Hearthpwn

Teron is very good and a decent inclusion for this deck. There are actually a few cards that I might change, but this is a budget friendly decklist so I don't want to make it too expensive. I would suggest removing either a timber wolf or leper gnome if you have him. If it were me I think I would remove the leper gnome; timber wolf is excellent as a cheap kill command activator, unleash buffer and all around quick buff in a pinch when you have beasts on board and need that little bit of extra damage.

i replaced with 2 scrapshots but 2 jungle panthers should be fine as well if you don't have the dust to craft them.

Bad luck albatross certainly isn't a bad suggestion. The only issue i have with it is how easily it can be removed without having done any damage, which is an issue in face hunter. Jungle panther is harder to play around bc it has stealth, and scrapshot does 3 damage immediately while simultaneously buffing a beast in your hand and consequently making it more difficult to remove once it is played. Albatross is a good tech for highlander decks tho, so I think it could be a good choice if you're running into a lot of highlander players.

I like how this thread has degenerated into a place to brag about what rank you are. The guy above me literally made an account just to declare that he's apparently top 200 legend, lol. 

Quote from MrBoss1357 >>

i think its to not get mad cause u are a rank 4 and lose to legend maby thats what they thought

 

 If anything it's the opposite of that. It's pretty easy to get tilted in HS just by playing: now imagine if you're high diamond trying to grind to legend and you lose to some guy in bronze. That would tilt the hell out of anyone. Whereas if you're at a lower rank and you lose to a player in legend you at least have an excuse as to why you lost. Players in legend would theoretically be less susceptible to this bc they've already achieved their goal and they would probably prefer to get matched with a player from any of the lower ranks than another player in legend for obvious reasons. With that said, I think it's probably just an oversight/error on Blizz's part that legend players can see their opponent's rank. You know, small indie company and all that.

Quote from Highwayman37 >>

Apart from this MMR debate - been playing for 5 days now and this is brutal. I have always fairly easily reached rank 5 previously and thought I would try to make legend for the classic legendary this season.

Raced up to gold 5 easily and thought this was great at first. Now stuck at Platinum 5 which already feels like the previous rank 5 to legend grind (ie one win, one loss and getting nowhere).  This could be due to this meta not being for me, or just not being great at any of the current top decks but as I’ve said I’ve never really had issues hitting 5 before (have hit legendary on one occasion). 

Not sure if I will continue playing ranked further as this has been an incredibly frustrating and boring experience pretty much as soon as I hit Platinum 5 and lost my stars. Frankly I think this new system is a steaming pile of dog shit. 

 Do you still have a star bonus? The new system is pretty clearly set up to cater to players who consistently hit rank 5 plus / have high enough mmr to get at least the plus 9 star bonus. If you don't have that it's essentially as grindy if not more so than the pre-2018 setup. So far as I can tell they're attempting to further incentivize players to spend more time playing relative to the prior ranking system, but the new system is needless to say relatively punishing for players who don't have particularly high mmr / have not achieved high rank in the season prior. 

Quote from Kryp_ >>

Ofcourse , alexstraza is the problem , not the smorc bullsh*t and netdecking

 Aggro decks and netdecking have existed and been prevalent in pretty much every popular online card game ever created. People were using aggro and netdecks in HS 5 years ago. That's not going to change and it probably never will. You can't change human nature, but we certainly can provide input/have influence on micro elements like individual card design. Hence threads like these.

Quote from Infirc >>

So for those that don't know Alex was nerfed way before time because her effect used to destroy all the armor and set the opponent to 15 health regardless of how much armor they had, with the critical amounts of armor that some classes can achieve now both in standard and Wild,  it might be time to revert the nerf to ALex
My suggestion to unnerf Alex is twofold,

first: it was her original effect,

and second: this is not a proposal to make aggro unstopabble against its only counter, so those of you suggesting complete armor removal for 2 mana can shove it up your bums..., the reason for tieing this effect to  Alex again is that  Alex is a 9 mana card, so that means she'd take your whole turn to remove armor, and this would be more of a tech choice for heavier mid-range decks to be able to get back into playability

 This would be completely broken, so I'm going to say no. Imagine getting alex off primordial drake or off DQ Alex for free and instantly swinging the game even harder than it did before. Alex off alex is already one of the most gamebreaking/cancerous things in the history of HS, the last thing it needs is a buff. Alex was nerfed before draconic lackey, primordial drake, DQ Alex, etc. existed; I think it's ridiculous to assert that it should be unnerfed now that it's potentiality for discovery/free use is higher than ever before.

Very nice man! 

Quote from Neilpnyc100 >>

Why arent I receiving the correct rewards? Just went from Bronze 10 to Gold 5 with 2 losses.. problem is for Gokd 5 reward I received 1 pack whereas I thought it was 2 packs and 4 rares?

 Those are end of season rewards.

Thank you! There isn't a ton of room for improvement per se with this archetype, but if you have the dust I might suggest removing one timberwolf and adding a toxic reinforcements in its place. I've also seen some more recent variants using bloodmage thalnos and 2 rapid fires for spell damage lethal, which is interesting but I'm not sure if it's necessarily better. If you were to go that route I would take out one timberwolf and both leper gnomes. It's also worth noting that very soon lifedrinker will rotate out and I've suggested jungle panther as a replacement, altho scrapshot from the new expansion would also be viable.

Quote from 1xbenx1 >>

Stopped at Diamond 10.  Not really feeling it until the new expansion. Bomb Warrior made the climb really easy though. Deck has limitations though, most played because it was fun. 10x multiplier.

 This for me as well, altho I went with face hunter for the climb

Quote from Offwhitebaby >>

thanks for the advice and yea, theres time but i wanted to try top 100 :) i dont know how many players there are in legend now so it would have been cool to play with pros! i did it like 4 years ago then i stopped for some years! Now hearthstone seems so cool to play with all the new features

 Playing against pros is very cool, I feel where you're coming from. I think you're high enough that you might run into some now tbh. I have no question that you'll get there given your progress already, you just need to be patient and stay focused. Best of luck man.

you're at the equivalent of rank 2-3 2 days into the season and you're playing a tier 1 deck. So my advice to you would be not to worry too much about being temporarily stuck. Take it easy and relax, you don't have to hit legend within the first 3 days of the season and there's not a lot of room for improvement with regard to your deck. If you are running into a lot of priests your best bets are either quest lock or malygos OTK rogue according to HSreplay, but those decks aren't the best for climbing in general. I'd recommend you stick with dragon hunter for now (at least until the expansion drops) and just grind it out. 

Quote from SlydE >>

Quote from Sevasmios >>

Quote from Aegis24 >>

 

 This is news to me, thought it was based entirely on one's rating from the prior season but I guess linking the bonus to mmr makes sense. With that said, it still kinda sucks for people that actually worked to get higher ranking to end up getting the same star bonus as someone who barely played and ended the season 10 ranks lower than them. Doesn't seem particularly fair.

 It may just go by the overall MMR of my account for all I know.  Like I said I typically hover around ranks 10-5 so if an 8 star bonus equates to rank 8 it fits.

 It sounds like this might be the case. They haven't specified the degree to which MMR is taken into account relative to the rank an account achieved in the season immediately prior TMK, so it's possible MMR is the primary determinant of star bonus and last season's rank is relatively insignificant in the overall equation. If anyone has additional information/insight on this and can provide a source I'd be very interested to learn more.

 They HAVE specified they only match by MMR until you are out of bonus stars:

Q: How does matchmaking work for each season?

A: There are two matchmaking pools: matchmaking by rating (aka. MMR) and by rank.

When your star bonus multiplier is bigger than 1, or you are in Legend rank, you are (generally) in the first matchmaking pool; when your star bonus drops to 1, you are in the second pool.

You will get a lot more rewarded for the wins with bonus stars, but they do not come easily.

 Ok, you clearly misunderstood what I was saying. That matchmaking is predicated on MMR now is not in question. The question is, to what extent is star bonus predicated on an account's MMR relative to the rank they achieved the season before. The key words being to what extent and relative here. It's been established that MMR is a factor in determining the star bonus, but is it the predominant factor, to the point that the rank an account achieved in the last season or even the last few months is practically irrelevant? That's what I'm curious about.