Dre;34765 wrote:tbf it doesnt matter if there some cards in the mulligan that arnt used in this particulair deck, i often have a mulligan that works for 4-5 decks with like only 2-3 cards difference. The mulligan just holds the cards it gets. So if there is no cons in the deck it wont hurt to have a hold cons in it. It will just not hold it (duh) but if one time you think u want to swap out like a kings for a cons u dont have to adapt your mulligan all the time just for one card. What is strange about the mulligan are the discard rules tho. because the mulligan will discard anything anyway if there is no HOLD for it written. So its unnessesairy.
Yeah the discard rules are strange. I wasn't saying it was bad or anything -- I was just wondering if it was the right mulligan because I had made that mistake a day earlier posting my Tempo Mage deck's _mulligan.txt file. I uploaded an unedited version and that's what I thought this may have been.
But regardless, I added (and removed) a few things to it and it was doing better.
Right now I am at 47W-49L with the deck, it is running on my laptop next to me right now and has been running over night. The problem I am having is I am getting the object reference error with this deck; which is some sort of silverfish error. I had a Warrior deck that was getting that same error and after talking to botmaker he figured out it was Tinkertown Technician that was causing the error so I removed him and everything was good. Now I have to figure out which card is causing the error in this deck because it is happening quite a bit. I think it may be Truesilver Champion although I'm not sure. So far every time I have witnessed it happening, Truesilver Champion has been one of the cards in my hand.
EDIT: The exact error is "Object reference not set to instance of an object" it's common and it sucks :P
HearthRanger Administration Team & Lead Forum Admin