I guess you are not a developer, I hope I can give an insight on why HearthTech is righly mad about it. When you build a big project like this being constant in the design and the implementation of new rules, although it is the hardest thing to do, it is mandatory to not have a bug and behaviour inconsistency fiesta like is Hearthstone nowadays. To be more specific, in that case industry standard is 'same rule but one has an exception', not 'each one has its own rule', in a sense that you should be able 'trace back' the behaviours if you visualize them in a flow chart. Most likely they hardcoded Shadow Chord (as the general rule is that hp can be less than 0, like with Helm and classic damage) with an inconsistent custom rule. There could be somewhat infinite valid reasons for that (like not already having a phase where the game can actually check the value before the spell resolving, or not actually having a =0 state check) but it's always considered a thing you should avoid while coding, especially when you design the scalability of a system
@@vigormortishs as much as I'd like to agree with you, you're giving a most likely opinion. As I've said, chord has an additional line in its code. Keyword: code. Break points are not set at =0 (the resolution of effects after all trigger instances are checked).
![State of Play | September 24, 2024 [ENGLISH]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/fVs0suPHAX8/mqdefault.jpg)
Permanently dormant Magtheridon: 😁😎
It doesn't deal damage: 😐😭
The first one is not a bug. Different hard code for cards, as Chord: distort has an additional line of code.
I guess you are not a developer, I hope I can give an insight on why HearthTech is righly mad about it. When you build a big project like this being constant in the design and the implementation of new rules, although it is the hardest thing to do, it is mandatory to not have a bug and behaviour inconsistency fiesta like is Hearthstone nowadays.
To be more specific, in that case industry standard is 'same rule but one has an exception', not 'each one has its own rule', in a sense that you should be able 'trace back' the behaviours if you visualize them in a flow chart.
Most likely they hardcoded Shadow Chord (as the general rule is that hp can be less than 0, like with Helm and classic damage) with an inconsistent custom rule. There could be somewhat infinite valid reasons for that (like not already having a phase where the game can actually check the value before the spell resolving, or not actually having a =0 state check) but it's always considered a thing you should avoid while coding, especially when you design the scalability of a system
@@vigormortishs as much as I'd like to agree with you, you're giving a most likely opinion. As I've said, chord has an additional line in its code. Keyword: code. Break points are not set at =0 (the resolution of effects after all trigger instances are checked).
@@vigormortishs i agree about the rest of it, how projects go and unfold. Usually, a PM fucks shit up, with jira points and do this instead of that.
Maybe different codes, but cards with the same effect are not supposed to behave differently. It's a bug.
it clearly works like that because distort checks for 0 attack after the effect while helm doesn't
Yo wtf, kurthus applying lifesteal tl in hand minions Is kinda cool
What Happen if an negative values amalgamam, enter in a board with aura buffs like Deputization Aura or any other automatical buff?
It calculates from those negative values. -1 Attack with Deputization Aura will still be 0 Attack.
the macaw seems buggy with 1 cost cards