OK so here's my unpopular opinion question for January. I've been on the good and bad side of milling whilst playing Hearthstone. I understand its weakness and strengths and that it can feel bad to play against. But what i dont see is that it's any underhand than any of the shenanigans going on right now. There is some support fot it at the moment mainly in druid and some neutrals but I feel like it's kinda missing from the standard meta game, even though it would get thrashed by aggro
I think that when you are playing against a mill deck and you are not aggro there is this psychological pressure that you must maintain your hand size and play your outs as quickly as possible and that adds another layer to the game that's not there at the moment.
I don't think the developers would do this and I realise I could just play wild to play this strategy but my post is more about standard. I think a 4 cost coldlight type neutral card would be fair.
What are your thoughts?
Blizzard said they want to minimize the capability you can influence your opponent's deck and hand. Combo is still a playstyle after all.
It has always been a fringe archetype both in its original game Magic and in HS.
Its place in standard shouldn't exist. Kills control all together. U cant manage ur hand size when u cant play more then one card until turn 7 or 8. Specially in decks that already has draw cards.
Its hated in Magic and its hated in HS for good reason.
I passionately despise Mill. Mill players are playing a completely different game than I am, and it's not something my deck is prepared for: I'm attacking your Health total (like I'm supposed to), while you're attacking my deck (which has little to no defensive capability). I'm here for an "honorable duel", wherein my army and your army clash and we see who comes out on top; that's why I don't like Combo, either. You're just spitting in the face of that by playing Mill.
If you have the time, you should totally check out our weekly Hearthstone card design competitions! :D
I had a thought about this when Valdris Felgorge was revealed: while obviously valuable in all variants of Handlock, that card could also be a "pre-counter" to a return of mill decks. It reminded me when, after they revealed all the Highlander cards in SoU, one of the devs said that's why they introduced so many bomb/other "shuffle [X] into opponents deck" mechanics in RoS - effectively they set up the counter before introducing the main mechanic so there wouldn't be a runaway Highlander shitfest. Perhaps you're not alone in thinking about a resurgence?
Personally I would hate the hell out of that as Mill decks DO feel super crappy to play against, even moreso than OTK combo decks. But then again I hate Res Priest as an archetype with equal fervor and Blizz won't seem to let that die so all my angry letters don't seem to have much effect on their planing :)
Probably not in Standard.
Mill scares people i guess, even if it just accomplishes the same role as Combo as anti-Control archetype.
On the other hand, Aggro/Burn is so unchecked in Wild (due to ridiculous card draw to Aggro, and ludicrously efficient board clears to Burn), that Mill is simply hopeless there, where it would belong.
I agree with most of the other commenters that it shouldn't be in standard. I hate milling like I hate OTK decks. They're not fun to play against and Blizzard shouldnt promote them. (They also need to stop making resurrect cards for priest but that's another topic) Usually once I realize someone is just milling or setting up for some sort of combo I just quit. Sure they get the win but I value my time more and I'm not going to waste it on some BS like Mill or combo/otk.
I absolutely LOATHE decks like wild Mill Rogue (especially since I am a combo/OTK 'main'), BUT I still feel it should be kept in the game and lightly supported with future cards in the future (as long as it doesn't get to ridiculous levels).
The more diverse cards/strats/interactions the more varied and interesting the game will be. HS gets boring when you more or less have have just a few playstyles that play, more or less, exactly the same with just a new name/theme/tribe slapped onto it. Plus, I am wholeheartedly against the concept of there never being matches that force pure 'stall' control decks from actually trying to kill you with pressure or a finisher. Mill accomplishes exactly that; control will never win by out valuing mill.
First off: you're conflating the various types of mill. There are cards that directly burn (e.g., Gnomeferatu, Fel Reaver) and there are cards that force your opponent to draw which will result in draw if they have too many cards. "Milling" is a reference to the original MtG card Millstone which mechanically was like the former, its just that in HS the overdraw mechanic is much more prevalent so we've associated it with that term.
Regarding the latter: personally I'm OK with forced-draw strategies becoming flavors-of-the-month every so often just to provide a change up, but I don't think they should ever become evergreen. Since giving your opponent cards is ostensibly a negative side effect, it's very difficult to properly balance those cards (looking at you, Naturalize), plus they create extremely polarizing match-ups. And the games against true overdraw decks really aren't too fun--you feel more like you're fighting HS rules than combating an opponent. I just can't imagine a world were having those decks as a constant threat in standard makes it more enjoyable.
Regarding the former: I could potentially see this in evergreen if it was changed to be part of the class's identify, and only that single class had access. I think a lot of the class identify stuff is very muddy right now, and this is definitely a novel mechanic that they could popularize to make something feel different. That said: if they want to go that route, I think they really need to look at taking away / constraining first before they start adding.
I really don't mind drawing others to fatigue as a strategy or win condition, but milling as a win condition is just too polarising. It tends to make certain matches 'unfun' for your opponent, an auto concede when facing a deck that is tailor made to destroy your archetype.
If it must exist in hearthstone there needs to be cards that allow you to access milled cards, or to increase your deck size. Both concepts are cancerous, as with those 2 hours dead man's hand warrior mirrors. Imagine having that on a tournament. Most viewers will rightfully turn off their sets.
I agree with LyraSilvertongue. Especially "The more diverse cards/strats/interactions the more varied and interesting the game will be" and "I am wholeheartedly against the concept of there never being matches that force pure 'stall' control decks from actually trying to kill you with pressure or a finisher".
I also like Combo / OTK / Mill decks. But still, I also think such decks shouldn't be the main part of the meta.
Blizzard can introduce some cards to fight back against Mill decks. It's not impossible to create cards with interactions against Mill. It might be for example interaction with Graveyard in HS... which can also help against Resurrect Priest in the long run :)
No thank you. Id rather play my cards.
~ Have an idea? Found a bug? Let us know! ~~ Join us on Discord ~
I haven't played Mill for quite a while, but I do enjoy that Archetype, because of that weird win condition it provides.
To let Control-Players choke on their own greedy, value-generating Cards or see how important Combo pieces get burned... just wonderful :)
But I do agree that Mill is frustrating to play against/hard to counter. Mill-Rogue only needed one Card that makes your Opponent draw, and it became one of the most hated Decks of all time. If there is ever gonna be a card like Coldlight Oracle, I doubt the Devs would make it neutral, just so Rogue can't use it.
Maybe they'll print more Cards that counter Mill (Someone mentioned Valdris Felgorge), which would allow for that Strategy to exist.
I also think the Team could experiment more with Cards that fill your Opponents Hand with copies of The Coin. That wouldn't be too oppressive and there's already Stuff like Booty Bay Bookie or Soldier of Fortune, so maybe that could be the way for Mill.
ArtStation | Twitter
Quote From KingKrushI agree with most of the other commenters that it shouldn't be in standard. I hate milling like I hate OTK decks. They're not fun to play against and Blizzard shouldnt promote them. (They also need to stop making resurrect cards for priest but that's another topic) Usually once I realize someone is just milling or setting up for some sort of combo I just quit. Sure they get the win but I value my time more and I'm not going to waste it on some BS like Mill or combo/otk.
So you play exclusively control fatigue decks with no win condition? Cause otherwise there's no reason to quit a game like that, any combo deck might be stuck with combo cards in their hand so you can punish them by playing aggresivly
I guess i have an unpopular opinion about mill decks :) - because the time they we're in standard (i only play standard) i realy liked them. Sure it can be frustrating to play against but so we're lots of other decks.
I always kinda liked mill type decks but i guess i'm one of the few players who enjoyed playing them.
Challenge me ... when you're ready to duel a god!
The main problem is, that milling decks are uninteractive and unfun to play against. So no, do not ruin the game for many to satisfy a few.
BTW, without Vanish the Mill Rougue would be screwed, so it would not work in Standard anymore.
I was pretty disappointed when Coldlight Oracle got HOFed even though I don't think I've played a mill deck in HS ever. I think having alternate win conditions and counters to combo strategies (like overdrawing key combo pieces) is important to the game's overall health. For example, I don't think control warrior would've been as dominant over the past year if milling had been a viable strategy in standard.
The more viable strategies there are, the less likely it is a single strategy will become meta-game warping.
For practical purposes, mill is incredibly difficult to balance. In most CCGs, it's either trash or broken. That's probably why it's rarely implemented in standard anymore.
I'd definitely like to see some more mill cards added to the game, but nothing to make it really shine as an archetype again.
A couple of cards could help punish players that have their hand constantly full, which can change up strategies for the better. It would be really interesting to see Hearthstone implement something like that in the upcoming 35 card mini-set with the Descent of Dragons adventure. It wouldn't have enough of an impact to be super meta-changing, but it at least makes people think and would be a cool tool in the overall arsenal.
Founder, Out of Cards
Follow me on Twitch and Twitter.If you are planning on playing WoW on US realms, consider using my recruit link =)
People who do not play an archetype or style are always going to be against it. Which is why I despise Hunter decks...
With that being said, Milling your opponent takes a lot of patience and strategy. If you let one minion go for a turn too long, it could cost you. It's easier to disrupt than people give it credit. Both in Wild and Standard, when I have played and played against Mill decks, they are a 50% deck at best because of 2 specific set ups:
1) Aggro will almost always dominate you,
2) If you miss part of your combo to continue your mill, you're screwed.
Anyone that says that it must be removed from Standard and/or Wild is because they don't know how to play around it. Milling is basically a combo deck... and as it has always been known in MTG and other CCGs... Aggro>Combo>Control>Aggro. There are always going to be the games where you just get crap draws and that is how the cookie crumbles, but ultimately if you're a control played... expect to get owned by combo decks.
You must be signed in to leave a comment. Sign in here.