Deck Drilldown - Redlings Redux

    • GeneralVeers wrote:

      I don't like playing against this deck and have begun auto-resigning when I see it.

      IMO it's poor design to have a fast deck with a high health total that goes wide and tall.
      That seems like an over-reaction: after all, if the deck kills you it does it fast :) Definitely agreed that Ivan Slagpot's health total needs to come down though.
    • the absurde amount of aggro decks in ladder is main reason I stay away of it most time. I always hated aggro decks... they are dumb to play and dumb to play against. Absolutly no decisions involved other than probably if to mulligan or not.

      Every poor AI can play such decks... Turn 1, play 1 drop troop, attack / turn 2, play 2 drop troop or two 1 drop troops, attack. Oh if opponent played a troop on second turn and you are on the play, you actually can have the extremly difficult decision to remove that troop instead of flooding speed troops...

      So much is decided by the coin flip... pure luck here, going first as aggro player is so dam important that it hurts.

      There are mainly 2 pure aggro decks out there, Redlings and Red Deck wins. Redlings wins the creativity contest by a small margin, because the scrounge element. And both of them are played by a LOT of people in ladder. Thanks to bore the world with such decks.
    • Morshadoom wrote:

      the absurde amount of aggro decks in ladder is main reason I stay away of it most time. I always hated aggro decks... they are dumb to play and dumb to play against. Absolutly no decisions involved other than probably if to mulligan or not.

      Every poor AI can play such decks... Turn 1, play 1 drop troop, attack / turn 2, play 2 drop troop or two 1 drop troops, attack. Oh if opponent played a troop on second turn and you are on the play, you actually can have the extremly difficult decision to remove that troop instead of flooding speed troops...

      So much is decided by the coin flip... pure luck here, going first as aggro player is so dam important that it hurts.

      There are mainly 2 pure aggro decks out there, Redlings and Red Deck wins. Redlings wins the creativity contest by a small margin, because the scrounge element. And both of them are played by a LOT of people in ladder. Thanks to bore the world with such decks.
      This is objectively false. We see comments like this every season in Hex and every TCG. This season it is Redlings is brainless and easy, last season it was Angus, the season before that it was Yotul Burn.

      It is OK to dislike playing with / against aggressive decks. That is a subjective opinion and not everyone will always like the same things.

      Just because you dislike a deck does not mean it is easy. There is a reason the folks in my testing group and myself have 80%~ win rates with the Redlings deck, but if you look at the results from the bashes and the ladder the deck has a sub 70% win rate overall. There are edges to be gained with every deck when playing TCGs including aggressive decks like Redlings. One of the biggest hurdles to overcome when playing TCGs is being able to identify what you can be doing differently to gain those edges with and against the best decks.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by JeffHoogland ().

    • JeffHoogland wrote:

      If they wanted to adjust Ivan raising his charge cost to 4 is probably more effective than lowing the life total. Lowering his health just means the deck is worse against other aggressive decks, while still being able to run control and midrange out of the game.
      For me, reducing his health total isn't so much about nerfing Redlings as it is about aligning him to the overall philosophy that control champions have high health and aggro champions have low health. An aggro champion having the second highest life total in the game is completely at odds with that.

      My guess is that Hex didn't anticipate the Redlings deck and saw him as more mid-range/control than he turned out to be (which would make sense, given that his power gets stronger when you have more of a board presence). Compare him to Shoku, whose power is basically a side-grade of Ivan's as he is played today, and who has only 19 health.
    • Morshadoom wrote:

      the absurde amount of aggro decks in ladder is main reason I stay away of it most time. I always hated aggro decks... they are dumb to play and dumb to play against. Absolutly no decisions involved other than probably if to mulligan or not.

      Every poor AI can play such decks... Turn 1, play 1 drop troop, attack / turn 2, play 2 drop troop or two 1 drop troops, attack. Oh if opponent played a troop on second turn and you are on the play, you actually can have the extremly difficult decision to remove that troop instead of flooding speed troops...

      So much is decided by the coin flip... pure luck here, going first as aggro player is so dam important that it hurts.

      There are mainly 2 pure aggro decks out there, Redlings and Red Deck wins. Redlings wins the creativity contest by a small margin, because the scrounge element. And both of them are played by a LOT of people in ladder. Thanks to bore the world with such decks.
      Everytype of decks exist for a reason. Yes Agro are over represented in the ladder right now, and you might quit to them, but I don't.

      The type of deck i hate is the ones you can't interact with.. you know like super heavy control decks (See Ali Aintrazi deck that he played yesterday) I kill myself before I play a full game against that.. he just plays alone while the other waits. It does require ALOT of thinking but is completely boring for the other player.

      Playing against agro is more manageable depending on the situation.

      But in the end, TCG's tend to switch from agro, to midrange, to contrôle all the time. It will eventually be less agro and we will see other types of decks.
    • JeffHoogland wrote:

      Just because you dislike a deck does not mean it is easy. There is a reason the folks in my testing group and myself have 80%~ win rates with the Redlings deck, but if you look at the results from the bashes and the ladder the deck has a sub 70% win rate overall. There are edges to be gained with every deck when playing TCGs including aggressive decks like Redlings. One of the biggest hurdles to overcome when playing TCGs is being able to identify what you can be doing differently to gain those edges with and against the best decks.
      The reason is, you win more coin flips? :P

      No, seriously, of course top players have a higher win percentage with every deck, but forgive me, with aggro decks I see this much more based in the reserve selection (and how to use it vs. each deck) and probably in mulligan skills, where you have a good advantage over the net deck copy kids.

      I'd like to test it to make it less subjective if that is possible, but without reserves and mulligans my assumption is, that you dont have more than a very small % advantage over guys that dont invest hours on testing and analysing of the current meta.
    • JeffHoogland wrote:

      If they wanted to adjust Ivan raising his charge cost to 4 is probably more effective than lowing the life total. Lowering his health just means the deck is worse against other aggressive decks, while still being able to run control and midrange out of the game.
      While I agree that increasing charge cost probably does more to hurt Ivan than a life nerf, at the same time, I do think its crazy a pure aggro champion has 24 health (I mean, 1 less than Dreaming Fox? really?), just doesn't feel properly lined up compared to peers.


      JeffHoogland wrote:

      Morshadoom wrote:

      the absurde amount of aggro decks in ladder is main reason I stay away of it most time. I always hated aggro decks... they are dumb to play and dumb to play against. Absolutly no decisions involved other than probably if to mulligan or not.

      Every poor AI can play such decks... Turn 1, play 1 drop troop, attack / turn 2, play 2 drop troop or two 1 drop troops, attack. Oh if opponent played a troop on second turn and you are on the play, you actually can have the extremly difficult decision to remove that troop instead of flooding speed troops...

      So much is decided by the coin flip... pure luck here, going first as aggro player is so dam important that it hurts.

      There are mainly 2 pure aggro decks out there, Redlings and Red Deck wins. Redlings wins the creativity contest by a small margin, because the scrounge element. And both of them are played by a LOT of people in ladder. Thanks to bore the world with such decks.
      Just because you dislike a deck does not mean it is easy. There is a reason the folks in my testing group and myself have 80%~ win rates with the Redlings deck, but if you look at the results from the bashes and the ladder the deck has a sub 70% win rate overall. There are edges to be gained with every deck when playing TCGs including aggressive decks like Redlings. One of the biggest hurdles to overcome when playing TCGs is being able to identify what you can be doing differently to gain those edges with and against the best decks.

      Sure, better players will likely have higher winrates with Redlings (but this applies to any other decks too), do you not think its a balance issue if literally any random joe can pilot it up to 60-65% win rate? You seem to be suggesting that sub 70% is acceptable.. I've played a ton of competitive games my entire life, anything with those sort of win rates for this extended period of a time would have elicited a response from the balance team long ago.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by TCGosu ().

    • JeffHoogland wrote:

      In the first Bash it had an under 50% win rate across the board: hexpvptools.net/tournament/1126952111

      In the second it is over 50% but not by a ton: https://hexpvptools.net/tournament/1126476055
      Is there a way to filther out where redlings meet redlings? If that is calculated with the win rate the numbers will obviously go down. An angot vs angot matchup will always drag it down/up to 50%. I'm not a math expert, but I believe it's how it works.