Originally Posted by BobboFitos
Here are the deck types:
Aggro
Midrange
Control
OTK/Combo
Tempo
An aggressive deck can be completely face oriented (there hasn't been a strictly face deck in the meta for quite some time, but this was way back with face hunter, super aggro shaman, and of course pirate warrior) or just something that floods the board/creates an early advantage. (Odd paladin fits the bill - it succeeds because it has some power surges in the midgame, but generally it just throws a lot of **** out there early and pops the face a fair amount)
A midrange deck adapts based on the matchup. It has capability to play fast - ie. when against a deck that will win the end game or a combo-oriented deck where you need early aggression, but also can sit back and play the control style vs a faster deck where you'll outvalue them. In the current meta, something like Even Paladin is pretty obviously midrange, as it can flood the board/push damage in certain matchups, but also has comeback mechanisms (board wipes/heals/taunts) if it takes a more defensive approach.
Control decks are slow by nature. The classic control warrior did this the best - it had removal for days, had tons of ways of coming back vs both fast and somewhat fast decks, and wins based on attrition or fatigue. The warrior deck posted here with Zola and Cubes and **** (I've been loving it) is a callback to control decks, but if you look at VS power rankings, the only real control deck that makes an appearance is the slow mage deck. (Big spell)
OTK and combo decks are basically littered across the VS spectrum. All the priest decks, exodia paladin, cube variants (specifically hunter but also warlock of course), anything Mecha C'thun... I find them really frustrating to play against because the vast majority of them don't engage the opponent. They play their game and the player has fun playing it; you are kinda the spectator. Same applied with miracle rogue and freeze mage, and the HS team killed those off. I think that's healthy. They are fun to play but horrible to play against.
This is my own editorial opinion, but aggro decks are silly because they limit interaction by few exchanges / decisions (skill point is lower), and serve as a meta check, but OTK decks are silly because they turn what is essentially a 2 player game into a 1 player game. You ask yourself, how good is my opponent? How well do they play their deck? And finally, can I do anything about their combo/OTK? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
Finally, tempo decks respond to their opponent and cede value advantages. They differ from pure aggro decks because you generally aren't just looking to pump face damage (although you of course should be), but also looking to stay ahead on the board. You sacrifice card advantage and the like for early pressure. Tempo mage was about "how do I vomit my hand on the board in the most efficient way possible"; Odd rogue is a tempo deck because of the inherent value of your weapon and cards like Vilespine, which stay on curve to prevent your opponents from sticking stuff on the board.
I don't mind tempo decks. I think they take more skill to play than pure aggressive decks, I also think they do well vs OTK and the like which stockpile their cards since they push in early. Hearthstone has seen many metas of which deck is king, and in my personal opinion, the game is best when it's a midrange meta.