What BGs are OP

I'm fairly certain all of them would have many many games against him over the few months. Id ask @nepyonisdead I know he played it for a bit.

Garu Hurler, some equipment that gives you siege, some spell that makes you attack twice, some more damage stuff. He hits your shrine from like 9 spaces away so you cant even deploy detection anywhere close to help you.

Also 2x pox harbys to do similar Bane Shift, maybe more.

 

Ah, ok, that deck, I know what we're talking about now, sorry for the confusion. Yeah, that is not really the kind of aggro/rush deck to which I was referring when I was talking about power and playability relative to visibility -- I meant more like stock UD, not a straight-for-the-head kind of deal. There's other things to say about Siege shrine rush.

 

Thats not what happened, sok just banned time slip.

 

You can say that about 90% of bg's out there. "why not SL meta"

This particular reason is because skeezick are cheap to put together compared to meta

 

I recall it being played for less even before the ban. Maybe i'm wrong though.

Skeezick are definitely not cheap compared to meta(from what I recall all legendaries and exos are run). Pretty sure meta would be cheaper overall only leg is like snogvie I think.

I don't understand the point of making the BG unnecessarily hard/more expensive. Imagine if hearthstone players were told to play (current and oldschool) freeze mage as their first deck(fairly expensive and skill intensive). Doesn't make sense.

Just play something easier, better and cheaper. I'm almost 100% certain you don't get better from making the game harder for yourself. You just lose more. My play with mirefolk/snaps/poison etc. in almost no way makes me better or worse whether I win a lot with those BGs or lose a lot. For the most part your skill is independent of the BG imo. Your knowledge of your BG is dependent on your BG though so at first you will be pretty bad with any BG for the most part.

 

Shrine rush BG wasn't hard to beat once you include a couple tech choices.

 

Ive never played a shrine kill bg nor will I ever, my stance on anyone who uses this bg (except the original maker) is that they are just bad players who cant play the game so they opt for the easy wins.

 

Must have been mistaken then

 

I dont blame you loads of ppl have taken that up after princeleaf resurfaced

 

I highly disagree, I've been always in love with shrine rush decks, BECAUSE its another approach of understanding the objective of the match "killing your opponent". I play regular decks as well...
But I had during the yeards over 5/6 shrines rush decks, and mostly every one was harder to play than conventional ones. Some of them I got the idea from other players through watching A LOT of games and I build them my way.
But I even created my own shrine rush deck.
I've spent A LOT of hours reading at runes from the Rune Checklist in order to make strategys/combos viable. And also spoken to creators of new decks in order to improve deck concepts.

Every gimmicky deck is particulary easy to defeat, if you just know how.
Ethereal pool deck = Deploy 4 champs same turn.
Old Solitary Garu = Detection/Pacified/Awestruck/etc. Man there were so many things that could go wrong with the garu deck. Getting to deploy the Garu being the first one... having only 4 champs in the deck....

I think playing the game is creating new strategys, the most strats, the richer the game is.

The only think I have to be honest though, is that new client doesn't offer counterplay by not being able to click on the combat log to check what runes do. So I understand its harder than it used to be for new players to know whats going on.
If this could be solved I would play shrine rush again, but I stopped palying them because its unfair nowadays SINCE THE NEW CLIENT.

As you can see I have some ethics torwards the game because its not only about winning games... its about how you win them.
I suspect you wouldn't have said that rush shrine deck players had honour