Fireside Chat: Do you follow the Meta?
by JR Cook - 10 years ago show comments
For many people new to Hearthstone, the idea of what exactly The Meta is may be confusing. With all of the options for cards out there, there are a seemingly infinite* combination of decks that are possible. But with all of those combinations, there are only so many decks that are able to compete at the highest level, and that’s where The Meta comes into play. Understanding what the popular combinations are that you’re most likely to encounter while climbing the ranked ladder and how to counter them will make your ascent a much smoother one and allow you to stay at the top once you reach it.
So do you follow The Meta? How does this information affect your game play? Let us know in the comments below!
I absolutely follow the meta. Depending on what’s being run at the moment, some decks are totally not playable. In example, during the height of aggro Warlock, playing paladin control felt impossible. It was just too slow.
Isn’t the meta changing like almost every day?
Yah, that’s why most deck lists aren’t viable as they are for longer than like, a few days. People adapt, cards start being swapped out. Aggro Warlock had like, eight or nine different incarnations based on where you were in the timeline.
I sort of vaguely follow it. I hear people talking about “Meta-this” or “Meta-that” but aside from overhearing things I’m not exactly dialed into it. Is there some sort of super secret Meta club people go to for information on this? How do people determine what “the meta” is, anyway?
The highest I’ve ever been is Rank 14/13, and I guess I’m just not seeing any of it in those ranks. I see a lot of Hunter/Warrior Aggro in those ranks, which ends up being incredibly frustrating to play against. I guess Hunter/Warrior Aggro is “the meta” right now?
Especially since I’m playing a Control Shaman, I usually either survive the initial zergrush and turn the game around, or I succumb to it because I couldn’t get the removal I needed.
I don’t pay attention to the meta, which is likely a big part of the reason why I’m bad at Hearthstone. ^_^ This is largely due to an absence of time to research the ever-shifting meta-game, and a greater desire to build decks based on the arsenal I want to use vs an arsenal that has been demonstrated by other players to work universally.
To be competitive you have to follow the meta and figure out how is the best way to beat it. So with that I absolutely try to follow it depending on if I’m preparing for a tournament or wanting to grind in ranked play.
I don’t try to stay on top of it religiously because it feels about as useful as trying to buy all of your groceries on a daily basis. It might be the freshest way to enjoy your food (or Hearthstone), but it becomes so intense that you end up burning out and never buying food again and then you die. Okay, well, maybe not like that exactly, but I think a general understanding is useful in staying somewhat competitive if you’re not trying to absolutely murder every deck with surgical precision, but if you are and you want to be in the tournament scene, you DEFINITELY have to have your finger on the pulse.
More than anything, I’m just curious to see the overall trends and shifts as cards and ideas change.
I don’t pay attention, tbh. I have a weird druid deck that seems to work for me, so I just do that, or a aggro mage.
I think right now the majority of the players are more serious than casual so we hear a LOT about “META”, but over time the iPad / mobile version is going to introduce a ton of new players and the majority of them will have no idea that a Meta game could even exist.
i only follow the meta occasionally on streams while grinding out arena for cards.
for me it feels like there are aggro decks, then anti-aggro decks and decks which are designed to beat the anti-aggro decks which then lose to the aggro decks.
i dont see much mid-range decks who try to be good against everything.
If I am making a competative push through the ladder (aiming for high rank for the season) I will follow the meta to a degree. Of course as already stated it can change day to day and often if you try to shift with it you will be 1 step behind it so careful decisions must be made before making deck changes.
However currently I am testing a very unusual priest deck (priest giants/card draw and heal/nukes – it can actually deck itself by choice – I have drawn 38 cards in a turn teehee – best suicides ever at end game but I digress) and really seeing how it goes across the ranks. I actually dont want to follow the meta because I want to see how the deck adapts. The problem is I have so far pushed it to about rank 13 but I do believe it would actually be stronger at the rank 5 meta as this deck can succumb to the rank 10-15 cheese decks. These decks seem to drop away at lower ranks and this deck is actually very strong against Druid.