Help making my stupid looking vampire deck even more competitive!
Modern Deck Help forum
Posted on July 28, 2015, 6:45 p.m. by Xica
Here is my deck: Null profused turbo Vampires
At first glance it looks, not only uncompetitive, but unplayable... at second glance it looks just uncompetitive...
It is not the classical take on the vampire tribal, it makes heavy use of tutors, and uses some cards that have good synergy with my creatures, in only 1 copy (because i can tutor them).
The things i am the most clueless about are the following:
1# Would it be useful for me to add 4x Mutavault to help me cast Feast of Blood, and flip Bloodline Keeper
Flip in controll matchups, or it would be too much colorless mana together wih my 4x Cavern of Souls?
2# Could Slaughter Games reasonably replace 1 of my sideboard playsets?
If you have any other advice i would like to hear it!
(Except the: This deck cannot work. because, no xyz card, non aggro vampire decks are useless, why run 1 copy of spells... etc. - so please give usefull critque, and think/read my introduction, before posting that it does not work - because suprisingly it does.)
I didnt consider Surgical Extraction for 2 reasons:
1# the 
is not the only cost of the spell, i need to have that permanent in the graveyard. I most likely will need to cast an ther spell to do this.
2# it can be countered, unlike Slaughter Games
July 29, 2015 6:14 p.m.
@icehit6: Surgical Extraction is not "strictly better" than Slaughter Games. For one, it does nothing if they haven't played the card yet or you haven't hit it with Thoughtseize.
Number two, it doesn't have value either way. They either cast the spell or you had to remove the spell. You're using two cards vs. one to exile the copies.
Number three, Slaughter Games has the all-important "cannot be countered."
Combine these, and Surgical Extraction doesn't even come close to fitting the definition of "strictly better." In order for Surgical Extraction to be strictly better, it would have to read "Name a card and search etc." while either costing less, costing 3 colorless and one colored mana, be an instant, or name more than one card, or have another effect tacked onto it (such as "CARDNAME deals 1 damage to that opponent.")
@Xica: I would cut the Nomad Outposts for either basics or more fetches. Even if you don't have money to get more Marsh Flats, you could just use Polluted Deltas since you're always going to be searching for a swamp anyway. I like Mutavault, but I think you're right about having too many hard mana symbols. However, the deck could use a singleton Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth, which not only lets fetchlands tap for mana, but also your Mutavaults to tap for 
. Nomad Outpost is just going to cost you games when you need a land to come into play untapped and can't.
Corrosive Mentor is just bad. It gets Lightning Bolted without an ETB or "kill this or you lose/I get ALL THE CARD ADVANTAGE"-type ability. Not to mention, it doesn't interact with Vampire Nighthawk very well. I think you want more 4-ofs. If you really have trouble versus larger creatures, consider Terminate.
Null Profusion does too little too late. Phyrexian Arena, Dark Confidant, Night's Whisper are all better options IMO.
Retribution of the Ancients is yucky and win-more. By the time it gets going to do anything, you have to already be ahead. Same goes with Blade of the Bloodchief. If you're able to do anything with these, you shouldn't need them. You're in red so why not four Lightning Bolts? They kill creatures and get damage in when you need to finish off your opponent.
Beseech the Queen is okay. I think it's worth trying out, especially since you can use it to go find your lords. You might wanna try mixing and matching with Kolaghan's Command, Liliana of the Veil, Night's Whisper, or even Read the Bones. However, I'm more inclined to think this slot should be Inquisition of Kozilek, Thoughtseize, or Duress. You really don't have anything going on in your one-drop slot. Hitting their Lightning Helix to protect your turn two Tithe Drinker or turn three Stromkirk Captain may be more important.
As for the sideboard, too many four-ofs make it really narrow. While it's debatable for the mainboard, you DEFINITELY want hand disruption here in the side. Tidehollow Sculler or Duress at the very least. A mix of Kolaghan's Command, Fulminator Mage, and Slaughter Games could all replace Hide/Seek.
I personally still like Rakdos Charm, so I think it's worth keeping, despite it falling out of favor lately. Four copies is probably excessive, especially if you add in one or two Kolaghan's Command in your 75.
How is your Burn matchup? You probably do really well and may not need sideboard options because of Vampire Nighthawk and Tithe Drinker in the main. If it becomes too problematic, Kor Firewalker or Timely Reinforcements will do the trick. It should be noted that Delver cannot beat a resolved Kor Firewalker, so it works double duty there. You may find these are more viable options than Leyline of Sanctity, which gets awkward when you don't have it in your opener or you do and draw the other copies later.
I also vote for a singleton Vampire Nighthawk and a singleton Olivia Voldaren to replace two of the Oblivion Rings in the side. You want Vampire Nighthawk for the decks that don't have Lightning Bolt, especially Tron and Bloom, since he blocks and kills their six-drops. Similarly, you also want Olivia Voldaren for the rounds against players without Lightning Bolt. She's an absolute nightmare for Abzan (of all types) to deal with because she just grows and can't be Abrupt Decay'd.
July 30, 2015 5:21 a.m.
Extirpate however is strictly better than Surgical Extraction
Corrosive Mentor is there because i can only attack with bloodghasts. And sometimes it becomes a tremendous problem that my enemy has a blocker in greater than x/3, or one that can regenerate. In these scenarios this card makes the Bloodghasts unstoppable. I run only 1 copy, so drawing it as a dead card is something that occurs very rarely.
Retribution of the Ancients can wreck an enemy's creatures at turn 3 or 4 in my experience no deck in modern is able to consistently pull of wins before this, so i think this card is useful (if i have blade of the bloodchief on the battlefield), again i run only 1 copy and tutor it only if needed.
Blade of the Bloodchief is very useful, as my opponent need either kill some of my weaker guys equipped with it before destroying the lords, or accpet that they will grow. It is very usefull against more controll heavy jund matchups, as both deck are capable of removaing nearly every creture the oponent played, in such matches with frequent death events this card just rules, if i am able to manage to keep one of my creatures alive.
Null Profusion is there to combat things like USA controll, or any controll that can effectively clear my creatures. It allows me to flood the board (playing at least 2 spells, or even 3... + land on every turn), of course its only useful if the game goes on too long and i need a push to overwhelm my opponent, again i run only one copy. And in more hand distruption heavy meta it should be side board card.
You are probably right about Slaughter Games, i should replace them with some hand distruption Inquisition of Kozilek / Thoughtseize / Distress / Castigate... i am leaning mostly towards Castigate it has no restriction, and its an exile, so it prevent graveyard actions (for example with Kolaghan's Command)
In the past i played this deck with 8 fetch lands, but it seems too much, if the game goes on longer and i have cards in hand, or the enemy puts them back in my hand, i am mana screwed enough to not be able to castthem only durning multiple turns. I believe the optimal ammount for this deck is between 6-4 fetches. To be honest i dont know... should i replace the Nomad Outposts with 1x Mountain & 1x Plains, 2x Mutavault or something else?
I would keep 1 playset of Oblivion Ring in my 75, because their versitality, i know they are only second to thing my Maelstrom Pulse but 3 colours are hard enough to manage for me at the moment.
In most burn matchups i have the upper hand, but when the suckers have a playset of Wheel of Fate then i am in deep trouble. Leyline is also very good against 8 rack, and other decks that invested heavily in hand distruption, lots of decks play hand distruption, and this card just makes a lot of their cards often 6-8 - or even more - dead draw.
July 30, 2015 8:11 a.m.
Being honest sylvannos, I do believe that Surgical Extractionis in fact strictly better in this situation, so let me tell you why your logic is flawed.
Yes, you're right that Slaughter Games has the better effect when it comes to not being countered and not having the card already played to rid of it, but in the context of this deck against control, the card you're trying to get rid of is probably already going to be in the graveyard once you get that fifth mana to get rid of the card. Again, unless it's a 6 mana cost win con, it's probably going to be in the graveyard, which means Surical Extraction has the ability to come out earlier, at instant speed. And if you run four, it's all the better.
You aren't using "two cards" to get the effect for one.
In the case of searching for a win con Slaughter Games is better, however for deleting removal and counterspells from a game, Surgical Extraction tops it.
I don't appreciate the condescending tone, especially when you're wrong. Do your research before you make a comment - there's a reason Surgical Extraction is a 4 dollar card while Slaughter Games sits nicely at around 60 cents. It's just better. And if you need another explanation to why it's better, then let me know.
@Xica, I appreciate you taking my thought into consideration. I didn't realize you were trying to target permanents, I must have misread when I saw control matchup, so I assumed you would be using it for removal. I would still recommend running one of Extirpate in the sideboard just because if you draw it and there's spot removal in their graveyard, it can be game changing. And as well, as you said, Extirpate is a strictly better card than Surgical Extraction. And you were very correct with that.
July 30, 2015 8:27 a.m.
icehit6, I'm going to have to disagree with you here. By your comment it seems that you're using Surgical Extraction as a "value" card, you said that it is a better card to take a removal spell that is in their graveyard. While this is true, one of the biggest mistakes players make is siding in cards like Surgical Extraction against a deck that doesn't rely on a certain card to win. Unless you are lucky and the card you are naming is also in their hand you are just losing a card to deal with cards your opponent might've never even drawn in the course of the game. Against Grishoalbrand, Ad Nauseam, and other such decks this is fine as they need a certain card to win. You can't say that one of the three cards mentioned is strictly better than the others because which one you want to use depends entirely on the deck you are playing and what decks you are expecting to play against.
July 30, 2015 9:33 a.m.
That is true, but I am saying in a control matchup it's very good. I'm not saying in every single case. I will agree with you against things like combo, it's just utterly useless. You're never going to get selected card, but I think it's a family decent card against removal and board clears and things of that nature.
July 30, 2015 12:43 p.m.
Well not gonna lie i need a little more info on your deck. like the deck list. Also why slaughter games? Yes i see valid and nonvalid points for surgical extraction,but extirpate might be better. Only because of split-second.
July 30, 2015 7:48 p.m.
My deck list is linked in the 1st line oof the opening post.
I would like to use Slaughter Games to prevent infinite combos, and punish decks that depend too heavily on 1 playset of strong cards to work properly.
July 30, 2015 8:07 p.m.
@icehit6: You're using a very specific term in the wrong way. Read this article on MtG Salvation. If you had said "I think Surgical Extraction is better for your deck than Slaughter Games," instead of "strictly better," you would be fine with your opinion.
"Strictly better" has a very specific meaning. I.e. Ancestral Recall is strictly better than Concentrate, which is strictly better than Rhystic Scrying. In the sense you're using the term, you're comparing Concentrate to Divination, saying Divination is better because it costs less. They don't do the same thing.
Not only do you have to either 1) Wait for them to cast the spell and for it to go to the graveyard or 2) Get rid of it yourself via removal or disruption, you can't blindly name it and exile it before they draw it. This is something you need to do against decks like Mono-Blue Tron, where you name Mindslaver before they have 13 mana available.
Lastly, cost is largely irrelevant. You're comparing the price of two cards that are printed over a year apart from sets that were opened in different quantities. RtR was drafted a lot more than New Phyrexia, hence more copies of Slaughter Games were opened. Cost is dependent on supply and demand...not how good a card is. Otherwise, Vampiric Tutor would be worth far more than Imperial Seal, but that is absolutely not the case.
I can be condescending all I want when someone blatantly spreads misinformation before even looking at the person's deck that's in question. Maybe if you took the time to realize what the person who asked for help was asking and avoided using terms you don't understand the full meaning behind, you could avoid these types of conversations.
@Xica:
Have you considered adding Terminates? On top of Tragic Slip, you can get past things with more than 3 toughness or with regeneration.
With Blade of the Bloodchief and Retribution of the Ancients, you say it yourself: if you can keep creatures alive. If you have a guy with lots of +1/+1 counters from Blade of the Bloodchief, you should already be winning. Neither of these cards helps you when you're behind. Neither one helps you if your opponent is just wiping your side with Lightning Bolts, Path to Exiles, etc.
Null Profusion would be better if it cost less. If your hand is empty, control players will just let it resolve and you lock yourself out. Otherwise, it comes so late in the game they have the resources to deal with it. Even worse is when you're under pressure from Liliana of the Veil or Deceiver Exarch clocks.
I would avoid Castigate because of how many two-drops you have already. You need something to do turn one to get yourself going. Castigate is an awesome card, but you don't have a lot going on turn one. This is a problem against decks like Infect or Affinity, which are looking to kill you on turn three. Hitting a Glistener Elf or Cranial Plating turn one is where you want to be. These decks are otherwise going to give you problems.
Six fetches is probably right, but those Nomad Outposts have got to go. A basic Plains might be in order so you can cast everything in your deck under Blood Moon (more importantly Oblivion Ring to get rid of it). Maybe cut one or two swamps for Mutavault?
The issue with Oblivion Ring is Abrupt Decay, Inquisition of Kozilek, and Destructive Revelry. It's a good catch-all answer, but there are so many answers to it already. Burn is likely boarding in Destructive Revelry in order to deal with Leyline of Sanctity already. I think at the very least you need Olivia Voldaren because of how well she answers so many different decks.
No burn deck plays Wheel of Fate, nevermind four copies. They optimally want to spend their turn two casting Boros Charm or Eidolon of the Great Revel or Monastery Swiftspear and Lava Spike or something that takes out a huge chunk of their opponent's life total, not play a spell that may or may not resolve until turn 6, after the game should be over.
July 30, 2015 8:11 p.m.
If i would cut Corrosive Mentor, Retribution of the Ancients & Null Profusion, i would probably add a 4th copy of Gatekeeper of Malakir. So i would have 2 spaces left in my mainboard... would it be better to use 2x Mana Tithe, or 2x Terminate in your opinions?
However i am not sure about dropping Retribution of the Ancients, its virtual card advantage, as i dont have that many removals (and cant have that many if i hhave a nice number of creatures), and Corrosive Mentor still seems like worth keeping in 1 copy.
...i got more and more convinced that i shouldnt keep Null Profusion, even tought it makes me able to consistently beat USA control that is present (and beats me) in my local meta. After all it is too specific an answer :/
July 30, 2015 8:33 p.m.
id remove 1 o-ring,1 tragic,and 1 feast for 3 path to exiles or unmake. As for slaughter games id use stain the mind, extirpate, or very last surgical extraction or infinite obliteration pending on the meta in your area. Also id add in faithless looting to get a bump on bloodghast or to rid your self of too many lands. Id also drop keeper of the blood lines for Captivating Vampire.
July 30, 2015 8:39 p.m.
Sadly i am never mana hosed, and sometimes even mana screwed so i have no lands to discard.
Captivating Vampire has only 1 benefit over Bloodline Keeper
Flip, it costs 
less. But it has many downsides: its a target for Inquisition of Kozilek, it has a weaker body when it enters the battlefield (aka. wider range of spells and creatures can kill it), it isnt a flyer, it gives only +1/+1 instead of +2/+2, and cannot generate 2/2 flyer tokens.
There is just no way i would play that card in this deck, it maybe is a consideration for aggro and/or mono black vampire decks....
And its ability is hideous... tap 5 vampires to steal 1 creature? c'mon! (seriously, should i sacrifice 5 blockers / attackers, to steal 1 creature?)
P.s.: Bloodline Keeper
Flips transform requirements may seem like a lot, but it generates vampire tokens that help him flip.
July 30, 2015 8:55 p.m.
@sylvannos, it's wonderful to hear your input. If you could read, I think that you could see I said in my second post in a control matchup that Slaughter Games was inferior to Surgical Extraction, which if you had half of a brain, yes, it is evidently is. I do not need an article to tell me what "strictly better" means as an English minor. And no, that is not something I am saying to sound superior, rather I am saying so you understand that I understand how the English language works.
In my first post, I will say that I wasn't specific enough because I did not mention control whatsoever. That is my fault, I'm so sorry to confuse you!
As I said in my second post, I will explain to you my logic to why you are incorrect. Slaughter Games costs 4 mana. It is completely illogical to run that card against control unless you're going for a wincon. Now I understand that Slaughter Games was not being used for control matchups, rather combo matchups. I seemed to have incorrectly used context to assume that question number one was connected to question number two. If you do not know what context is, here is an article explaing it - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context_(language_use)
Now back to the point. Slaughter Games costs 4 mana. It does not make sense to run it against control, again, unless you're going for a wincon, because Surgical Extraction can get rid of counter spells, removal, and other low costs spells like cantrips and draws a lot faster and a lot easier than Slaughter Games. Yes, though, again in the hope that you know how to read, I realize it's better for combos and wincons.
No I do not need your condescending attitude. Yes, I admit I was wrong with bringing up the cost comment; you are correct when you say that cost is largely irrelevant when you look at the effectiveness of a card.
If you had originally told me why I was wrong without being such a prick about it, there wouldn't be this conversation. As well, if you maybe looked at things from my perspective for a second and got over your huge ego, you would see in which parts I am correct and which parts I am incorrect, which by the way I openly admitted to being wrong in. However I am not accepting defeat in the sense over control, which is what I originally meant. So kindly fuck off sir, and please do not respond back to me again.
Thanks!
July 30, 2015 9:35 p.m.
@icehit6: Slaughter Games is played specifically to strip control of its win con lol...who cares how many Mana Leaks they have if they have no way of winning the game? Control isn't going to win by turn four. Surgical Extraction doesn't stop combo from going off when you really need hand disruption and spot removal like Inquisition of Kozilek.
"Strictly better" has a very specific meaning in MtG, just like the term "card advantage" or "mana curve." Your understanding of English is irrelevant because "strictly better" is a term used by players in every language, not just English. Korean or Italian players have just as much understanding of the term as an English speaker.
You're getting upset that someone called you out on saying something wrong. I don't know how many times I have to repeat it, but Surgical Extraction would have to be something like:
Or:
Or:
You're trying to compare Serum Visions to Sphinx's Revelation, saying Serum Visions is strictly better because it costs less and draws cards. Slaughter Games and Surgical Extraction have two completely separate purposes and different uses. This isn't subjective and is completely irrelevant to my ego or attitude. Whether or not I'm an asshole has no bearing on Surgical Extraction not being strictly better than Slaughter Games. Your refusal to take 30 seconds to learn the definition of a phrase says more about you than it does me.
July 30, 2015 11:24 p.m.
sylvannos, you obviously can't read. I'm not getting mad at you because you are right. I admitted multiple times where you were right, where I was wrong, but as well where you were wrong and where I was right. I think you struggle to understand when I say "Slaughter Games costs 4 mana. It is completely illogical to run that card against control unless you're going for a wincon." That is me saying that yes, you are correct about it going for a wincon. If you read further, you would see that I said that I misinterpreted the post and assumed he was using this card for control, which is why I said use Surgical Extraction instead.
So, all in all, I've admitted where I was wrong, gave my logic for everything of what I was trying to argue in the first place, which again is Surgical Extraction > Slaughter Games in the matchup of control. I don't even know how many times I've said that, and you're still trying to tell me why Slaughter Games is better in the situation against combo. Even after I've said so many times that yes, I understand Slaughter Games is better against wincons. If you need me to cite my sources from this page and use quotes, please let me know. It doesn't seem you're that strong of a reader, so maybe highlighting things will be helpful for you.
Now that we've learned something about me, let me do a little bit of analyzation about you! You're very argumentative. Right out the gate when responding to me, you give a condescending tone, choosing to be a prick instead of asking me my logic to why I believed Surgical Extraction is "strictly better." I misread his post and assumed that, again, for maybe the 10,000th time, Slaughter Games was being used against a control matchup instead of against a combo matchup.
Second, I see that you have trouble reading. If you need help with your remedial English classes, I can give you some lessons on how to read more efficiently and be able to break big words up so you can understand and read them.
Third, yes this does have something to do with your ego and your attitude. If you had been nice, like every other person here, then you wouldn't be making yourself look really stupid right now (which I will include bullet points to why you are uneducated below my post) and I would've actually had a conversation with you to explain my side, which by now you should understand, but you're still not getting it.
In case you were having trouble reading what is about, here are some bullet points to explain this entire thing in a nutshell.
I told you in my last post that you were correct on the case where Slaughter Games is better for a wincon. I was not arguing that, I was saying Slaughter Games is not good against control because things like Surgical Extraction can come out earlier and get rid of things like spot removal, counterspells, cantrips and draws. Now, if we are looking at it from this perspective, Surgical Extraction is in fact strictly better.
You are explaining to me what the phrase "strictly better" means. I understand what it means. I don't need an article to tell what it means. Even if I didn't know what it means, one can assume through context of what it does mean.
You still think I'm arguing because I am wrong, which again I will repeat for the troubled reader (you), I have admitted where I was wrong which includes Slaughter Games vs Wincon. Your entire argument against me is literally invalid at this point.
You made custom cards to try and explain to me why you're right, even though I will mention for the third time in this post now, I have admitted you were right in my last post in the Slaughter Games vs Wincon matchup
You have a terrible attitude and a terrible ego and I really hope that turns around for you someday. It's okay to be troubled, but don't take it out on people here. I am a relatively nice guy, however if you're going to be an asshole to me, I will be one back. And in this case, I really believe you have lost this conversation.
July 31, 2015 7:18 a.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #19
Well, this is amusing.
icehit6, being the one to sling insults does not make you the "winner" of this discussion. You used the term "strictly worse" incorrectly. The cards are strong in different scenarios. Unless you have more discard, it can be hard to get what you want into the bin for Extraction, while Slaughter Games costs more.
Please, please don't be an ass.
July 31, 2015 7:37 a.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #20
To add on, I think Games is better in any deck that can't get cards into the bin very reliably. Jund can do this, Vampires can't. I think Slaughter Games is better, but I'd likely play a split.
For the record, please don't board in either card against control.
Xica, you should diversify your sideboard. 4-4-4-3 is very lacking against the linear decks, because you only have very general cards that can be mediocre in a lot of places. Try playing a mix of linear answers and versatile cards, and try to develop some diversity.
July 31, 2015 7:46 a.m. Edited.
I have no issue with you GlistenerAgent :) I can take constructive criticism pretty well. I will back my argument up to defend my side, but if you're right, you're right. I just don't appreciate attitudes where the person believes they're superior and are condescending like in this case here. Yes, being like that doesn't make me the winner of the argument, and I don't consider myself the winner in the case of I was mean to him. However, I'm not going to sit there and be treated like an idiot with no consequence. I think him and I both have something to learn from this experience.
July 31, 2015 8:24 a.m.
canterlotguardian says... #22
Where's my Michael Jackson popcorn picture when I need it? Oh yeah, right here.
July 31, 2015 8:37 a.m.
@icehit6: You barge into this thread, use a term incorrectly, don't actually bother looking over the deck in question that's asking for help, are confronted with a matter-of-fact definition of the term, then flip out and call me condescending, then act like the other person was an ass all along.
I'm sorry, but you don't get to have a monopoly on being treated nice by everyone when you act like this. Why should I have to ask your opinion on what you mean by "strictly better" when I already know what it means and you can't even be bothered to take the five seconds to look at a person's deck but have time to make a post? Then have the audacity to start lecturing me on language and questioning my literacy?
All it would have taken was for me to hear "What I meant was X," without accusations. I didn't have any idea my original post here was insulting to anyone, nor was it my intent. I felt I was making a matter-of-fact statement as a segue into addressing the topic. My apologies for derailing the thread.
@canterlotguardian: Here's the gif as well for your records, sir:
July 31, 2015 5:23 p.m.
@Sylvannos, first off, I did not "barge into this thread." I made a comment on what I thought. I've told you countless times I thought it was in the case of control.
No, I did not use "strictly better" incorrectly in my first post. Again, in the case of control, Surgical Extraction is better. I had assumed (becuase of his first question) that his question on Slaughter Games was related to control, so in the short time I had before I wanted to go to sleep, I made a comment stating something I thought would be helpful.
Yes, in your first comment, at least in the way I read it, was very condescending. That does not dismiss my behavior, and I apologize for it, however you went along with the bad behavior as well and came at me too. So you don't get a "monopoly" on being treated nice either with your attitude. I'm a very straight forward person. If I feel like you're being rude to me, I will be rude back. If you're nice to me, I'm nice to you. And honestly, because I don't know you, and we got into a dumb argument over two cards, and I really did go too far with some of the comments I made, I apologize. And I really mean it. I'm sorry.
If you want to start over, I think it would be helpful information for you to understand that I confused myself into thinking that Slaughter Games was going to be used in general control matchups; getting rid of things like removal and cantrips and other things alike. That is why I recommended Surgical Extraction. It's a more efficient way of getting rid of those things without much threat or drawback. Thoughts on that?
icehit6 says... #2
I haven't looked at the deck, and I will. But the first thing you need to know is Surgical Extraction is strictly better than slaughter games because of the mana cost difference. Obviously a downside because it has to be in a graveyard, however you're not getting mana out super fast, so you'll always have Surgical Extraction ready before Slaughter Games. Definitely Extraction over Slaughter Games every single time.
July 28, 2015 8:50 p.m.