By the way, until the refinement of poison/masque Rogue and for a couple of weeks after last nerfs, we had an amazing meta, most probably the most diverse after scholomance, maybe of all time, at least outside top legend. Over 20 viable decks.
Nerf Gnoll, delete the last 2 non-Hearthstone decks (please don’t let Mozaki become the new weapon Rogue) and the game will be in great state. If you give Warrior some more consistent draw as well in mini-set, you’ll have 10 viable classes.

Seriously? Nerf the most linear deck of all time? If you are a good player you know how to play around this deck. At legend, it falls to tier 3. Except if you are a bronze-platinum player then I would give you some credit.
Pirate Warrior is another story in wild ofc with so many 1 mana activators.
But again, there the problem is not the archetype but the rest of the field that make it viable. In a meta with more aoe, the deck would be Murlock level tier.
Again, Reddit describes a completely different reality.

Totally agree, the only aggro deck at the moment is face hunter. The last viable board based aggro deck was Taunt Druid. The last really fun such deck was aggro DH (which if I remember well Yellorambo was enjoying and promoting for several months in Ashes). Unfortunately, Reddit community managed to convince Team5 to delete that archetype from future expansions. There was such an outrage about it even after all these nerfs. I hope everyone enjoyed that outcome. Almost a year without aggro meta but OTK, solitaire or dmg from hand decks instead. If you are confused about what is aggro or control, it would be very enlightening if you followed VS content and ZachO.
Initiative or resources based decks are the right terms!

I totally agree with your response. Whoever is following VS and has listened to the latest podcast should realise what the problem is. I don’t think the article contributes to anything or makes us wiser. Telling us about retro archetypes that are irrelevant these days or expressing their biased because of this fixation the last few months of not having these so-called slow metas or because their main class is dead atm.

Just 2 points. 1. I would prefer any kind of meta (as toxic as it might be) more than any attrition-priest meta. And that was Team 5 goal and they achieved it. They created new exciting cards and strategies, away from one of the most boring meta ever (Barrens). From a client’s perspective who is not free-to-play, I really enjoyed paying for stuff in stormwind and playing as much as I could until 2nd nerfs. Same goes for Scolomance ofc.

2. Seems that classes like Pala and Warlock always receive a lot more criticism or cause outrage when they have their overpowered meta compared to Rogue, Warrior even Mage. I think that top legend players have to do with this since it is usually mentioned that these strategies/classes are brainless, boring, or not challenging enough to deserve such strong decks. How long did it take (and I haven’t seen similar complaints or bans in formats) to get rid of Warrior’s million armor (oh actually Skipper was never nerfed) or Rogue’s 0 mana decks (Galakrond meta was hilarious), not to mention that Garrot was untouched for a whole expansion. Everyone was referring to a solitaire meta (which was an illusion) being caused by other decks but not Rogue?

You will never have everyone happy. It all depends on whether the reactions from the community and specific content creators are big enough to mobilise Team5.

Hey dude, I always enjoy reading your guides especially given our similar love for “vengeance” since AoO. I knew my mulligans without the guide, however, I was puzzled by a sentence:
“Beaming Sidekick and Guardian Augmerchant – Keep alongside a strong one-drop on the coin or with two other one-drops going second.”

Is there something I don’t get? Do you mean going first? Or keep with two other one-drops going second if these 2 one-drops are not the premium ones?
Keep up the good work 🙂