Are all decks better with at least one ally?

[Gondorian]

Hey all!

There are a few heroes that can work (to varying extents) without allies. We call these "solo" decks for obvious reasons.

In light of this, I have two questions for the community at large:

1) Are there any solo decks that would not benefit from adding at least one ally?

2) To what extent do you consider "solo decks" to be an archetype that should be considered when balancing the game?

You can probably guess what I think, but it doesn't matter in this case, because I want to hear what YOU think.

Thanks in advance.

[Ohi2222]

Ask the soloclaw specialist please :d

[Gondorian]

Ask the soloclaw specialist please :d

Could you point them at this thread, please? I don't know who you mean.

[Daemon Rayge]

I would say yes. For Decks like Solo DarkClaw or even those occasional Solo Mages, throwing in some Haste allies can be beneficial as it can provide a little extra damage.

A more recent and notable example would be Embers Jericho running only Eriss. With Lingering Essence, her ability becomes free and allows Jericho to keep on pumping out damage. I have also seen Alyssia to boost the damage, as well as Devoted Knight for ramp.

As for Solo Decks as an Archetype, I personally say we should keep them possible, but not make them something to promote. Look at Lone Wolf. That screams Solo Deck and is staple in Millstalker. We should in the future try to limit stuff like this from being promoted, but keep it a possibility, as long as the hero itself who is going this route doesn't have too much versatility. Enough to keep it afloat, but not be one with answers for everything.

[jacqui]

Not all "solo" decks work better with adding [at least] one ally. Sometimes there just isn't enough space and more important cards are necessary to make the solo deck work properly. With that being said, on the whole, I do not believe solo decks are better than allied decks currently. Empirically this seems to hold true when looking at what people are playing.

[jonmaciel]

In my own opinion, I don't like solo decks. I'm not saying make it impossible to play as solo but the game is centered on this idea of battling for board control and that makes the game exciting. So when something new is being made, I don't think anyone wants to see cards designed for a hero to use solo and frankly neither do i.

As for the solo deck question, I don't think millstalker would actually benefit from adding any allies. At least the deck that I've seen and played with!

[Gondorian]

In my own opinion, I don't like solo decks. I'm not saying make it impossible to play as solo but the game is centered on this idea of battling for board control and that makes the game exciting. So when something new is being made, I don't think anyone wants to see cards designed for a hero to use solo and frankly neither do i.

As for the solo deck question, I don't think millstalker would actually benefit from adding any allies. At least the deck that I've seen and played with!

Millstalker or Moonstaller? They are different. Millstalker could add Harbinger of the Lost and cycle him all day with Arthyle's Crypt.

[Nik]

The greatest (and one of the few) advantages of a solo deck is limiting the use of several abilities from some heroes and cards that are ally-focused. For example a solo deck has a big advantage vs Victor as he cannot make use of his hero ability or even his SE, and gets a deficient draw if he depends on Hunter´s Gambit for it. Including a few allies makes him lose this advantage on the opponent, so I think it should only be done when those allies (or ally) are not an essential part of the solo deck strategy but only an complement optional to play on some matches.

[Airact]

Millstalker or Moonstaller? They are different. Millstalker could add Harbinger of the Lost and cycle him all day with Arthyle's Crypt.

Decks with Lone Wolf probably don't want any more allies than what they already have.

I think there could definitely be more approaches to the game and if solo decks are the best for that, then go for it.

[Ross013]

It depends entirely on the deck you are building. Control decks benefit hugely from keeping allies to a minimum because you have room for your abilities, but every deck needs a win condition. I don't really rate completely solo decks as great because a lot of decks in this game rely on curving out with allies, and it's easy for a slower deck to get bogged down and overwhelmed. Many solo decks may run an ally just as a utility (snow land spotter in gwen for instance) and the reason that works is because the allies ability is valuable to making the win condition work. That being said, it's hard to rely on a single ally, since the removal in the game is really really good, so allies don't stick around often. If you are talking about making solo decks truly viable for high level play, I think that there needs to be better ways of protecting those utility allies, as opposed to just giving better options, because sure, an ally that has a good impact is great, but if it doesn't stick around long enough, it becomes crushing for your deck.

The other side of the coin is to not make these decks impossible to interact with, so consideration towards how a non solo deck would interact is important, and that is where the balancing point comes in.