Not quite legend yet (rank 1, 3 stars), but wanted to share





List is legit. Took me a while to refine it, but happy with the current version. Hunter is the worst matchup by far, no answer to the spellstone or barnes ysarrj. You gotta go all in fast in that matchup and hope for no freeze trap b/c hunter runs no silence. And most times your cards just don't line up perfect. Pally and warlock matchups are def favored tho, which is why I think its a great call for the meta. Have some fun with it, no one else is playing it.

Mulligan tips: Generally speaking, you're looking to come out like gangbusters, so you want cleric and radiant ele. Shadow ascendant is NOT a keep unless you are on the play and already have cleric. This is why it's a one of in the list. Pyro is a keep vs pally, but nothing else. Potion of madness is a keep too vs pally, but nothing else. Generally don't keep 3 drops, you run so many, you'll hit them. PWS is also an awesome keep so long as you have cleric or radiant ele. In a lot of matchups, the elixir is a keep on the coin with radiant ele, because coin ele into the elixir is bananas.

I was hoping that the Day9 video ended with him losing to some absurd bugged interaction.

Call to arms is 2x as busted as pre nerf innervate. Without doubt the most busted card to have ever existed.

Yeah it's pretty busted

just went 9-3 on EU with my free run though. Midrange hunter with 0 wild cards.

Don't think I've ever played against a spell hunter who didn't have Barnes in hand.

Just hit legend with the above list, #82. Which is my highest rank ever. FeelsGoodMan

the new ranking system got me back to Dad Legend in like an hour, now I don't have to play again for a month. love it!

For some reason I had it in my mind that you a computer science major or something which made it really weird to me why you would take the stance that the development team is incompetent and that their code is a disaster. I am guessing I was wrong in that belief.

I do write code for a living and I guess the simplistic way to say it is that the tiniest changes in code can have unexpected and far-reaching effects on the output of the program. A lot of times these problems can't be found until the system goes live. Once that happens you're on high alert to be hyper-receptive to any and all bug reports. I agree with Day[9] that Blizzard for the most part puts out the highest quality products in the industry.

On the flip side, they definitely have some challenges like the first few days of the new season, where people can't log in and it essentially feels like the entire system is broken. If you can't even play a ranked game then the new ladder code doesn't matter at all. But given Blizzard's track record with things like this, I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that this will be resolved and that Hearthstone will continue to be one of the most polished games in the industry.

I am close to my degree, yes.

If tiny changes in code cause far reaching and disastrous effects in your system, then your design is bad. Period. That's like, year one **** you learn.

maintainability is a great indicator of how well designed a piece of software is. The fact their code clearly does not scale well to changes tells me it's bad.

the one guy made a great point about how they've been looking for a senior developer for a while now. typically that slot gets filled pretty quickly on a team, and it says they're likely looking for someone to mentor the team on better practices and right the ship.


classic example of bad programming practices - unlicensed apothecary triggering on evolve but not on thrall evolve. That tells me they have hard coded separate methods for however they implemented evolve on thrall vs the spell evolve. stuff like that is what contributes to poor maintainability.

i haven't looked at the source yet but i hear they rely heavily on global class variables rather than passing parameters to functions. This would also contribute to their scalability problem and is generally really bad practice.

the ranked bug was pretty serious - I guess players couldn't progress after patch. And even after they "fixed" it, it's still broken - I was supposed to reset to rank 4 and 5 stars, I reset to rank 5 and 5 stars.


congrats, i legit don't understand how you make that list work. i lost 5 straight with it, didnt draw cleric once and it feels like if you don't you just lose.

And its even better in aggro...

eh, spiteful priest isnt an aggro deck

the real retort is that duskbreaker is the best anti-aggro card ever and yet still prob isnt good enough - aggro still is the top 3 decks in the meta

or at least more cards on its power level should be printed for other classes

the problem is the card is great vs aggro but it's also great vs everything else

i really miss cards like chow, it **** on the fast decks by trading 2 for 1 early but it's so bad vs slow decks, but youre cool with that to just temper the face stuff

There also has been so much power creep. I've been just playing wild, doing quests and stuff, and almost all the decks are standard decks with like 2 wild cards (like mad scientists in tempo mage and nothing else that is wild)

When you can take a standard deck into wild (cubelock is another) and not even use wild cards, you just know the new cards are >> the old. That's ****ed up.

How do you incentivize people to keep paying $$ then if new cards aren't better than old cards?

Tbf warlock is better in wild with voidcallers and malganis.

Plus the ****ing stupid giants package which i dont care if winrates suggest its "balanced" because every other deck is designed to beat it and it shuts down so many possible strategies. Needs a ****ing change asap

It's possible to make unique and new cards without making them straight better. Introducing new archetypes and card combinations allows for creativity and fun all the while not destroying the value of old cards. In my opinion.

Basically I just think the card designers are pretty lazy, and I can't really blame them

A good example tbh of cool cards that are new are the cube - on its own, not super OP, but allows for really cool combination and synergizes with some older cards that weren't really played. A card that is not cool but strictly OP is the 2/2 5 mana summon a demon. That's broken af. The deathknight cards were just OP, but at least allowed some new archetypes and kinda neat interactions.

Again, it's a problem when in wild the same decks that win in standard are also the strongest.

Yeah, true, just like mad scientists have a home in tempo mage and a few of the aggro cards can fit into the aggressive paladin decks.

But 26+ of the cards stay the same. There have been so many cool legendaries that actually do something neat that are straight out unplayable. It's sad

Yeah i totally agree. The fact that Dr Boom and piloted shredder have gone from oppressive powerhouses seeing play in 90% of decks to absolutely non existent shows how much power creep there has been.

i've never played wild at all

so its so hard for me to imagine a meta where dr boom isnt good

like, i know its true, but i still dont want to believe it

Your opponent just played 29/29 worth of stats on turn 5 and your plan is to wait 2 turns to play dr boom? GL.

ok, ive been playing wild bc i like those cards, and i can tell you dr boom is no longer good

Modern day Dr. Boom would be like a 5 mana 5/5 with the same boom bots instead of a 7 mana 7/7.

funny thing is, everyone was whining about kobolds cards being underpowered/useless before the expansion came out (even when all the cards were known), and yet it seems to be one of the most powerful expansions, mb even stronger than naxx, which was I thought was just a blunder from an unexperienced team