PDA

View Full Version : R/B/g Bloodchief Sligh



Hanni
10-06-2009, 10:49 PM
This is a variation of R/g Goyf Sligh and R/G/w Naya Sligh. The deck splashes black instead of white, dropping the awesomeness that is Wild Nacatl, for an experimental project with Bloodchief Ascension.

---

What is Bloodchief Acension?

Name: Bloodchief Ascension
Cost: B
Type: Enechantment
Card Text: At the beginning of each end step, if an opponent lost 2 or more life this turn, you may put a quest counter on Bloodchief Ascension. (Damage causes loss of life.)
Whenever a card is put into an opponent's graveyard from anywhere, if Bloodchief Ascension has three or more quest counters on it, you may have that player lose 2 life. If you do, you gain 2 life.

---

My Original Sligh Shell

For a quick reference, here is my highly optimized R/G/w Naya Sligh list that provided the shell for this deck:

R/G/w Naya Sligh

// Lands
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
3 Taiga
2 [A] Plateau
1 [U] Savannah
4 [RAV] Mountain (2)
1 [8E] Forest (3)

// Creatures
2 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
4 [ZEN] Goblin Guide
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf

// Spells
4 [A] Lightning Bolt
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [DLM] Incinerate
3 [EX] Price of Progress
4 [VI] Fireblast

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 2 [TSP] Krosan Grip
SB: 4 [CFX] Path to Exile
SB: 4 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 4 [MR] Chalice of the Void

---

[B]The Experimental Black Splash

R/B/g Bloodchief Sligh

// Lands
4 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
3 Badlands
2 [R] Taiga
1 [B] Bayou
4 [LRW] Mountain (1)
1 [4E] Swamp (3)

// Creatures
2 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
4 [ZEN] Goblin Guide
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf

// Spells
4 [ZEN] Bloodchief Ascension
4 [B] Lightning Bolt
4 [LRW] Tarfire
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [DD2] Incinerate
3 [VI] Fireblast
4 [LRW] Thoughtseize

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 4 [MM] Snuff Out
SB: 4 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 3 [TSP] Krosan Grip

---

[B]General Overview

Without going into great detail and discussion about the Sligh archetype itself (there's already a thread for that), I'll just explain the differences between the white splash and the black splash.

Basically, the deck drops white and Wild Nacatl for black and Bloodchief Ascension. From the sideboard, Snuff Out's come in for Path to Exile.

Thoughtseize is included in the black splash in place of Price of Progress, and the manabase shifts to a R/B base as opposed to a R/G base.

That pretty much sums up the basics.

---

Why Bloodchief over Wild Nacatl?

They are both 1cc, and attempt to do alot of damage for their mana investment. Nacatl deals damage faster. Bloodchief has more lasting power. You want to play them both early; that's the concept of Sligh. Aggro early, finish with burn. Both tend to be bad topdecks later on the game.

The comparison between Wild Nacatl and Bloodchief Ascension is similar to the comparison between Werebear and Quirion Dryad. Nacatl typically does 6 damage by turn 3; Bloodchief requires you to grow it before it activates, which will typically start on turn 3.

However, each has their pros and cons.

Nactal does way more damage earlier. This makes R/G/w Naya Sligh the faster deck, and a faster clock is a great thing against many matchups. However, being a creature, Nacatl is subject to creature removal and being ground stalled against larger creatures.

Bloodchief is rather slow, but is a powerful engine once its established. The ability to burn away the opponent's creatures and still deal damage to the opponent is a very powerful effect. Bloodchief also enables the deck to run Thoughtseize, by turning topdeck'd Thoughtseize's into Shocks.

Whether or not being faster or being more resilient as a better approach is something that warrants testing, and that's what this experiment aims to do.

---

Bloodchief, and the Mechanics it Enables

Bloodchief is a completely different animal from Wild Nacatl.

Wild Nacatl pushes Sligh to a faster fundamental clock, reaching speeds of turn 3-4. Turn 4 is a consistent goldfish, and turn 3 occurs frequently.

Bloodchief, on the other hand, has the potential to do far more damage, is very synergetic with the entire deck, and enables some resiliency that Sligh has yet to have, without butchering the deck (like maindeck Vexing Shushers).

Bloodchief doesn't need to be cast turn 1 like Nacatl to be effective. A turn 1 Goblin Guide, followed by a turn 2 Bloodchief is better than a turn 1 Bloodchief followed by a turn 2 Goblin Guide, for example. Bloodchief requires that the deck spend more of its early burn damaging the opponent rather than it's creatures, which can be a little counterproductive, but makes up at 3 counters by making all burn spent on creatures double over as damage against the opponent.

Bloodchief isn't a creature, so it's much harder to deal with. Of course, alot of decks are playing EE, O Ring, Qasali Pridemage, so on and so forth. However, alot of decks are playing StP, Lightning Bolt, so on and so forth. I feel that enchantments are less vulnerable in the metagame than creatures are, and so being an enchantment makes Bloodchief harder to deal with than Nacatl.

Bloodchief gives life gain, which can be relevant in some matchups. The life loss may be negated by early Thoughtseize's or Snuff Out's sometimes, but other times, it's actually a lifesaving ability.

An active Bloodchief can damage the opponent without even doing anything. The opponent's own strategy will cause him/her to put cards in their graveyard, whether it's something as basic as playing a cantrip, or something more dedicated like dredging Loam. This alone makes Bloodchief warping when active, causing the opponent to either answer it immediately, play their deck suboptimally, or just die outright with little effort on our part.

Before Bloodchief, running Thoughtseize was never an option. The deck sometimes runs out of gas, and Thoughtseize does very little to improve this. However, with Bloodchief, topdecked Thoughtseize's essentially become burn spells. This makes it a solid topdeck, whereas before it would have been completely worthless.

When cast on turn 1, Thoughtseize does slow the clock down, but is a very powerful play regardless. The ability to slow combo down a few turns can oftentimes win the matchup. The ability to grab a Tarmogoyf or Counterbalance out of the opponent's hand can swing a game around completely in your favor. Maybe even most importantly, the ability to see the opponent's hand right away in game 1 allows you to know exactly what your playing against, and how to properly play your following turns. However, Thoughtseize loses most of its effectiveness after the early turns of the game. Becoming a burn spell under an active Bloodchief turns a dead card in hand into a useful one, and this is rather good.

*Price of Progress in the sideboard is a great sub for Thoughtseize in matchups where Thoughtseize is bad and/or Price of Progress is great*

The problem with Bloodchief is that it's slow, it changes some of the fundamental gameplans of the deck (like spending early burn hitting the opponent rather than casting it on blockers), and it is dependant on other cards to be truly effective. Nacatl is much more of a standalone threat, making it faster and more consistent.

Is resiliency and lasting power better than consistency and a faster clock?

---

The Sideboard Difference Between Black and White

The big creature removal in the sideboards are important against certain matchups.

Path to Exile rfg's creatures, which is a powerful effect. Putting a land into play under the opponent's control can sometimes affect tempo, though, and it does cost 1cc.

Snuff Out cannot kill black creatures, which makes it worthless against Tombstalker and other big black men. It costs 4 life, which can be risky against other aggressive decks, but Snuff Out generates far tempo by being a free spell.

Both have their pros and cons.

---

Dark Confidant vs Tarmogoyf?

Dark Confidant is a creature I want to briefly mention, because it is a possibility being in black. Dark Confidant is actually a decent card in the deck. The opponent is going to play removal on our creatures regardless of which ones we play. Dark Confidant is weak to low damage based removal, where Tarmogoyf is mostly unaffected. Tarmogoyf is weak to destroy non-black based removal, where Dark Confidant is mostly unaffected.

The deck plays a savage amount of burn spells to destroy early blockers regardless, so regardless of how big (4/5) or small (2/3) Tarmogoyf is in comparison, both should be able to swing in at least once or twice for damage.

Tarmogoyf is better at pushing damage through against opposing aggro decks, and does more damage faster.

Dark Confidant is an engine creature that draws the deck into more burn, effectively dealing a larger amount of damage overtime against, especially during ground stalls.

Whether or not Dark Confidant has a place in the deck would need significant testing, but Dark Confidant would replace Tarmogoyf in the same way that Bloodchief replaces Wild Nacatl. Whether or not that is a good decision, warrants testing.

One pro for Confidant in this debate is the stability of the manabase by dropping out green completely and going straight R/b. The loss of Krosan Grip's is not that bad, since the deck answers Chalice/Counterbalance with Vexing Susher anyways.

Debatables

I keep bouncing around between Chain Lightning and Tarfire. Chain Lightning gives more bang for the buck. Tarfire is an instant. Tarfire can pump Goyf even bigger. Right now I'm siding with instant speed damage, since it's much stronger with Bloodchief. The added bonus of making Goyf even larger is great, too. However, I'm torn between the two, and it's going to take some testing for me to actually figure out which one is the better one.

/FIN (for now)

EDIT: I've decided to drop the Thoughtseize's for now. They are good sometimes, but other times they clog me up when I really needed burn. I dropped all 4 for some Chain Lightnings.

In all honesty though, the deck hasn't been performing even close to as good as R/G/w Naya Sligh. I'm thinking Bloodchief Ascension would be more applicable in a R/b Burn deck.

Waikiki
10-07-2009, 03:34 AM
have you tried ank of mishra or zoo-zu together with guide it will give bloodchief alot of counters I guess.

TheDeadMan
10-07-2009, 06:31 AM
So your destroying sligh's mana base, splashing a cute card, and running un-optimal creatures/burn to try and justify black vs just playing mono red or zoo... :really:

Valtrix
10-07-2009, 08:58 AM
Seal of fire seems better than tarfire. Other than that though, I don't really like bloodchief's ascension because it feels like a win more card to me. Perhaps that won't show up in testing, perhaps it will. (Yeah, at work, don't really have much more constructive criticism besides that.)

alderon666
10-07-2009, 10:52 AM
Nacatl is far superior to Bloodchief in every moment of the game unless you get hit by Moat or something. 3 counters just feels like too much to build. I do like the Snuff in the place of Path..... gets around a bunch of counters and Counterbalance.

Finn
10-07-2009, 02:03 PM
Hanni, I am with Alderon entirely. Nacatl is one of the biggest reasons Zoo is so effective right now. This Ascension thing is dead as a topdeck, and slow at all times.

DukeDemonKn1ght
10-07-2009, 02:30 PM
It seems like an incorrect assumption that Dark Confidant would have to replace Tarmogoyf. In fact, I would imagine this deck would want to run both.

Thoughtseize/ Chain Lightning seems like the most obvious slot that Bob could fit into. Or else Rift Bolt, since it doesn't play very well with Bob... And honestly, would it mess up this deck's curve that much to replace one set of one-drops with a two-drop? I really can't envision any scenarios where you just don't have a first turn play, because this deck's curve is still ridiculously low.

In my mind, running out of gas is Sligh's biggest problem to overcome, and the fact that Confidant overcomes this while also providing a modest amount of pressure just seems too good to pass up... In theory at least.

Hanni
10-07-2009, 09:34 PM
have you tried ank of mishra or zoo-zu together with guide it will give bloodchief alot of counters I guess.

No, I haven't tried those yet. If I were to run those, I think they would replace Bloodchief though, rather that be added in addition.


So your destroying sligh's mana base, splashing a cute card, and running un-optimal creatures/burn to try and justify black vs just playing mono red or zoo...

How am I destroying Sligh's manabase? It's almost an exact copy of R/G/w Naya Sligh.

Mono red? What, you mean burn? Maybe because Sligh is better? I also prefer Sligh to Zoo for a number of reasons.


Seal of fire seems better than tarfire. Other than that though, I don't really like bloodchief's ascension because it feels like a win more card to me. Perhaps that won't show up in testing, perhaps it will. (Yeah, at work, don't really have much more constructive criticism besides that.)

Tarfire pumps my Goyfs the same as Seal, so either one seems fine. However, I very much enjoy the fact that Tarfire can screw up combat math, so I'm sticking with Tarfire.

My testing results for Bloodchief haven't been as good as Nacatl, primarily because I either don't see it, people destroy it before it's active, or I don't get it activated before I win or lose. I'm still going to test it a little further, though.


Nacatl is far superior to Bloodchief in every moment of the game unless you get hit by Moat or something. 3 counters just feels like too much to build. I do like the Snuff in the place of Path..... gets around a bunch of counters and Counterbalance.

Nacatl is superior early, which is when you want to see either of them, so I agree that Nacatl is better. Later in the game though, Bloodchief does do some serious damage; whether or not it matters by then is a different story.

3 counters itself isn't so bad if it's played early. It gets a counter on each end step, so I you attack and damage the opponent, burn them on their turn, and then attack again... it has 3 counters. Then on the opponent's next turn, he's taking 2 damage for every non permanent spell he casts, and any creatures that I burn away.


Hanni, I am with Alderon entirely. Nacatl is one of the biggest reasons Zoo is so effective right now. This Ascension thing is dead as a topdeck, and slow at all times.

I know that Nacatl is good, I've been playing Naya Sligh since Nacatl was printed, back when everyone was totally against going 3c (and everyone has since come around).

This is an experimental deck. It might not work, or it might just be worse than Naya Sligh. It still deserves testing, though.

Both Nacatl and Bloodchief are often dead topdecks. I like that Bloodchief is resilient to creature removal, resilient to manabase hate (i.e no plains makes Nacatl 2/2), can do assloads of damage, so that's why I'm trying to test it. I'm not expecting it to be better than Nacatl, but I'm hoping that it does end up being good at least.


It seems like an incorrect assumption that Dark Confidant would have to replace Tarmogoyf. In fact, I would imagine this deck would want to run both.

Thoughtseize/ Chain Lightning seems like the most obvious slot that Bob could fit into. Or else Rift Bolt, since it doesn't play very well with Bob... And honestly, would it mess up this deck's curve that much to replace one set of one-drops with a two-drop? I really can't envision any scenarios where you just don't have a first turn play, because this deck's curve is still ridiculously low.

In my mind, running out of gas is Sligh's biggest problem to overcome, and the fact that Confidant overcomes this while also providing a modest amount of pressure just seems too good to pass up... In theory at least.

The reason I poised Confidant vs Goyf for the slots was because the deck doesn't want any more 2cc creatures. 2cc creatures don't get to attack until turn 3, and are therefore slower than 1cc creatures. Sligh is geared to be a faster deck than similar decks like Zoo, so it really is that important. Opening hands that are clumped up with 2cc creatures are not good. I'm sure that running Confidant alongside Goyf could be good in some matchups, but that's something that I guess would need tested.

I've already dropped Thoughtseize and probably not adding it back. I really liked what it does for the deck, but it just wasn't work out well enough. Too much dependance on an off color was difficult for the manabase to handle, and a clump of Thoughtseize's causes the deck to run out of gas before it can finish.

I'd be hardpressed to cut Rift Bolt since it dodges CB and Chalice.

EDIT: Eh, screw it. Naya Sligh is just light years better. Bloodchief sucks. I think it's a plausible addition to Burn, since it gives them a little better end game, but then again, so does Sylvan Library, so I'm just going to scrap the idea entirely. Thanks for playing along.

I did come out of this experience a bit richer though. I've playtested the hell out of Naya Sligh, but in trying to work Bloodchief in, I've actually been able to refine my Naya Sligh deck a little. The new version:

R/G/w Naya Sligh

// Lands
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
4 [B] Taiga
1 [A] Plateau
1 [U] Savannah
4 [RAV] Mountain (2)
1 [8E] Forest (3)

// Creatures
2 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
4 [ZEN] Goblin Guide
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf

// Spells
4 [A] Lightning Bolt
3 [LRW] Tarfire
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [DLM] Incinerate
4 [VI] Fireblast

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 4 [CFX] Path to Exile
SB: 4 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 3 [TSP] Krosan Grip

Finn
10-08-2009, 11:36 AM
This is an experimental deck. It might not work, or it might just be worse than Naya Sligh. It still deserves testing, though.That seems perfectly reasonable. In that case, what you need now are people to use the design and report their experiences instead of this nattering about perceived failures by all of us.

Valtrix
10-08-2009, 11:49 AM
Tarfire pumps my Goyfs the same as Seal, so either one seems fine. However, I very much enjoy the fact that Tarfire can screw up combat math, so I'm sticking with Tarfire.

The reason seal of fire is better than tarfire is because you can have it work with bloodchief's ascension more effectively, since you get more control about using it, and can make a topdecked ascension get online sooner. While it doesn't "screw up combat math," it can also be nice to have that on board + an incinerate to take care of a goyf if you don't have the mana for that otherwise. Honestly, 2 damage doesn't screw combat math up that much in my opinion. For all cases other than your opponent attacking into your creature you could just play seal second main phase anyway. It's not to pump goyf up, though you certainly can do that if you want.

GGoober
10-08-2009, 04:26 PM
Here's my iffyness on your list. If you're going for pure speed, then Bloodchief Ascension is simply too slow. With Goblin Guides, Goyf Sligh is now turn 3/4 goldfishing consistently. Playing that Bloodchief ascension is going to slow it down. That's fine if this is slower than Goyf Sligh since it provides inevitability with Bloodchief.

BUT, since it's slower than Goyf Sligh, Goblin Guide is no longer as good as it is. Goblin Guide is really not great UNLESS you're in the FASTEST deck possible such that drawing the land didn't matter. I would recommend you either stick to Goyf sligh, or develop this into Dark Zoo with Bloodchief. The first step I'll make is to swap Guides for Bobs, and this will be insane. Now your opponent has to deal with Bobs AND Goyfs where earlier, they only had to worry about Goyfs and draw lands since you're not killing fast enough.

Regardless, Bloodchief is a great card on turns 1-2, but it's much worse later. I feel that it doesn't fit a super-aggressive deck, but rather a controllish BR burn/discard. I think Dark Zoo RGB is good with this card. It offsets the life loss from Bobs, and like Zoo, which wins on turns 4-6, Bloodchief serves a much better role in a deck that wants to win on turns 4-6, rather than 3-4 (when can you cast this and get 3 counters if you want to win THAT fast?).

Grollub
10-09-2009, 02:10 AM
I feel that it doesn't fit a super-aggressive deck, but rather a controllish BR burn/discard
I agree, mainly because it turn disruption into burn, severly punishes topdecked fetchlands, smallpox and pox into finishers.

Hanni
10-09-2009, 03:03 AM
You guys are right, which is why I have abandoned this idea.