Should the Magmar Trial keep its current form?

[kirabi]

I saw a thread on reddit ask this same question so I figured I would ask it here for more feedback. Currently the Magmar is working with some minions that might not be intended for example

Vaath bbs with Red Steel Minos or Thraex it counts towards the Trial

Starhorn and your bbs(or gaze or spikes) with Vindicator it counts towards the Trial

Ragnora and your bbs with Lady Locke or Mirkblood devourer it counts towards the Trial

The question is simple assuming the Trial amount would be adjusted for these new unforeseen interactions( like to 6 or 7) and assuming they are evaluating the cost and effectiveness of all Trials to make them work better.Do you think that Magmar Trial should stay the way it is currently or change back to the intended buff spell way?

[alexx55]

I think it should, because many of those cards that actually work are not really that great (well, redsteel is, but others are meh), so you are putting semi-good cards for a great wincon. But it definetily needs an up-count to 6-7

[kirabi]

To answer my own question I think that the “mistake” end up adding flavor to the Magmar Trial each of the generals kinda got a underplayed minion that combine with bbs to give a unique spin on the deck. I think if changed back you would see the same 1 generic deck and general.

The amount for the Trial has to change if left as is,The deck was already high roll candidate and left at 5 it would get some really amazing Turn 2 activations which would be tiliting for other players. I think 7 is probably the correct amount but given how they fix stuff I would rather see 6.We have seen cards nerf twice but we never seen a card nerf hard but then adjusted back after to something playable

[ancientmage]

The deck is a high roll candidate but also suffers horribly from bad luck too, bumping it to 7 feels a little harsh when it can be difficult to even proc 5 sometimes.

[cloudfrog]

idk. unique spin or not, the bbs triggers proves superior over other means. turning it to 7 would mean that the bbs method will be the only good way to run hate furnace. So i guess it all boils down to what people want: bbs furnace or normal furnace.

side note I kinda wished T&D’s just gave you an edge, not a near-100% wincon tho.

[calebtenrou]

Some of the interactions I like, for instance Thraex and Redsteel. Others though I find very irritating. For instance Entropic Gaze or Spikes and Vindicator generate irritating amounts of value while also dealing damage to my General AND providing Trial progression.

Basically more intuitive ones I am a fan of, the others less so. If these interactions are kept I think making the Trial end at 6 would be fair.

[dbrans]

I feel like if the vindicator/thraex/redsteel interactions are removed the hate decks become much slower and inconsistent, particularly if u increase the amount of spells to make up for the changes, to the point where u either get a lucky draw snowball or lose, or else u have to play a more traditional magmar deck that’s too slow to compete with top tier mythrons, and hate becomes a win more condition

I would prefer the trial to be altered to include these interactions, but on the same note, even with these interactions is it the one and only op meta deck or just on par with the other new decks?

[loliconartist]

Id say hatefurnace rn is around the same power level as alot of other strong decks, but those few strong decks have (or will have) a much higher power gap from other decks that should be tier 1 or 2, so it will be hard to compete with t0 this expac

[excogitator]

Should the Magmar Trial keep its current form (should indirect attack buffs count)?

• Yes
• No
• Needs more testing

Show results