Golgari and Azorius mix?

Deck Help forum

Posted on June 27, 2013, 7:24 p.m. by ExiaExpress

Hello fellow planes walkers, recently I have been working on a Golgari deck that first really focused on milling myself with Grisly Salvage and using Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord to try and apply some nice utility to my graveyard but I quickly be unsatisfied with this set up and then moved on to what I have now. I really would like to implement the Azorius control aspect in my Golgari aggro deck so any help would be much appreciated! Peace is a lie is the current build I have going now and any criticisms, comments, opinions, ramblings, salad is much appreciated!

I'm confused by what you're going for here, for two reasons.

1.) Aggro and control don't mix very well. You want one or the other, not both. Are you working towards some sort of tempo build?

2.) Golgari is G/B and Azorius is U/W. Four colors is feasible in this format, but not really as an aggro deck. You pretty much need to be playing Farseek turn 2, which is not very aggressive.

June 27, 2013 7:34 p.m.

raithe000 says... #3

This particular grouping doesn't seem to work. I just ran some playtests on your deck using some of my own. It lost 3 of the 4 matchups.

The big problem I saw was a bad mana base. You have no mana fixing in the deck, and there were 3 times I mulliganned down to 4 or three cards in the opening hand before giving up and just giving you an entirely new hand. Especially in a 4 color deck, i would run the full 24 lands and drop the rogue's passage and vault of the archangel for cards that give you colored mana.

Secondly, your deck seems very disjointed. There are some powerful cards in the deck, but its hard to get them out early enough to put pressure on the opponent or drop them early enough to slow them down. There's definitely potential here, but I would drop at least one color.

June 27, 2013 8:31 p.m.

ExiaExpress says... #4

I really appreciate the feedback! I went ahead and edited the deck. Really trying to just focus three colors(B/G/W), but I really wanna keep Vorel in the deck because I feel like he really adds to the theme. Im also thinking that I should get some Golgari Charm for utility.

June 27, 2013 9:54 p.m.

raithe000 says... #5

Looks better, certainly. I'm not seeing the white or blue other than the paladin and Vorel. If you are just splashing for those guys, they may not be worth it in this deck. I'd pick one color or the other, or neither, and focus in on synergies between whatever colors you have left. Consider Transguild Promenade or Chromatic Lantern instead of throwing so much of your mana base into providing for 4 cards.

I would argue there are better choices than Thrashing Mossdog , say Deadbridge Goliath for more power at the same mana or Slitherhead to add a 1 drop, but if you are seeing a lot of flying in your meta, it may be worth it to keep them in. Personally, i'd trade a Corpsejack Menace out for another Lotleth Troll , but that's your choice. I'm also a little iffy on Treasured Find in the main board, since you are now running more of a ramp/ aggro deck than a combo deck and many of your creatures work quite well in the graveyard.

A couple cards I would consider: Crowned Ceratok means your powered up guys can't be blocked by a 1/1 and basically not do anything. Hunger of the Howlpack could be useful, especially if you use Valroz and the Elks to prime them.

June 27, 2013 10:15 p.m.

ExiaExpress says... #6

Crowned Ceratok Seems like it could be really useful to keep my counter stack interesting I will definitely look in to acquiring a few. My very first build (before I posted my build on the site) had some Slitherhead in it, I guess I just forgot about it. It has a zero scavenge cost for a one drop so I should probably consider either putting it in my main or maybe side board. Deadbridge Goliath has interested me for some time now, him and Desecration Demon . Thank you again raithe000 for the feed back it is really really appreciated! Glad I could some what improve the deck as well

June 27, 2013 10:36 p.m.

This discussion has been closed