Hearthstone

I've even gone as far as running an Ooze plus Harrison and an Owl plus a Spellbreaker in some of my control decks. They never see it coming.

slippery_sl said:

It's probably decent on ladder. There is a fair amount of Hunter/Rogue/Warrior

Click to expand...

I still don't know if its worth, it is often close to a dead card. Warlock is still the most common matchup through all tiers past 20 and only gets more common the higher up you go in ladder. Besides warlock, there is a lot of priest, so it is just a 5/4 for 5 in those matchups. Now, what if you do happen to run into a lot of hunters? Well its 1 card in a 30 card deck. Its difficult to draw into a 1 of at the right time, often times even if the class is a weapon class you don't have the card in hand when you need it, its extremely frustrating drawing your harrison right after a weapon class uses one of their weapons and then if you have no other play its like, well do I play the harrison now or hope he draws a second weapon?, usually leaving the card, essentially dead in hand, obviously a spectral knight or sludge belcher would have been way more valuable in that scenario and more consistent across all matchups.

You could say the same about Ooze.

Ooze is the better off-curve play though, imo. Cheap and easy and a better body for its mana cost because you don't have to pay for the card draw of Harrison. I always see it as your goal is to break the opponent's weapon. That's the most important thing. Harrison is a flashy and indulgent way to do it but unless you know you're going up against big fat weapon decks (like in a tournament), then Ooze is preferable in general.

Yeah, no. A 3/2 for 2 is 100x better than a 5/4 for 5. If you're playing a vanilla 5/4 for 5 turn 5 you are in trouble. A 3/2 for 2 turn 2 is in most every case a good tempo play. For example, both will only trade 1/1 against zoo, but one is 2.5x the cost.

I agree it is the better on curve play as well.

I was talking about holding on to it though and treating it like a dead card. That's no different than an Ooze. If your opponent uses their weapon and you draw an Ooze, it's still going to sit in your hand as a dead card just in case they play another weapon. Just like Harrison.

Right, they are both essentially a dead card, but a 3/2 for 2 mana is at least mana efficient; a 5/4 for 5 is not.

mures_sl said:

Right, they are both essentially a dead card, but a 3/2 for 2 mana is at least mana efficient; a 5/4 for 5 is not.

Click to expand...

I would argue that a ooze is not always dead...Against a priest, or warlock for example...It is an early play to trade vs a northshire, or a lock creature (imp, etc). I used to be skeptical about ooze in a deck, but now I find room in my priest.

Exactly our point, its not anymore dead than a vanilla 5/4 for 5. But at least the 3/2 for 2 is mana efficient, good tempo play early game, or a decent play to play out a curve late game. Its much more difficult to play harrison + a card late game than it is ooze + a card.

I play Harrison in my ladder control Warrior. Never regret it. It allows me to catch up in card draw when Handlocks Jaraxxus (this happens to me a lot), I can force out SW: D from Priests if I time it right, vs Rogue even if I just destroy a 1/2 dagger the draw often gives me answers I need. It trades with a big Druid minion (or, even better, eats a Swipe). Paladin, Hunter, Shaman, and Warrior? So incredibly value.

It is pretty much only bad vs Zoo and Mage.

The Master_sl said:

I play Harrison in my ladder control Warrior. Never regret it. It allows me to catch up in card draw when Handlocks Jaraxxus (this happens to me a lot), I can force out SW: D from Priests if I time it right, vs Rogue even if I just destroy a 1/2 dagger the draw often gives me answers I need. It trades with a big Druid minion (or, even better, eats a Swipe). Paladin, Hunter, Shaman, and Warrior? So incredibly value.

It is pretty much only bad vs Zoo and Mage.

Click to expand...

I play Harrison in control warrior as well...And I don't play the ooze...The warrior doesn't need the tempo control in the same way a control priest deck does.

I'm convinced that 50% of the game is identifying your opponent and mulliganing properly.

Like I said, I don't know if its worth running harrison on the ladder in the current meta, I wasn't talking about ooze, but ooze fits into so many more decks better than harrison jones. I'm basing this off of my ladder experience of not seeing that many weapon classes period and then my past experience playing harrison, he usually isn't around when you need him. Even in the miracle heavy meta he wasn't that good of a card when I ran him, I did it just because I despised miracle rogue.

I don't track my games, but I would say these numbers fairly accurately describe my ladder experience:Meta Analyst: Third EditionYou will notice weapon classes are almost always the least common. Couple that with warlock always being the most common past rank 20 and only becoming more common as you rank up; harrison is such a poor card against warlock. Probably figure half of those warlocks are zoo and harrison is about aA dead a card as you can draw against zoo.

mures_sl said:

Like I said, I don't know if its worth running harrison on the ladder in the current meta, I wasn't talking about ooze, but ooze fits into so many more decks better than harrison jones. I'm basing this off of my ladder experience of not seeing that many weapon classes period and then my past experience playing harrison, he usually isn't around when you need him. Even in the miracle heavy meta he wasn't that good of a card when I ran him, I did it just because I despised miracle rogue.

I don't track my games, but I would say these numbers fairly accurately describe my ladder experience:Meta Analyst: Third EditionYou will notice weapon classes are almost always the least common. Couple that with warlock always being the most common past rank 20 and only becoming more common as you rank up; harrison is such a poor card against warlock. Probably figure half of those warlocks are zoo and harrison is about aA dead a card as you can draw against zoo.

Click to expand...

Um, so according to that link rank 5 to legend 44% of the people you're playing have weapons (Shamans sometimes don't run Doomhammer, but for the most part this is true). If your argument holds that higher up the ladder more locks are handlock than not (and I agree with it) that numbers goes to at least 61% (also if you Harrison a Jaraxxus that is almost an auto-win and that will be 17% of your match ups). So in 61% of your match ups past rank 5 he is incredibly useful. Versus Druid and Priest (another 20% of your match ups) he trades 1-for-1 in most cases and usually with a higher value card. So in 19% of match ups (Mage and Zoo) he is questionable. Considering as a control Warrior you are favored in both those match ups, not running him in control Warrior seems very questionable to me. If anything that just cements that every control Warrior should always run him.

Just too many what-ifs for me, I'd rather take a solid 5 cost card. Not sure where you got 44% from, I'm adding up 38% in ranks 5-L if you count shaman, and it was something like 33% of class breakdown overall, and shaman is probably 50/50 with the doomhammer nowadays. And thats only 1 card in a 30 card deck you're hoping them to play and you have your 1 of at the same time. There is the burst shaman that runs 2 doomhammers, but thats even more rare from a class that is already rare.

So ~66% chance its nothing more than a 5/4 for 5. Even if you look at the very top of ladder and factor in some handlocks say its only ~50% of being nothing more than a 5/4 for 5 well I'd much rather a sludge belcher, azure drake, or spectral knight, which commonly go 2 for 1, than something that is commonly a 5/4 for 5. Besides the coin flip if he could possibly have any added value then you have to have him in hand at the right time. Like I said earlier I can often remember where I was playing against a weapon class and had him in hand and a weapon just never came or the weapon comes out and you don't have him in hand. So you're taking a percentage of a percentage of him getting value, like I said just too many what-ifs for me.

Not to say you can't run harrison or that he is a bad card, his value is phenomenal when he works, but I believe a consistently valuable card is better. I do like him in control warrior as you are more likely to make it to late game where you will have both drawn him and your opponent play a weapon. But with so many heavy early game aggression decks on the ladder sludge belcher and/or spectral knight are mvps.

I think the game is set up so that you are to spend a great deal of time in the Arena until you have built up a card pool.