Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 101 to 120 of 120

Thread: GB Vengevine

  1. #101

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    Good point. I had Fragmentize in earlier versions for that reason. I put Nature's Claim in that one because of the manabase. Fetchlands improve Bloodghast. Basic swamp is good in some matches. I don't want to fetch turn 1 Scrubland unless the hand has Tireless Tribe and no other white source, because green mana is useful more often. That tilted me towards Claim. Maybe it's better to just play all rainbow lands in the all-in version.

    Rainbow land pros:
    -Easier to support colored costs for sideboard cards: Fragmentize, Ingot Chewer (a 1cc answer to Chalice), Abrupt Decay..
    -Dodges Stifle
    -Mana Confluence -> Putrid Imp -> Discard Prized Amalgams and Bloodghasts and Stinkweed Imp and Cabal Therapy -> flashback Therapy. Opponent could confuse you for Dredge and concede.


    Rainbow land cons:
    - Bloodghast is worse without fetchlands
    - No basics to get vs Assassin's Trophy, Path to Exile, Ghost Quarter...
    - Scoop to nonbasic hate
    You bring up good points, and I never really considered the mostly-rainbow manabase. In general, I've found that by the time your opponents are hating on your lands, you don't need to cast any more spells. Discard outlet + land from hand + rootwalla reanimates vengevines anyway. In the case of blood moon, you can lotus petal -> fragmentize, and this deck can definitely win without casting a spell after t1. Plus, 4 undiscovered paradise is usually enough to get back bloodghasts I've found.

    Game 1 it's pretty bad against spell-based decks, just a slow discard outlet. It has anti-synergy with any weenies you have out and Basking Rootwalla (Rootwalla will enter play before Dreams resolves, then die). It's much better against aggro, hatebears or tokens, when you're using it both to discard and kill things.

    For the all-in version with rainbow mana, what about some Firestorms SB?
    I haven't come across a situation where I was locked out by creatures, but I can see cards like containment priest and thalia heretic cathar being really annoying. Firestorm is nice because it's reach and clears out blockers, both effects we want. The only problem I can see is that normally our discard effects want to happen on turn 1, when firestorm is weaker. However, it seems like a very strong sideboard card. Thank for this, I'll try it out.

    What would you put in the board to help against Miracles? I put 4 Cavern of Souls maindeck to fight counters and Carrion Feeders to fight Swords and Terminus. Other than more discard, I couldn't think of much else.
    I think the way this deck is most likely to beat miracles is to get a really strong turn 1 and dodge/discard a terminus. For that reason, I can't think of a sideboard option that doesn't just dilute our gameplan. We probably just have to accept the bad matchup.

  2. #102
    Etherium is limited. Innovation is not.
    Hanni's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2006
    Location

    Columbus, OH
    Posts

    2,573

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Getting to 3 mana might be rough, but Lost Legacy/Unmoored Ego would be good against Miracles. Swords to Plowshares is only mildly annoying in the matchup; Terminus is the actual problem. Removing Terminus from the game before going off seems like a legitimate plan.

    Is Miracles alone worth boarding those for? Would they be reliable enough to to bring in against combo matchups? I doubt it, but it might be worth testing.
    Sligh
    Mentor Deathblade
    The Mind Harvester
    Wb Tokens
    4c Nobleblade

    Quote Originally Posted by MMogg View Post
    In porn terms, Zoo has a 11" shlong and an impressive money shot, but it's over in 4 minutes, whereas Landstill is a good 8" and can go for 30 minutes.

  3. #103

    Re: GB Vengevine

    I don't think 14/15 lands and 4 lotus petals is enough to support casting 3 mana cards with any reliability. Plus, if you do have 3 lands and legacy/ego, you probably don't have a strong combo and your opponent can save counterspells for it.

    Is gaddock teeg or meddling mage where we want to be?

    Edit: Legacy and ego are probably good options for the fairer build.

  4. #104
    Etherium is limited. Innovation is not.
    Hanni's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2006
    Location

    Columbus, OH
    Posts

    2,573

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Quote Originally Posted by Inkfathom View Post
    I don't think 14/15 lands and 4 lotus petals is enough to support casting 3 mana cards with any reliability. Plus, if you do have 3 lands and legacy/ego, you probably don't have a strong combo and your opponent can save counterspells for it.

    Is gaddock teeg or meddling mage where we want to be?

    Edit: Legacy and ego are probably good options for the fairer build.
    Stubborn Denial and Circular Logic are other possible options.

    I doubt Miracles keeps much countermagic in... probably just Force of Will. Counterspell is too slow, Flusterstorm doesn't hit creatures, and we have Cavern of Souls.
    Sligh
    Mentor Deathblade
    The Mind Harvester
    Wb Tokens
    4c Nobleblade

    Quote Originally Posted by MMogg View Post
    In porn terms, Zoo has a 11" shlong and an impressive money shot, but it's over in 4 minutes, whereas Landstill is a good 8" and can go for 30 minutes.

  5. #105

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Good points.

  6. #106

    Re: GB Vengevine

    I like Stubborn Denial a lot more than Lost Legacy. The rainbow manabase makes it feasible. Most players won't see it coming.

    Is Invasive Surgery too narrow to matter in enough other matchups?

  7. #107
    Etherium is limited. Innovation is not.
    Hanni's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2006
    Location

    Columbus, OH
    Posts

    2,573

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Invasive Surgery is probably the best option, since it will unconditionally answer Terminus. It's also good against most combo decks, which makes it versatile enough to be worth sideboard space. It's unfortunate that it cannot counter Surgical Extraction, though; Flusterstorm would be even more versatile, but I think it would be much less reliable against Terminus specifically.
    Sligh
    Mentor Deathblade
    The Mind Harvester
    Wb Tokens
    4c Nobleblade

    Quote Originally Posted by MMogg View Post
    In porn terms, Zoo has a 11" shlong and an impressive money shot, but it's over in 4 minutes, whereas Landstill is a good 8" and can go for 30 minutes.

  8. #108
    Member
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    3,729

    Re: GB Vengevine

    @FTW: Sickening Dreams isn't just for wiping, its an unconditional discard outlet like Brutality that doesn't need to resolve to get the job done. The reach is actually relevant as well, sometimes trimming 1/2 a turn off (damage itself and can get opponents to 10 or less for hasty Bloodghasts.) It was the testing against Grixis Delver that convinced me it was worth testing (Daze is a card.)

    EDIT: I should also mention that I have a number of D&T players in my local metagame, likely enough that maindeck SD's are going to be worthwhile. The damage to opponent's provides reach alongside Brutality as well, and maybe it should just be Brutality 3-4 instead. I've seen games stolen by Conflagrate in modern, which this can do a passable impression of (it just can't be flashed back.)
    Last edited by Mr. Safety; Yesterday at 10:45 AM.
    I am counted amongst legions of the unrighteous
    who dread not being immersed in pits of fire

  9. #109
    Member
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    3,729

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Regarding the all-in version: aren't you just playing a Belcher style deck by trimming the lands way back and trying to be a t1-2 deck? You're actually playing fewer initial mana sources than Belcher (which has around 20, not counting LED because it isn't an initial mana source to start the chain.) You're aiming for explosive but playing fewer initial mana sources than arguably the most explosive t1 combo deck in the format. I'm not criticizing, just trying to understand where you're coming from. The question of critical mass is really the big question for any version of this deck. The grindier version eschews redundancy for resilience, the combo version eschews protection for speed. I worry the critical mass of synergies might not be enough for the Bg grindy version but I fear losing too many games to inconsistency/lack of interaction g1, and I really want to be winning g1.

    I'm headed to the local this week, maybe getting some matches in against actual opponents will help, lol.
    I am counted amongst legions of the unrighteous
    who dread not being immersed in pits of fire

  10. #110
    Etherium is limited. Innovation is not.
    Hanni's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2006
    Location

    Columbus, OH
    Posts

    2,573

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    Regarding the all-in version: aren't you just playing a Belcher style deck by trimming the lands way back and trying to be a t1-2 deck? You're actually playing fewer initial mana sources than Belcher (which has around 20, not counting LED because it isn't an initial mana source to start the chain.) You're aiming for explosive but playing fewer initial mana sources than arguably the most explosive t1 combo deck in the format. I'm not criticizing, just trying to understand where you're coming from. The question of critical mass is really the big question for any version of this deck. The grindier version eschews redundancy for resilience, the combo version eschews protection for speed. I worry the critical mass of synergies might not be enough for the Bg grindy version but I fear losing too many games to inconsistency/lack of interaction g1, and I really want to be winning g1.

    I'm headed to the local this week, maybe getting some matches in against actual opponents will help, lol.
    You're looking at the all-in deck the wrong way. Initial mana sources are irrelevant; you run the amount that is required. The deck only needs one or two mana; 20 of the creatures in the deck are free, and with the exception of Lotleth Troll, the rest cost one mana.

    Why isn't the all-in version as grindy? Because it runs less discard, spot removal, and lands? Those cards slow the game down, but don't inherently make the deck better at grinding. The all-in version has a multitude of recursive creatures that gives the deck more than enough grind to beat most of the fair decks decks (such as Grixis Control and D&T).

    The point of the all-in approach is to increase the consistency of the deck by increasing its redundancy and synergy. More pieces interact with more pieces to more consistently enable hands to "work." It doesn't just make the deck faster, it also makes the deck more consistently able to cheat a pile of creatures into play.

    You also mention that the all-in version has less resilience, but I fail to understand what you mean. Resilience to what? The deck doesn't need discard or creature removal to beat Delver decks if it can put a Putrid Imp into play off of a Cavern of Souls and then dump a pile of creatures onto the board, for example.

    Resilience to graveyard hate postboard, maybe? I don't really think the fairer versions are any less affected, but regardless, the all-in version has enough tools to beat graveyard hate postboard.

    If anything, the all-in versions should be much stronger game one against fair decks, not worse. It may be softer to combo with less maindeck discard, but then again, this deck can kill on turns 2-3 itself, so the combo matchups are likely a toss-up in game one (for the all-in version).

    If you're looking for a slower, more disruptive approach, I don't see why you wouldn't just play Buried Phoenix. The strength to the Vengevine approach is the speed and the critical mass of threats. Think BR Reanimator compared to UB Reanimator as an example of what I mean.
    Sligh
    Mentor Deathblade
    The Mind Harvester
    Wb Tokens
    4c Nobleblade

    Quote Originally Posted by MMogg View Post
    In porn terms, Zoo has a 11" shlong and an impressive money shot, but it's over in 4 minutes, whereas Landstill is a good 8" and can go for 30 minutes.

  11. #111
    Member
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    3,729

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Great post, thanks. I did indeed mean resilience to gravehate, but also resilience to mana-disruption. I'm trying to avoid the Wasteland dilemma. Waste your 1 land, Daze your discard outlet, GG.

    My perspective was basically that both decks can win over 2 turns, the disruption maindeck version does it on turns 3-4. The 'all-in synergies' wins over 2 turns, turns 2-3. I was looking at it as the difference between Turbo Depths and Lands; both can make a t2 Marit Lage but one is dedicated to doing it as fast as possible while the other is ok with playing a more disruptive game. I could be way off here, but that is my perspective currently.

    I don't want to mislead; I'm still getting a significant board presence by turn 3, if not lethal, and closing games out pretty handily. I think either version is well-placed as a 'dredge' deck that doesn't spread graveyard synergies over several turns. We really only need one big turn to set up synergies and blast out a bunch of threats.

    As I posted, I'm testing this out on Friday, will let you know how it goes. If I'm really unhappy with results I can easily switch over to your approach. I'm only about 12 cards off (Amalgams, Tireless Tribe, and a few lands.) I'd be happy to see any version do well, it's a fun strategy that just *might* be a legitimate pure agro deck in legacy.
    I am counted amongst legions of the unrighteous
    who dread not being immersed in pits of fire

  12. #112

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Iíve actually found wasteland to be pretty bad against our deck unless we get a very slow start. The deck generally wants to dump its hand on turn 1, and I wouldnít keep a hand with only 1 land if I couldnít at least play a discard outlet on turn 1. Daze is good but it does little on the draw and does nothing against cavern.

  13. #113
    Etherium is limited. Innovation is not.
    Hanni's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2006
    Location

    Columbus, OH
    Posts

    2,573

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Lotus Petal can help to beat Daze and Wasteland as well.
    Sligh
    Mentor Deathblade
    The Mind Harvester
    Wb Tokens
    4c Nobleblade

    Quote Originally Posted by MMogg View Post
    In porn terms, Zoo has a 11" shlong and an impressive money shot, but it's over in 4 minutes, whereas Landstill is a good 8" and can go for 30 minutes.

  14. #114

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    @FTW: Sickening Dreams isn't just for wiping, its an unconditional discard outlet like Brutality that doesn't need to resolve to get the job done. The reach is actually relevant as well, sometimes trimming 1/2 a turn off (damage itself and can get opponents to 10 or less for hasty Bloodghasts.) It was the testing against Grixis Delver that convinced me it was worth testing (Daze is a card.)
    Yeah, I just meant it can also be used for X=1 or X=2 (mini-wipe) instead of for X=5 (all-in discard your hand). It has many modes. It's still relevant post-board vs hate because you don't have to go all-in. You can still use it in a fair game to wipe weenies and bait graveyard hate by pitching Bloodghasts. If you board it out, the deck lacks creature removal.

    You shouldn't need Sickening Dreams to beat Daze. Instead of playing a 2cc unconditional outlet, you could play a 1cc creature outlet and leave up 1 mana. That beats Spell Pierce too. Also Cavern of Souls. For the explosive version, Firestorm is a 1cc unconditional discard outlet that also kills things if it resolves.

    If you're boarding into a fair deck, does it make sense to run Aether Vials sideboard? You can Vial in all your threats instead of using the graveyard. No one will expect it.

  15. #115

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    Regarding the all-in version: aren't you just playing a Belcher style deck by trimming the lands way back and trying to be a t1-2 deck? You're actually playing fewer initial mana sources than Belcher (which has around 20, not counting LED because it isn't an initial mana source to start the chain.)
    Belcher needs 4-7 mana on turn 1 to win. That's why it runs so many mana sources. The all-in deck needs 1 mana on turn 1.

    A better comparison is LED Dredge, another explosive deck that just needs 1 mana on turn 1. They run 12-14 initial mana sources, even less. The rainbow manabase and 1cc anti-gravehate SB cards are very similar to Dredge's SB plan.

  16. #116

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Quote Originally Posted by Hanni View Post
    You also mention that the all-in version has less resilience, but I fail to understand what you mean. Resilience to what?
    I can't speak for where Mr. Safety is coming from, but when I differentiated between an all-in approach and grindier approach, it was based on these distinctions:

    1) Fetchlands and basics vs rainbow lands. The first means better Bloodghast recursion and more resilience to mana denial. By mana denial, I mean early Blood Moon (Dragon Stompy) or a turn 1 counter followed by Wasteland (Delver). Wasteland on its own is not that dangerous if we already resolved a discard outlet, but the 1-2 punch of counter+Waste is devastating. Less than half of opening hands will have Caverns, so it's a risk.

    2) Being fully-committed to the madness/graveyard plan. The less explosive list has a better shot of having a transformational sideboard into a plan B.
    I used that in my old BG Vengevine madness deck 7 years ago. It was a more effective way to dodge gravehate than boarding in reactive answers (e.g. boarding out Bloodghasts, Buried Alive and Vengevines for Dark Confidants, Thoughtseize and Abrupt Decay). It was hedging between an explosive deck and a fair deck, the way Survival lists used to.

    The explosive plan can't pull that off. There are too many cards committed to the main plan and a lower land count. You're not winning a fair game. That means the sideboard needs to be answers to gravehate, instead of a plan B. Dredge has the same problem. It's hard to win game 2, not knowing which hate to board against. If you bring in Nature's Claim and they have Surgicals, awkward... Still, this has more diverse threats than Dredge and should be harder to hate out.

    3) Threat diversification into cards that are both enablers and alternate win conditions: e.g. Lotleth Troll, Carrion Feeder, Cryptbreaker. These cards don't help you get the explosive turn 1 Hollow One starts, but they play dual roles of enabling your free guys or also threatening to win the game on their own, even if your graveyard is hated out or Hollow One takes StP. Cards like that reduce your turn 1 explosiveness rate but increase your chance of winning through spot removal or a Tormod's Crypt.

    I found the threat diversification angle very useful in my old Vengevine Madness deck, but that was before Hollow One. That was also in a metagame full of creatures (Maverick, Stoneblade, D&T), where having the grow guys grinded out wins. I have yet to test whether in 2019 you win more matches by having more explosive turn 1s or by hedging with alternate win conditions. In this meta, explosiveness is probably the right call.

  17. #117
    Etherium is limited. Innovation is not.
    Hanni's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2006
    Location

    Columbus, OH
    Posts

    2,573

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    I can't speak for where Mr. Safety is coming from, but when I differentiated between an all-in approach and grindier approach, it was based on these distinctions:

    1) Fetchlands and basics vs rainbow lands. The first means better Bloodghast recursion and more resilience to mana denial. By mana denial, I mean early Blood Moon (Dragon Stompy) or a turn 1 counter followed by Wasteland (Delver). Wasteland on its own is not that dangerous if we already resolved a discard outlet, but the 1-2 punch of counter+Waste is devastating. Less than half of opening hands will have Caverns, so it's a risk.

    2) Being fully-committed to the madness/graveyard plan. The less explosive list has a better shot of having a transformational sideboard into a plan B.
    I used that in my old BG Vengevine madness deck 7 years ago. It was a more effective way to dodge gravehate than boarding in reactive answers (e.g. boarding out Bloodghasts, Buried Alive and Vengevines for Dark Confidants, Thoughtseize and Abrupt Decay). It was hedging between an explosive deck and a fair deck, the way Survival lists used to.

    The explosive plan can't pull that off. There are too many cards committed to the main plan and a lower land count. You're not winning a fair game. That means the sideboard needs to be answers to gravehate, instead of a plan B. Dredge has the same problem. It's hard to win game 2, not knowing which hate to board against. If you bring in Nature's Claim and they have Surgicals, awkward... Still, this has more diverse threats than Dredge and should be harder to hate out.

    3) Threat diversification into cards that are both enablers and alternate win conditions: e.g. Lotleth Troll, Carrion Feeder, Cryptbreaker. These cards don't help you get the explosive turn 1 Hollow One starts, but they play dual roles of enabling your free guys or also threatening to win the game on their own, even if your graveyard is hated out or Hollow One takes StP. Cards like that reduce your turn 1 explosiveness rate but increase your chance of winning through spot removal or a Tormod's Crypt.

    I found the threat diversification angle very useful in my old Vengevine Madness deck, but that was before Hollow One. That was also in a metagame full of creatures (Maverick, Stoneblade, D&T), where having the grow guys grinded out wins. I have yet to test whether in 2019 you win more matches by having more explosive turn 1s or by hedging with alternate win conditions. In this meta, explosiveness is probably the right call.
    It's still possible to play the all-in list with a fetch/dual/basic manabase. I only moved towards Undiscovered Paradise and Cavern of Souls because they dramatically improve the deck. I could still run a 3 fetchland 1 Bayou 1 Scrubland 1 Swamp manabase, but the upside to playing 4 Mana Confluence 2 City of Brass is improved color consistency, and the ability to run blue and red sideboard cards like Invasive Surgery, Flusterstorm, Firestorm, Ingot Chewer, Wear//Tear, etc.

    There's still a possibility to play a transformational sideboard plan with the all-in list, I just don't think it's necessary. The deck already has non-graveyard dependent threats, and is much more resilient to graveyard hate than Dredge.

    Even if the anti-graveyard plan can be akward if we board wrong, I don't believe boarding into a fairer plan is actually good enough to win games against most decks postboard. You may get some points for blanking some graveyard hate, but you're still going to be a worse version of The Rock or Maverick or whatever, and those decks aren't performing well right now as it is.

    My all-in list is playing those alternate threats, though. I'm not running Cryptbreaker, but I do have 4 Lotleth Troll and 3 Carrion Feeder, in addition to Basking Rootwalla's and Hollow One's.

    The fact is, the only real differences I'm seeing between the all-in in list and the fairer lists is that I cut 4 lands for 4 Lotus Petal to speed up the deck (which seems fine to me since the deck doesn't need to generate mana every turn), less discard (which is less necessary with Cavern of Souls and a faster clock), and no maindeck removal (which is only really necessary against other aggro/combo decks like Infect and Elves). Otherwise, the variations are mostly similar.

    I'm obviously biased in my opinion, but I believe the creature-heavier (all-in) list is the better approach.
    Sligh
    Mentor Deathblade
    The Mind Harvester
    Wb Tokens
    4c Nobleblade

    Quote Originally Posted by MMogg View Post
    In porn terms, Zoo has a 11" shlong and an impressive money shot, but it's over in 4 minutes, whereas Landstill is a good 8" and can go for 30 minutes.

  18. #118
    Member
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    3,729

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Cool discussion, I just wanted to add in that one very potent threat that somewhat gets around grave hate is Gurmag Angler. The most commonly played graveyard hate is Surgical Extraction and Gurmag works around that fairly easily. Gurmags need to delve so Leyline of the Void and Rest in Peace are still non-bo's with it, but Surgical/Faeries/TCrypts are all able to be worked around. Containment Priest doesn't do anything to it either.
    I am counted amongst legions of the unrighteous
    who dread not being immersed in pits of fire

  19. #119
    Etherium is limited. Innovation is not.
    Hanni's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2006
    Location

    Columbus, OH
    Posts

    2,573

    Re: GB Vengevine

    I don't think Gurmag Angler is very good, at least in the creature-heavier list, even as a transformational plan out of the sideboard. My list simply does not put enough fodder in the graveyard. Even if I were to switch to an 8+ fetch manabase + Lotus Petal, there's still not enough fodder. The cards that I discard are intended to be returned to play. I don't run any cantrips, and very few instants/sorceries.

    Gurmag would probably work in lists with Faithless Looting and such, and certainly works if you're running Stinkweed Imp, but I almost never hit Threshold for Putrid Imp in my current rainbow list, and Gurmag would be completely uncastable for me.

    Against the targeted graveyard hate where Gurmag would excel, I would rather board into Silent Gravestone, I think.

    Another interesting fact about the faster all-in list, is that it can get underneath the slower hate like Rest in Peace and Containment Priest.

    Honestly, the more I think about the deck, its matchups, and the sideboard plans, the more convinced I am that this deck is better than Dredge. It's not quite as powerful in game one, but still powerful enough to beat the fair matchups all the same, and is significantly more resilient to graveyard hate postboard.

    Cavern of Souls making the initial discard outlet uncounterable is huge, and gives the deck a resilience to Force of Will and Daze that (LED) Dredge doesn't have.

    I've been trying to make a viable Vengevine deck for years to no avail, but I really feel like we're onto something here. Again, this isn't Tier 1 by any means, but I certainly think the deck could achieve a 5-0 run on MTGO.
    Sligh
    Mentor Deathblade
    The Mind Harvester
    Wb Tokens
    4c Nobleblade

    Quote Originally Posted by MMogg View Post
    In porn terms, Zoo has a 11" shlong and an impressive money shot, but it's over in 4 minutes, whereas Landstill is a good 8" and can go for 30 minutes.

  20. #120

    Re: GB Vengevine

    Hmm, I havenít had quite such positive results with the deck, I feel like the deck just mulls to obvilion way too often or I keep a hand that needs one thing to work and I never draw it. Itís possible Iím playing it wrong, but it feels too inconsistent to be very strong deck for me so far.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)