Legends of Runeterra
ez karma...
so its not fair to lose from 20 life after winning the game the entire time. allowing people to have wins stolen from them in this way will make people stop playing your game. honestly its really bad game design to allow a deck to lose and be behind for 10 turns, then kill their opponent from 20 with a few spells. none of witch even deal damage to them normally. please fix this before your entire player base leaves and stops playing. im not ok with having my games stolen from me by this skilless and i do mean SKILLESS ezreal deck. I will concede to every ezreal karma deck i see and i think everyone else should too. boycott this deck and refuse to play against them. refuse to let them have any fun.
Leave a Comment
You must be signed in to leave a comment. Sign in here.
so its not fair to lose from 20 life after winning the game the entire time. allowing people to have wins stolen from them in this way will make people stop playing your game. honestly its really bad game design to allow a deck to lose and be behind for 10 turns, then kill their opponent from 20 with a few spells. none of witch even deal damage to them normally. please fix this before your entire player base leaves and stops playing. im not ok with having my games stolen from me by this skilless and i do mean SKILLESS ezreal deck. I will concede to every ezreal karma deck i see and i think everyone else should too. boycott this deck and refuse to play against them. refuse to let them have any fun.
As an Ezreal player imma tell you a controversial secret that will probably land me in a sea of many downvotes
Just kill the Ezreal.
It is, in my opinion, generally a good idea to have a few spells that can deal with low hp, low attack, backrow or elusive units (I mean, what's an Ezreal player gonna do against a Culling Strike?)
But no really, I don't understand how you could possibly take 20 damage, in a winning position, from a "few spells that don't do damage normally", that's 10 spells, what was he playing, poison puffcap Ezreal??
Edit: I forgot Dawn and Dusk was a card and is incredibly stupid with Karma
Definition:
Ez decks are also know as a Combo or "Exodia" deck.
Its main purpose is to stall the game untill certain conditions are met, then perform an OTK. (One Turn Kill: multiple plays that takes down the nexus from 20 -> 0 in a single turn)
The OTK combo is a concept that exists in most card games, usually being very strong versus slow decks and weak versus aggro decks.
About your post:
Playing behind is part of their gameplay. You were never ahead to begin with. In the current meta, if you re not 1 card away from finishing the game around Turn 8, then you are already behind. Each turn you delay, you fall more and more behind.
Those decks requires a great amount of skill to play optimally, but i agree its not very fun to play against.
Personal opinion:
I also dislike the very existence of OTK decks, because there is nothing that can be done exept:
FINISHING THE GAME BEFORE THEY WIN!
Just imagine there is reaper hidden in your match whispering: You only have X turns left before you DIE!
This concept sets a timer and puts a lot of pressure on the oponnent. So in order to win, its necessary to build a deck in a certain way that allows to close games before X turn, where X is the average turn the OTK assembles their combo.
This limits a lot of deck build creativity and pushes many decks out of the meta. For example, one of the reasosn i believe Vladimir doesn't see any play despite many recent buffs on the archetype, its because he lacks an explosive finisher so can't beat ez wich is pretty popular right now.
I am ok with OTK existing but as a guy who likes to build OOTB decks, i would probably be happier if they didn't.
Hearthstone: Me vs Firebat -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09NCE81owjo
This is a terrible advice... some reasons why:
1- 2/4 elusive is not easy to remove;
2- Deny; (wich also deals dmg with Ez on board)
3- Many pieces have burst spell speed;
4- Karma also needs removal;
5- He may play another Ez; (Cost is only 3 mana)
6- He may chain will of ionia on Ez then play him again;
7- He may chain other spells on your removal.
No bro, removing ez is not an option unless its played very early in the match.
In that case, you can count he has another Ez in his hand.
Hearthstone: Me vs Firebat -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09NCE81owjo
Just play a good spider deck to crush Ez decks. As an aggro/midrange player. I lick my chops at Ez decks when I play aggro. The reason Ez is rising is because Bannerman is, was/kind of the best deck. Bannerman is midrange and Control beats Midrange.
Aggro beats Control
Control beats Midrange
Midrange beats Aggro
It is a vicious brutal cycle, Ez is the result of Elusive Midrange and Bannerman Midrange taking tier 1 status. It was natural a control deck would become the solution.
I hate control players, but I understand the necessary evil. If there were no control decks. There would be no aggro decks and the only thing you'll have is midrange. I welcome Ez's rise, because it will mean the end of bannerman and elusives.
If you keep seeing Ez deck crop up. Build a Spider or Discard burn deck and make them wish they didn't play that deck. If you want to become a good player you have to adapt.
Adapt? Seems like a kinda conceited thing "If you want to be a good player, just carbon copy known good meta decks" is what you're saying. I'd hardly quantify that as a good player. Playing a deck well, knowing when to play counters is what makes a good player. There's a reason people call certain decks "auto-pilot" decks, because they are easy to play and provide high winrates. Holistically those types of decks are....that's right..."aggro/midrange" decks. Wait...what's that you pilot? Aggro/Midrange?
I jest. I jest...but seriously. Your response coming right after Hellcopter's response...
See the bolded part?
Balance. The problem is that despite LoR having MORE control over phases of the game, ways to counter players...ironically as of late I've found it LESS and LESS interactive than hearthstone. Hearthstone may have RNG filled moments, but even as a control player up against an aggro Demon Hunter deck I feel like I have a chance.
But when I'm playing a deck in LoR, if I'm up against the currently stupidly popular Shadow Isle control deck, I know there's very little chance of me winning. The problem is that you can only have 2 regions in a deck. And some regions have little or NO tools to combat certain mechanics. This isn't hearthstone where I can just include a neutral tech card if I'm having trouble with removal or a big unit, or aoe. In hearthstone you can include Big Game Hunter in your deck if your deck lacks hard removal, in LoR unless you have Vengeance and are playing a shadow isles deck, chances are your removal only comes in the form of multi card combos (think Frostbite+Shatter for Freljord) . The problem I'm starting to see is that by restricting cards to regions and not having "neutral" cards, you end up obviating entire regions during metas.
If the entire point of the game is to have fun while playing decks that interest you, being forced to play certain regions because the current meta is angled in some way, isn't fun, it's restrictive. And that is going to do two things: One it's going to disenfranchise players from joining/playing. Two even if it doesn't kill the game or playerbase, it's going to restrict creativity. Neither of those prospects is good for LoR in the long term.
<Your Ad Here>
I never said to "net deck", my advice as to for spoons to build a spider or discard burn deck. I agree, Good players just play "net decks", Great Players create the net decks. And yes you need to adapt. If you play one deck because you have fun with it. By all means play it and have fun, but don't come whining to the devs that your deck sucks when it falls out of meta. If I wanted him to net deck I would of told him to go build this and link a deck list.
Now you do bring up a good point of the 2 region limit. It's a hard decision whether lock at 2, 3, or no limit. My only concern and counter to your argument is if there was no region limit, you would create super cards that would show up in every deck. I think 2 is appropriate for the moment. I can see expanding it to 3 o more, as more sets, regions and cards are introduced. Including introducing concepts that encourage multi-regions like. "Play: Unit gets +1/+1 for each unique region units have on the battlefield." For this card cost 1 less for each region in your hand. I do find there is plenty of creativity in the game right now, but I do agree some regions are way more popular than others. Compare Ionia/P&Z to Frejord.
I do think for the longevity of the game, they do need to introduce cards at a faster pace. If you count the closed and this first season. We've had the same cards for nearly 16-18 weeks. If they want to keep the health of the game fresh and fun, they need to reduce the number of weeks between new cards.
While I will ignore the cheeky response of calling aggro players dumb, oh wait "auto-pilot" is what we are calling it. Control is not my play style, I do not like sitting around drawing cards and preventing the other player from play the game. But apparently my tiny aggro brain cannot understand your advance control play style concepts. Oh wait I do play them, I just don't have as much fun playing them.