The latest Vicious Syndicate report (it’s probably the most reliable source) lists it as the #1 deck on the ladder in terms of win rate.

Of course, the meta has already shifted a bit, e.g. Malygos Druid got very popular on the first days of June season, so Quest Warrior might not longer be #1 in the next report, but it’s definitely a great deck.

Source: https://www.vicioussyndicate.com/vs-data-reaper-report-92/

If you want to play Zoo specifically, Keleseth would be a better craft. However, Gul’dan can also be played in slower Warlock decks if you’re into that.

Good job, that’s an interesting deck choice indeed

I agree, a slower meta means that more creative decks can get played. Normally those are usually punished hard by Aggro, and they have no place on the ladder.

The only downside of a slower meta are game times. Sometimes when you play a slow deck and you queue into another slow deck, the games are horribly long. Especially bad for pooper players, lol.

Good job, hitting R4 with Miracle Rogue is a nice achievement

Correct about the turn limit, but the game ends in a draw.

The “higher health total” rule was set in official tournaments so they don’t have to replay those games, lol.

Mirrors are nightmare. Probably the second worst to the Fatigue (Dead Man’s Hand) Warrior. In case of Priest, at least if both players draw Benedictus (and neither copies it), the game won’t last forever. In case of DMH Warrior, if both players play the matchup well, the game will 100% get to the turn limit.

Good job!

If you’re asking which card to craft, in this list, Gul’dan would probably be the best one of the three. However, The Lich King is a better craft in general, as it’s one of the best Neutral Legendaries and fits into multiple decks.

Again, Dread Infernal vs Argent Commander is a tech call. Argent Commander is a better reach card, while Infernal provides a bigger body, small AoE (which comes handy sometimes) and most importantly get revived by Bloodreaver Gul’dan.

Both options are valid, but most of the higher win rate lists have dropped Commanders in favor of Dread Infernals. Just give it a go!

She’s not a bad option, but the main problem is that she doesn’t really fit the deck’s game plan. This is no a slow, control deck – it’s a beatdown deck. You usually want to kill your opponent as quickly as you can by putting constant pressure. Playing a 6 mana 3/6 and then 5 mana 2/2, 5 mana 3/3 and a 5 mana 4/4 doesn’t really fit the “pressure” theme.

In the end, some of the builds use her, others don’t, in the end it really depends on the decks you face. If you play against a really slow meta, like lots of Taunt Druids and Quest Priests, then she’s great. If you don’t, then she’s mediocre.

This specific list is the one Sjow used to get #1 Legend. She didn’t need her on the way up there, but she might be better at other ranks (because the high Legend meta is sometimes different than e.g. R5-R1 meta or e.g. R15 meta).

That’s a bad idea IMO. Not only Call to Arms is still a great card (it’s one of the highest win rate cards in the deck!), but Level Up is just not good in this list. You rarely Hero Power, and Hero Power only summons a single 1/1. Comboing Lost in the Jungle with Level Up is not good at all – you pay 6 mana and two cards to get two 3/3 Taunts. You would need to consistently get at least 3-4 buffs for Level Up to be good.

It’s good in Odd Paladin, because you want to Hero Power every often there. Having 4+ Recruits on the board is common. Just play Murloc Paladin and start counting – how many times you have more than 2 Silver Hand Recruits up in the mid game?

It’s still one of the best cards in the deck, there is no point in swapping it.

You know, bad draws happen in a card game. If you play an Aggro deck and don’t draw your early game at all, you often just lose. If you play Control Warlock and draw your Voidlords before Lackeys, you often just lose. If you play any combo deck, and combo pieces are the last cards in your deck, you often just lose.

That’s how the game works, and you’re not the only one affected. You would be surprised how many games you (or anyone, for that matter) won not because you were playing great, but because your opponent had poor draws.

You absolutely need the Twig for your Malygos combo, so if it gets destroyed by Ooze/Harrison, you’re out of luck. Kobold is there to get it again for another attempt.

It can, but it’s not good. On average, you will pull out something like a 1/2, 1/1 with Divine Shield and a 2/1. It’s not worth it for 5 mana if you only run 1-drops.

When we’re talking about getting that card back in mullgan – you’re correct, there is 0% chance to get it back. E.g. you throw away Leeroy and get Leeroy again – it’s impossible.

What is possible is getting the card you threw away as your first draw after mulligan. HS decks are relatively small, so the chance to immediately draw a card you threw away in mulligan is not that low.

However, lots of people say that it happens more often than it should, but that’s not true – it’s actually another bias, called “confirmation bias” – you remember the times it happened more than it didn’t happen, because it supports your claim.

That’s why I’ve said in general. In other words, on average. You can get more than one Legendary in 20 packs – heck, you can get even a few Legendaries in a single pack! It’s just better than average result, so great for you!

You’re right – we can’t be sure. All we know is what the devs have said us.

For example, about the cards in your deck. Devs have confirmed that they do remain static until an effect that affects the deck gets played – such as shuffling cards into the deck. Then the order is randomized. But, from the player’s perspective, the cards are random anyway, so it doesn’t matter if the order is static or dynamic.

As for the other RNG, like mulligan etc. – the devs have also been asked about it, for example regarding the chance to draw the cards you’ve mulliganed. Lots of players believed that you had a higher chance to draw the cards you have mulliganed as one of the first draws, which of course isn’t true. The devs have confirmed that it’s not the case. They’ve also confirmed that there is no such a thing as matchup manipulation, e.g some players believed that after a longer win streak they will start facing bad matchups, or vice versa.

But I understand that you can’t really trust everything devs say, as they might hide some information. In case of Hearthstone, knowing those things is mostly about the sample size. Sites such as HSReplay gather hundreds of games every minute, including replays – cards that were mulliganed, drawn etc. For example, in the last 7 days, they’ve gathered over 9 MILLION games. If the RNG was altered in some way, it would stand out. Unless the alterations are in the margin of error, but that would be quite pointless.

Another reason why I don’t believe that it would be the case is the situation in which they would be found out. If some statistics, or anything, confirmed that the RNG is indeed altered, there would be a MASSIVE outrage, and lots and I mean lots of bad PR for the game, so I don’t think it’s worth it. They have other ways to lure the players and keep them playing, there’s no need to alter RNG in order to do that.

But you’re right that we will never be 100% sure how it really works. Maybe HSReplay is paid off to not share that data? Maybe players who discovered it are silenced? Okay, that sounds like a terrible conspiracy theory, so I will just stop there

Thank you!