Legends of Runeterra realm avatar Legends of Runeterra realm home

Legends of Runeterra

1 Characters Joined
Create Thread
Legends of Runeterra | Posted by | 3 years, 10 months ago
Discussion

Final Meta Stats - Decks Are Dead

https://app.mobalytics.gg/lor/stats/regions

Final meta stats for the expansion by play rate.

There isn't a single list being played right now above 53% because "decks" are bad right now.

Card piles are great, lists that don't try to do anything or have any sort of win con are excelling.

Now why is this problematic that every single deck that tries to do anything only wins 53% or less in a card game about synergies and deck building?

Probably don't have to explain it to you but nobody will want to brew anymore or play specific archetypes or role play as specific Champs.

Its sad really that we went from patches that had the highest deck diversity in LOR with healthy winrates across the board 

To everything essentially being bad because they cancel each other out, or are too wincon specific to be flexible enough to win in a meta where trying to win a specific way is bad.

Would of said I told you so but these numbers by play rate quantifiable prove I was right.

13 Share

// join_the_conversation

Sign in to share your thoughts, vote on comments, and connect with the community.

Sign in Create account

Comments

Sort by:
Oldest Newest Top

  • https://app.mobalytics.gg/lor/stats/regions

    Final meta stats for the expansion by play rate.

    There isn't a single list being played right now above 53% because "decks" are bad right now.

    Card piles are great, lists that don't try to do anything or have any sort of win con are excelling.

    Now why is this problematic that every single deck that tries to do anything only wins 53% or less in a card game about synergies and deck building?

    Probably don't have to explain it to you but nobody will want to brew anymore or play specific archetypes or role play as specific Champs.

    Its sad really that we went from patches that had the highest deck diversity in LOR with healthy winrates across the board 

    To everything essentially being bad because they cancel each other out, or are too wincon specific to be flexible enough to win in a meta where trying to win a specific way is bad.

    Would of said I told you so but these numbers by play rate quantifiable prove I was right.

  • I wish hearthstone became like that...

  • So you want to say that if every archetype can succeed deckbuilding is dead?

    Interesting idea... so if there are 3 decks to rule the meta because their mechanic is stronger than the other mechanics it is easier to build decks using other mechanics... that proven to be weaker?

    Deckbuilding isn't easier in solved metagames the only difference in unsolved metas is that you can't build rogue decks meant to specifically counter the meta which... is actually a good thing when that's not necessary. Right now you can play what you want and i don't know what else you would want for brewing?

  • Its not that every archetype is succeeding, it's that every archetype isn't succeeding.

    Therefore the only sucessful decks are non-archetypal.

    Which in a game that is supposed to encourage synergistic deck building topped off by specific champions, means that the current meta is antithetical to its core design principals.

    Aka...that's bad.

    • If you could bring up such a "anti synergy" deck that is scoring high winrates then I could see your point but be real: decks don't have to be simply xy overwhelm, shen x barrier, murloc... i mean yordle tribal or the likes of it. If combining multiple archetypes to a multifunctional deck that can adjust to more strategies at once then that simply is good deckbuilding.

      You don't like that I don't mind that.

      I just took a look at the stats and... what are you talking about?!? The vast majority of decks on the list are well established decks from the start of the expansion. Nothing you mentioned gets  backed up by the stats. Why does this Post even exist?

    • I can't see why that's a bad thing. I don't want to be forced to play a certain deck or go home.

  • Having every deck with the highest play rates of 10% and lower have 53% winrates down to 50% and below.

    Has never been the case for as long as I've been playing LOR and recording these statistics.

    Thats what I'm referring to.

    Which could only possible happen in a highly oppressive meta where nothing is "very good."

    Like literally the best deck with the highest playrate is spiders and youre correct its a pre-expansion deck that had an astounding 53% winrate because everything more interesting has been grounded into the statistical dirt.

    You dont see a problem with that?

    • Quote From Nifty129

      Having every deck with the highest play rates of 10% and lower have 53% winrates down to 50% and below.

      Has never been the case for as long as I've been playing LOR and recording these statistics.

      Thats what I'm referring to.

      Which could only possible happen in a highly oppressive meta where nothing is "very good."

      Like literally the best deck with the highest playrate is spiders and youre correct its a pre-expansion deck that had an astounding 53% winrate because everything more interesting has been grounded into the statistical dirt.

      You dont see a problem with that?

      You realize when decks score high winrates and high playrates they oppress other decks right?

      They ask the question can you beat x y and z? If you can't (and high winrate + high playrate decks only have niche counters) your deck gets "oppressed" by the meta deck.

      If there is no meta deck to specifically tech against you just need to make sure your deck works within itself and is flexible which is a lot easier to do.

      So won't you understand that diverse metas without clear topdogs (viego desserter is btw a pretty clear topdog) are a good thing unless you want to be one of those "jam deck x for easy master" players?

       

    • Quote From Nifty129

      a highly oppressive meta where nothing is "very good."

      Pick one.

      Also meta isn't solved imo. There are decks that are successful and they aren't mentioned in Mobalytics stats (proving deckbuilding is not dead by any means). Katarina Ziggs Annie and TF Nami Go Hard are examples of them and I really would not be surprised to see more.

  • Ultimately, we will see what Riot does when they get off their summer hiatus.

    If we see a round of balance patches similar to the ones we got pre-expansion we'll know I was right.

    If we see no radical changes to the meta for the next 6 months I'll be wrong and that's just how this game is now.

    No skin off my nose either way.

    Also here's sunny mirroring my sentiments that this meta is oppressive:

    https://youtu.be/Eq3CS7q98Vs

  • If we see a round of balance patches similar to the ones we got pre-expansion we'll know I was right.

    If we see no radical changes to the meta for the next 6 months I'll be wrong and that's just how this game is now.

    I like how your trying to act as if you didn't decide to make that statement after reading the tweet were Rubin Zoo said the patch 3.10 will have 40+ card change, you ain't fooling anyone there buddy.

    And after watching the Sunny video I can say for sure that he doesn't mirror any of your sentiment.

  • Actually I didn't know that.

    But thanks for confirming my correctness.

    What a pal :)

    Like I've literally been saying this meta is hot streamer bate garbage since the expansion came out.

    So the likelihood that I read a tweet that didn't come out yet to base that assessment is trolly at best and insane at worst.

    But yes 40+ card changes to fix all the broken stuff streamers/pro players whispered in Riots ear while they were advising for this expansion sounds like the perfect remedy to me.

    Very happy.