- 3x Electrickery
- 3x Essence Scatter
- 2x Rolling Temblor
- 1x Smelt
- 3x Thunderbolt
- 2x Tormod's Crypt
- 1x Vandalblast
Comments View Archive
October 5, 2012 9:57 a.m.
I really like the concept and this just looks like a really fun deck to play! +1- I also love the name!
October 17, 2012 2:06 p.m.
I just play tested this against some common human/control decks and this not only withstood all of their attacks and controllery but smashed them in return! I'm am genuinely surprised, +1 for you good sir!
October 31, 2012 5:48 p.m.
This is pretty cool! I like that epi experiment can be used turn 4 for 2, after a guttersnipe turn 3, and burn thru cards pretty cool.
November 18, 2012 7:05 p.m.
November 18, 2012 7:06 p.m.
November 18, 2012 8:31 p.m.
I playtested this deck a few times against a multitude of decks. I found that mizzium skin isn't too useful, personally I would take it out to add in an extra izzet charm, brimstone volley, and/or and additional dissipate or annihilating fire. Also, I would find a way to lower the deck total to sixty by removing the annihilating fire or dissipate. Overall, it's a very fun deck to play, I might consider playing my own version of it for my local FNMs.
November 19, 2012 8:14 p.m.
cool deck man!! if u got some money buy some bonfire's and add them instead of izzent charm. but i am also a know counter spell hater lol.
November 23, 2012 4:59 p.m.
Thanks for all the people who took the time to look and comment on the build. Truly appreciated.
The Epic Experiment is like an extra 3-4 cards in your hand plus another extra 12 mana that is magically given to you whenever you cast it. I love it.
I have tried Rolling Temblor mainboard (still in side) but I found out that what the deck needs ( which is true of all burn decks) is fast in your face damage otherwise you run out. Flames of the Firebrand affords this damage while having the choice of redirecting to creatures if need be.
Sadly the Goblin Electromancer s have been long gone in this deck as I found that his mana discount is not as needed as I thought. I just made way for more spells. The Cackling Counterpart is an excellent idea for copying the guttersnipes though . I will tinker with that.
Thanks for reminding me to edit. The Mizzium Skin s have been never been effective and found that the 3cmc cost of the Dissipate was too high of mana to keep open. I have actually been playing without those cards for a few weeks now and have replaced them with more burn spells in the real deck. If you ever decide to publish your epic deck I would love to see it . I've had lots of fun with the deck but I would like to see others take on it especially if you can make it as more of an FNM competitive deck.
I try to avoid any spells with X casting cost because they will deal very little damage when I use the Epic Experiment early to mid game.
November 24, 2012 12:01 a.m.
If you Epic Experiment into a spell with X in the casting cost, X will be defined as zero...
November 24, 2012 6:50 p.m.
That is correct. I forgot to specify that the only way you give damage with an x spell through experiment Is when you have a Guttersnipe out and usually early to mid game you would only usually have 1 out.
November 24, 2012 8:14 p.m.
i thought of that after i wrote my comment about bonfire also, make's me think that having 4 epic's would be kind of overkill. i would hate to do a epic and lose two epic's doing it.
November 24, 2012 9:21 p.m.
sorry dont know why it did that twice, my bad. also izzet charm doesnt seem to be good here i would replace with burn or draw card. i hate that it only does damage to creatures and if u draw u have to discard which in my mind is pointless.
November 24, 2012 9:24 p.m.
I see your point about theEpic Experiment and theIzzet Charm but the experiment runs 4 for consistency and the izzet charm replaces all the counter spells to keep theBlistercoil Weird , Guttersnipe or epic spell protected. The waste is a calculated risk in the deck but I will take your suggestion and see if ratios can be altered.
November 24, 2012 9:52 p.m.
What tha Fuc....!!!
By the eternal flame!!!
Your deck techs are amazing!!!
Im copying them all!!!
November 27, 2012 9:58 p.m.
You are more than welcome to my friend. That's what this community is all about. I hope you get great games.
November 27, 2012 11:58 p.m.
Just an FYI, Dual Casting does not let you cast the card again. It simply lets you put a copy of the spell onto the stack, thus not triggering either Guttersnipe or Blistercoil Weird. The card still has some synergy with the deck, but it makes it much weaker with your only 8 creatures and less value.
November 28, 2012 1:45 a.m.
Thanks for your comment.
As previously discussed (there has been 74 comments on the stack thus I had to erase the most of it , including past discussions of this topic), I am well aware that the Dual Casting spells does not trigger either Guttersnipe or Blistercoil Weird (That would be too greedy). I have only used the spells that were CAST by the Epic Experiment to burn (with guttersnipe) then untap the weird and be able to tap again for Dual Casting .
Lets say in a most 'perfect' situation I have a Guttersnipe and Blistercoil Weird that has Dual Casting on it already out. I then cast an Epic Experiment for X=3 and pull out Pillar of Flame ,Izzet Charm and Flames of the Firebrand . I CAST the first spell, tap, copy it with the weird , then I CAST another one thus untapping the weird enabling me to use Dual Casting again to copy the second and then repeat the same again on the last spell. In the end I've cast 4 spells (including the experiment), the Guttersnipe has done his damage and the weird buffed... Whew!
Also the reason for a low creature count is for consistency to be able to pull just the 'essentials' to make it work. More room for instant and sorcery spells (all of which is less than 3 cmc) and LESS chance for a non damaging spell. It is also important to note that you don't really need a weird laced with the dual cast to be able to burn a high amount of damage. An experiment cast on its own , preferentially with a snipe out can do that quite efficiently on its own.
November 28, 2012 12:42 p.m.
Love this deck I have been working on my own which has turned from mill into something very similar, This has pointed out the flaws in my deck and given me more ideas. Have you been playing FNM with it and if so how has it been preforming?
December 8, 2012 6:14 a.m.
FAMOUScupcake - I think you would like this. +1 from me, standard idea but well executed.
December 8, 2012 4:54 p.m.
Here is my version I think it is complete ish now deck:izzets-burning-experiment.