Is There Such a Thing as a Too Varied Metagame?

It’s been a very long time since we’ve had as many viable deck options available to us as it is the case currently – so much so that it has brought along an interesting new complaint, one that has generally only been an issue for professional players: the idea that the game might actually have too many options right now. There certainly weren’t many metagames in the history of Hearthstone that we can compare the current one to – but we might just be able to find one that could help us figure out the root of such complaints…

Witch Wood You Choose, Given the Chance?

It’s quite likely that we’ve never had as many playable decks in the metagame at the same time as we do now, with as many as five different Druid archetypes running around, two Rogue and four Hunter decks spicing up the ladder plus Shaman and Warlock also featuring a duo of strong options each. Paladin may only have one good deck, but it’s one of the best around at flooding the board and punching face, Mage has a strong control and a bunch of mediocre aggressive options, and even Priest has three or four different archetypes to choose from, even if they are definitely lower on the power curve. Warrior is on the bottom of the pile, but even they can whip out a bunch of taunts and a Ragnaros cosplay to turn things around with reasonable success. It’s certainly one of the, if not the most varied metagame in the history of the game, and in terms of class diversity, it’s probably as close to an equilibrium as it gets. All classes are present at the Summer Championships: an auspicious occasion to be sure.

Interestingly enough, this situation brought along a new set of complaints from a very specific sub-group of players: the high-level competitors who feel like it’s way too difficult to get an edge with your deck choice on ladder or lineup setup in a tournament setting. It’s certainly an odd complaint to have, especially considering the meta we’ve just left behind – there aren’t as many ultra-polarized matchups as before the recent nerfs (perhaps highlighting the potential benefits of being a bit more decisive with card adjustments). However, there’s merit to the argument: for one, many of the current decks are variations on a theme that we’ve seen before – Token Druid, Tempo Rogue, Murloc Paladin and Even Warlock come to mind specifically – and there’s quite the overlap between a lot of them (mainly in Druid), which begs the question: how varied is metagame, really? In order to find answer, we need to go back to the past – way back, all the way until a half-forgotten era when Standard was still just a plan and everyone was still getting in here…

Who’s up for an Adventure?

The last pre-Standard meta after the Patron nerfs was perhaps the only one that comes even close to the current one, and it’s always been the benchmark I’ve been referencing as an ideal. To go into a little more detail, basically every class had at least two viable decks to play – Hunter had Aggro and Midrange (plus the hybrid option). Warlock had Zoo, Renolock and a Malygos deck. Priest could rely upon both the Dragon build and a full control archetype. Paladin had Secret and Anyfin plus a perfectly viable mid-range build without Mysterious Challenger. Jaina had a tempo build relying on Flamewaker and Freeze Mage. Warrior could go for a fatigue plan or just blow you out with a steady stream of Grim Patrons.

Druid had its infamous Force of Nature+Savage Roar combo (when the former card cost 6 mana but the Treants had Charge and died at the end of the turn) that enabled both an aggro and a mid-range deck alongside an Egg Druid. Admittedly, Shaman only had its aggro build, freshly emerging from the dumpster thanks to Tunnel Trogg, but it was good enough to catapult it to the top of the power rankings. Meanwhile, Rogue may have been the least effective deck around this time, but it still had its evergreen Oil archetype with the original Blade Flurry, plus some Zoo-esque decks relying on getting value from Unearthed Raptor (not to mention the meme-y OTK that relied on its synergy with Brann Bronzebeard, Leper Gnomes and other hilarious interactions).

In short, you had a ton of options and even though some heroes were clearly more equal than others, a skillful player could still pilot the less effective classes to high Legend finishes. This is perhaps the closest we’ve had to a metagame like that – despite having a comparatively small card pool –, which is an excellent development in and of itself. What’s the problem then, you may ask?

Known Unknowns

I think the complaints stem from the fact that the wide variety of decks offered by the Witchwood meta are using a very similar shell, unlike how it was in the post-LoE era. Yes, we may have an astonishing selection of powerful Druid decks, but they essentially all feature the same ramp and defensive tools, stalling and quickly cycling through their deck until they can end the game with a powerful combo finisher, either literally with Malygos and a bunch of burn, a set of sticky tokens using Soul of the Forest and Savage Roars or a board full of humongous Taunt minions. Often, you can’t even tell what you’re playing against even after they drew half their deck, which is an understandable source of frustration. They are not the same decks, but you won’t always get to figure that out from the other side of the board until it is way too late. Still, this is really only an issue in Druid, and may not necessarily be a realistic critique of the current metagame.

While the situation isn’t this bad for other classes, the same-y nature of their viable archetypes still apply in many cases. Even Warlock and Cubelock both rely on a Handlock-y style and explosive turns utilizing undercosted minions, both Miracle Rogue and Odd Rogue feature a very similar tempo shell nowadays, Odd Paladin is basically a reincarnation of the previous Even archetype and both of the strongest Hunter decks – Recruit and Spell – feature a similar explosive mid-game that they rely upon to close out the match.

There’s also the concern about the diminished ability to tech against the metagame, something I always considered to be a mirage. For us mere mortals, practicing a specific deck will always net more percentages than trying to guess the potential string of queues that we’ll run into in the next ten games. As for the top hundred, the current ladder system is always going to involve a merry-go-round of edges and percentages due to its volatile nature: that’s a different issue in and of itself, and it should not be pinned on a wide variety of viable decks.

This plethora of options also means that it is likely easier to find edges by piloting one deck particularly well, especially if it’s one of the Druid ones: while this is only anecdotal evidence, I’ve finally put aside some time to rank up to Legend after mostly playing Arena for the month, making the grind with Face Hunter. From that point on, I kept trying out different decks I haven’t had any experience with, swapping every five or six games, still maintaining a steady 65+% winrate and getting to a three-digit rank despite the current well-documented issues with the ladder. If the “variety issue” really does exist, it only seems to apply to the very top of the playerbase, whose issues warrant a different and systemic solution. Besides, this really isn’t the kind of “problem” that regularly rears up its head in Hearthstone: it’s a rare joy that we have so many good decks to play with at the same time, so enjoy it while it lasts.