Fair point on harvest hand. I was planning on switching it out for boots that have nonbasic land walk
June 8, 2018 3:49 a.m.
I'm winning by the seat of my pants. I know when to make my move, on the aspect of not having enough exalted.... I haven't found anybody with the cards to sell. I've been burned by online sellers before.
June 8, 2018 3:46 a.m.
Please login to comment
"which", not "witch". also, fetchlands don't belong in mono color decks. the loss of life is not worth the "deck thinning". the deck thinning effect is so minimal its practically nonexistent.
let me put it this way. lets say you're on turn 4, about to play your 4th land drop. so you've got 17 lands left in your deck, out of 50. that gives you a 34% chance of drawing a land turn 5. but if that 4th land is a fetch, you go down to 16 lands out of 49 cards left in the deck. thats a 32.6% chance of drawing a land turn 5. so basically, you've just increased your chances of drawing a spell by a whopping 1.4%. thats just not worth the 1 life you paid.
while i can agree that Collected Company doesn't really go in mono G stompy, your reasoning is wrong. a deck thats actually "meant" to use Collected Company rarely gets bad reveals from it. there will usually be very few other noncreatures spells alongside it.
as for Revenge of the Hunted, i probably wouldn't use that either simply due to lack of space, but i just want to point out that if its in your opening hand, you can simply mulligan.
Dungrove Elder may seem nice because it can get "bigger" and has hexproof, but with only 21 lands, on average it will be a 3/3 in more games than it will be a 4/4, and rarely go higher than that. a Steel Leaf Champion is bigger for the same cost, and raises devotion for Aspect of Hydra.
June 12, 2018 6:08 p.m.
so you're trying to make a 3 color deck without shocklands? im guessing no fetchlands either. good luck with that buddy.
June 12, 2018 5:47 p.m.
hungry000: i know exactly what the power level of modern is. why don't you quit being an asinine fool who think i don't know what i'm talking about. seriously dude F off with that "following general deckbuilding rules you hear about on the internet" garbage. i've been playing magic for over 13 years. the deckbuilding rules i follow are things i've learned by actually playing the game for over 13 years. that Tooth and Nail deck is a poor example to use. just because it uses less than 24, does NOT actually mean thats a smart choice. if you actually bother to do the math, it clearly shows you need 24 lands to reliably get a land drop on each of the first 4 turns. let me do it FOR you.
by turn 4, a player will have seen 10 (7 opening hand + 3 draws) from their deck if they're on the play. if you want 4 of those 10 to be lands, 4/10 of your deck should be lands. 4/10 of 60 is 24. pretty simple stuff there.
and on the topic of Heartless Summoning, absolutely not under any circumstances will it go in THIS deck. i'm not about to needlessly put my creatures into Lightning Bolt range. thats just stupid, and Nameless Inversion only makes the cut because with the combo it can affect the whole team.
June 12, 2018 5:41 p.m.
Boza: "these articles are far from what you suggest"...false.
June 12, 2018 5:32 p.m.
epajula: i don't think you actually know what a "troll" is. maybe instead of whining about something thats a part of the game and always will be, you could "git gud".
June 12, 2018 12:06 a.m.
epajula: nah just like to give people crap when they whine about infect lol
June 11, 2018 11:21 p.m.
SaberTech: just one small nitpick...pretty sure humans is 5c
June 11, 2018 9:51 p.m.
technically, "indestructible" doesn't end games. its the object itself that wins the games. indestructible just makes it harder to remove.
June 11, 2018 9:47 p.m.
its not like we don't still get really good removal from time to time. Fatal Push is a perfect example of something recent.
June 11, 2018 9:23 p.m.
Chasmolinker: what do you mean "as always"? most of his articles are just word salad, like a high schooler trying to meet a minimum word count on an essay.
June 11, 2018 9:16 p.m.
June 11, 2018 9:06 p.m.
epajula: he only has 3 sources of infect that i can see...
June 11, 2018 8:19 p.m.
hungry000: going below 24 lands in any deck aiming to hard-cast spells with a cmc of 4+ is HUGE no-no. even with mana ramp. if thats what you do with your own decks, i would highly recommend not doing that anymore. also, the -1/-1 from Heartless Summoning, when combined with the +3/-3 from Nameless Inversion, would kill my Thunderbreak Regent or Glorybringer. if i cast Nameless Inversion targeting Mirrorwing Dragon, it buffs my whole team, but Heartless Summoning would ruin that combo.
June 11, 2018 8:13 p.m.
June 11, 2018 8:05 p.m.
SaberTech: i "think" i see what you're saying now. at first you made it sound like a blanket statement of "any deck meant to be competitive will eventually look like a meta deck" but i think now it looks like you meant something more along the lines of "most competitive builds of an already-known archetype will likely look similar to the meta build of that archetype". like tron for example. i just generally prefer to make competitive versions of unused archetypes. i've gone 5-0 at modern fnm with 5c slivers. my buddy has gone 5-0 at modern fnm with a 4c planeswalker deck whose only creature was Narset, Enlightened Master.
JMCraig: whose friend are we talkin about?
June 11, 2018 8:02 p.m.
now don't get me wrong, i'm certainly not trying to say that i think nobody should ever netdeck under any circumstances. i totally understand going with a deck that has proven itself to be powerful when showing up to fnm where prizes are on the line. obviously we're there to win when we pay that entry fee. the part i have a problem with though, is when players just make a carbon copy of something they found, and pretend its their unique homebrew, or when they act like the wins they get make them some amazing player even though they don't know of any cards/mechanics outside of their deck.
let me give an example. once at modern fnm, i sat down across from a grixis Death's Shadow player. as i shuffled, he caught a glance of my Watery Grave. he immediately proceeded to shout out to the rest of the table that we had a "mirror match". but i wasn't playing Grixis Shadow. i was playing 5c slivers. and beat him to death 2-0. he didn't know how the regeneration mechanic worked.
June 11, 2018 12:28 a.m.
Q. If you copy the ddvklist but substitute one card, is it a netdeck anymore?
A. yes. seems obvious to me.
Q. What if you test it out, then go back to the original list?
A. im assuming you mean change the deck somehow, then test the new list. once you go back to the original, its a netdeck.
Q. What if you download a list, then spend a couple years systematically testing every card against several other good options, but ultimately end up replacing nothing? What if you replace only a few cards? How many is a few in this context???
A. this is basically the same question as the one before it. both scenarios result in a final decklist that is the same as the original netdecked list. so still a netdeck.
Q. Even more comfusing, what if you see a few good lists online, and end up using the 60+ cards that appear in all of them. If your deck unique? Is it a netdeck??
i'm assuming this question can only refer to commander. if there are 60+ cards that appear in "all" of the online lists, and we take into account a minimum of 30 lands, that means a maximum of 10 cards are unique. if less than 10% of the deck is unique, i consider it a netdeck.
for me personally, i think i draw the line at 20% of the decks spells, at least for 60-card formats. for 60 card formats, i consider it a netdeck unless a minimum of 8 cards are unique from the "stock" version. thats only 2 playsets though, so depending on the specific deck, it may be pretty generous of me to say that an 8 card difference actually separates it from being a netdeck.
June 11, 2018 12:19 a.m.
SCORE: 1 | 3 COMMENTS | 61 VIEWS
|Avg. deck rating||None|
|Last activity||1 week|