@@letir7561 Stormcallers would probably have been my next addition if I started losing rounds! The shield break and pseudo-chaff clear would fill some of the roles I was lacking
Is it that you "feel more comfortable playing agro" or that agro is just better? I dont see anyone above 2000 MMR playing standard anymore. Agro has far too many options and potential for tempo. Agro is boring to me so i climbed to top 100 in 501 and now have been doing 2v2 only
@@EssDubz I think aggro and standard are both equally competitive play styles at the moment. There are players like Flower Fairy (#1 world) who almost exclusively play standard. Top players like Red hair, n_sacco, B-man, Mathismight (to name a few) are often playing standard as well. The reason many people (including me) play aggro is because standard is very prone to mirrors, which can be difficult to manoeuvre and/or turn around once a player gets ahead. Aggro forces an imbalance and will result in less mirrors, giving both players more options overall. I also know that I am a worse standard player than the people I mentioned above, so I tend to play to my strengths.
@RoosterRUclips maybe I need to learn standard better since I see nothing but agro in my games 1900-2150 mmr. Haven't been able to crack elite levels yet. I just find agro has the pick of what they want to do and standard has to try to predict and also deal with round 1 asymmetry which almost always works against them
@@EssDubz You are right that aggro tends to be ahead early (which is the upside of playing asymmetrical). However, showing your hand early also means that the opponent has plenty of time to mount their defense (losing a couple rounds before stabilising doesn't matter if you win in the end). Aggro is weak to spells like oil as it cannot shield on the defender's side and will often have poorly defended towers which can be attacked. Aggro/Defense games are certainly more complicated than standard (long-range) games, at least in the sense that there are more variables. More units are playable, unit drops can provide immediate answers to problems (or not), spells may favour the aggressor or the defender. Card RNG is a bigger factor in these games than in standard. Getting to grips with all the different scenarios is something that only comes with experience, which takes time. I like that part though, as it keeps things interesting with a variety of available tactics. (P.S. I don't mind defending when I know I will get pushed. I just try to avoid the standard mirrors where possible)
![SahBabii - Viking [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D37cL92JX0I/mqdefault.jpg)
![[DRAGON BALL LEGENDS REVEALS ＆ STUFF] LEGENDS FESTIVAL 2024 Special Edition Part 2](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/af0phKxitX8/mqdefault.jpg)
Interesting, thanks for sharing, keep it up, i love it :)
Stormcallers with EMP/HE would be better answer for his slow defensive comp?
@@letir7561 Stormcallers would probably have been my next addition if I started losing rounds! The shield break and pseudo-chaff clear would fill some of the roles I was lacking
Steel Ball Stangs? What year is it?
Little blast from the past!
Is it that you "feel more comfortable playing agro" or that agro is just better? I dont see anyone above 2000 MMR playing standard anymore. Agro has far too many options and potential for tempo. Agro is boring to me so i climbed to top 100 in 501 and now have been doing 2v2 only
@@EssDubz I think aggro and standard are both equally competitive play styles at the moment. There are players like Flower Fairy (#1 world) who almost exclusively play standard. Top players like Red hair, n_sacco, B-man, Mathismight (to name a few) are often playing standard as well.
The reason many people (including me) play aggro is because standard is very prone to mirrors, which can be difficult to manoeuvre and/or turn around once a player gets ahead. Aggro forces an imbalance and will result in less mirrors, giving both players more options overall.
I also know that I am a worse standard player than the people I mentioned above, so I tend to play to my strengths.
@RoosterRUclips maybe I need to learn standard better since I see nothing but agro in my games 1900-2150 mmr. Haven't been able to crack elite levels yet. I just find agro has the pick of what they want to do and standard has to try to predict and also deal with round 1 asymmetry which almost always works against them
@@EssDubz You are right that aggro tends to be ahead early (which is the upside of playing asymmetrical). However, showing your hand early also means that the opponent has plenty of time to mount their defense (losing a couple rounds before stabilising doesn't matter if you win in the end). Aggro is weak to spells like oil as it cannot shield on the defender's side and will often have poorly defended towers which can be attacked.
Aggro/Defense games are certainly more complicated than standard (long-range) games, at least in the sense that there are more variables. More units are playable, unit drops can provide immediate answers to problems (or not), spells may favour the aggressor or the defender. Card RNG is a bigger factor in these games than in standard. Getting to grips with all the different scenarios is something that only comes with experience, which takes time. I like that part though, as it keeps things interesting with a variety of available tactics.
(P.S. I don't mind defending when I know I will get pushed. I just try to avoid the standard mirrors where possible)