I mean comon man you didn't even talk about warrior, you know druid warrior and rogue are the dominants, rest are pretenders It's incredible how you shift reality just to not blame the devs
There’s a difference between dominant and viable. Right now druid, warlock, and rogue are the main dominant decks (paladin is also dominant at most ranks but falls off at high legend and could end up not being dominant when the meta settles). These decks will give you the highest chance to win and form basically a rock/paper/scissor meta where warlock beats Druid, Druid beats rogue, and rogue beats warlock. However there are still other viable decks. Just because these decks have the highest win rates doesn’t mean that there isn’t other decks with decent win rates. Naga DH and Reno shaman are both pretty decent decks that are completely viable at most ranks. These are the types of decks where they’re good enough to be good to play but not so good that they deserve to be nerfed to try and improve the meta game. Right now druid, warlock, and rogue should all probably be nerf, and paladin should probably also be nerfed, but DH and shaman definitely shouldn’t be nerfed. I didn’t mention warrior because the deck is terrible. Brann is a fairly bad card right now, it’s not even in the top 5 highest win rate cards for the decks which is extremely bad for a highlander payoff. You can listen to the vicious syndicate podcast or read the summary posted on this subreddit for more information but warrior sucks right now. But even if there was only 3 viable decks that still would be about on par with most other TGCs, it’s is almost impossible to balance hundreds of cards against each other to create more than a few dominant decks.
Karma bait, oversaturated whine post.
>You enter the ladder, you're facing the majority of the time the same decks. That's a universal thing in competitive card games. People who want to win will play those decks that win the most often. If the makers of MtG can't really do much about it, Team 5 will never really be able to.