[Deck] Red Death (B/r Suicide) [Archive] - Page 3

Citrus-God

03-22-2007, 04:15 AM

There use to be a deck called "Chalice Black". I don't have much details except to say that I saw one person play it way back when Chalice had just come out. I also remember ObfuscateFreely mentioning it to me one time so maybe he can fill in some details about that deck.

As for Chalice of the Void, I've actively considered it in the board for awhile, but ultimately I didn't like the synergy it had with the deck. You already have a bunch of spells at 1 exactly 15 pre-board and you'll probably want to board most of these out if you plan to bring in Chalice for 1 unless you are planning to set it to 0 which might be fine except that only works against Tendrils combo and I've found Crypt to be especially good there. So I'm not sure what Chalice would be for? It could help in the Thresh matchup which I'm always worried about, but I'm not sure its better than Crypt and Dystopia.

I dont see CotV very good IMO, unless your against a Combo deck. IGGy and TES might take a hit, and the fact it comes down at Zero is kinda awesome. I would only consider setting CotV at 1 against Solidarity. This deck already has a strong MU, so I dont think it'd be a bit of a win-more against a Combo deck. You already have Therapies anyways.

Phantom

03-22-2007, 10:51 AM

So, ok, my pocketbook kind of hopes someone has a good way to shoot this suggestion down, but as Red Death struggles against Solidarity and recently lost to Threshold in a Top Eight, what do we think about Chains of Mephistopheles?

Ok, I'll give it a shot. Almost everyone is in agreement that Solidarity and Thresh are on the downswing (I guess Columbus will prove if this rumor has merit or not).

The other decks you mentioned aren't that heavily played, and often aren't that hard hit by Chains. Landstill, AS, and FS, are still going to beat you through damage, so while cutting off their draw engine is nice, it's by no means game over.

Also, I've always thought RD had one of the tightest boards out there. What were you thinking about dropping?

Lastly, Chains of Mephistopheles is fucking expensive. Go get a hooker!

Tacosnape

03-22-2007, 12:37 PM

Ok, I'll give it a shot. Almost everyone is in agreement that Solidarity and Thresh are on the downswing (I guess Columbus will prove if this rumor has merit or not).

The other decks you mentioned aren't that heavily played, and often aren't that hard hit by Chains. Landstill, AS, and FS, are still going to beat you through damage, so while cutting off their draw engine is nice, it's by no means game over.

Also, I've always thought RD had one of the tightest boards out there. What were you thinking about dropping?

Lastly, Chains of Mephistopheles is fucking expensive. Go get a hooker!

1. I doubt it. Threshold's as dangerous as ever and will rebound more once people quit hating on it. Likewise with Solidarity once people realize there are other combo decks in existence they have to prepare for (Iggy Pop, TES, Aluren.) Threshold will rebound first, I think, as Solidarity's still far over-feared right now. Legacy stays such an interesting format because any deck can be massively hated out of existence and then come back to life once people forget about it (See Affinity, Enchantress.)

2. Okay, so it's a stretch against AS and FS. I think it'd be stronger against Landstill, though (Until it got Deeded off the board, but I run Needle, so who knows.) Most Landstill decks run anywhere from 8-12 draw spells and are nothing but subpar Rock decks without.

3. I disagree. Outside of the big eight (4 Plague, 4 Dystopia) I think there's a fair amount of flexibility and uncertainty on the sideboard. Jitte just recently came into consideration. I like Pithing Needle. Null Rod has been debatable for awhile. Meltdown and Fire Covenant were played. Cabal Therapy makes a lot of boards, as does Tormod's Crypt. Not to mention Withered Wretch and that rogue Darkblast poking their heads up from time to time. That's a lot of options, most of which are still feasible suggestions.

4. Fuck that. I'll buy Sea Drakes. I steal hookers. There's less consequences in stealing a hooker than magic cards.

Michael Keller

03-22-2007, 08:48 PM

Wrench mind isn't nearly as powerful as cabal therapy, especially in this deck. And I don't think I'd want to go overboard on the discard in the sideboard (I'd run 3-4 therapies if any at all). Feel free to try it out but I think the results will be underwhelming. I know rise/fall was tested in the deck in lieu of therapy and the results were less than stellar.

I slightly disagree with that statement, and here's why:

1. Cabal Therapy isn't a guaranteed pluck (unless you've Duressed...and even then they can stack your possible target with Brainstorm). Irregardless...
2. Wrench Mind will nab two if it resolves.
3. Cabal Therapy against Solidarity or heavy aggro just isn't as good as Hymn to Tourach. Hymn/Wrench pluck mana, as well.
4. There is no such thing as overboard with discard in Magic. Discard wins you games.
5. The deck has plenty of answers for on-board threats. To dismiss any potential threats in an opponent's hand by forcing them to discard it is crucial in winning close games.

Granted, Wrench does allow an opponent to select which cards to discard, but I find that ultimately irrelevant. You already have Duress/Hypnotic to inflict random discard. Most of the field (sans..."T.E.S." or "IGGy Pop") doesn't run heavy artifacts...and if they do...they're generally important based solely on their inclusion. You already have Meltdown in the board for Affinity, so taking into consideration the damage that 3-4 more Hymns can do (and should accomplish) makes it a solid choice.

Sideboard is generally a meta-game choice, but after reading almost every deck in the Open board it seems like more potency in the discard department would be a much more appropriate choice. As stated before - it would only be a board option.

AnwarA101

03-22-2007, 08:57 PM

My issue with Wrench Mind is that I'm not sure I want anymore discard in the sideboard. I've recently cut Cabal Therapy in favor of Tormod's Crypt. Crypt is usually better against Iggy and I'm not sure with TES but at least Crypt is strong there as well. The real issue is that Cabal Therapy usually does make them discard two cards as you usually end up flashing it back. If you miss the first time that you usually means they don't have access to the most threatening card (yes Brainstorm can get around this but it can get around Wrench Mind as well). Also Tormod's Crypt pulls double duty against Thresh which I find to be a really hard matchup. I'm not sure I can go back to Cabal Therapy as Solidarity is having less success as of late and the deck is already packed with discard as is.

Michael Keller

03-22-2007, 09:02 PM

AnwarA101

03-22-2007, 09:42 PM

I must have missed some part of the earlier discussion - referring to side-boarding Wrench Mind vs. Tormod's Crypt...than I do apologize =)

I was just mentioning that I cut the only discard spell (Cabal Therapy) in my board recently for Tormod's Crypt. If you feel that discard is warranted in the board and you feel that Wrench Mind is worth it then you should make that conclusion. I know some people still run Cabal Therapy and its always a consideration, but I really think that Crypt is really strong right now.

Firebrothers

03-23-2007, 12:23 AM

I was just mentioning that I cut the only discard spell (Cabal Therapy) in my board recently for Tormod's Crypt. If you feel that discard is warranted in the board and you feel that Wrench Mind is worth it then you should make that conclusion. I know some people still run Cabal Therapy and its always a consideration, but I really think that Crypt is really strong right now.

Since you like crypt so much what are your thoughts on 2-3 withered wretch main deck? I don't know if you have commented on it much as it seems to have fallen by the wayside.

I have done some testing and like them. Threshold has to answer the whithered wretch or they lose. Our creatures are just better.

Michael Keller

03-23-2007, 12:41 AM

...I have done some testing and like them. Threshold has to answer the whithered wretch or they lose. Our creatures are just better.

Crypt SB > Wretch MD

While it probably seems like a good idea playing the Wretch in the main, it just doesn't seem feasible given the tightness of spots. The main deck is pretty much established as it is...and while you could SB Wretch, Crypt's instantaneous and zero casting cost allow it to be much more versatile (and harder to stop than a creature).

Also given the small curve in RD (and lack of instants sans Bolt), you generally won't have much open mana in the early goings and a mid to late Crypt is just as devastating as an early one (if executed correctly).

Happy Gilmore

03-23-2007, 09:15 AM

Crypt SB > Wretch MD

While it probably seems like a good idea playing the Wretch in the main, it just doesn't seem feasible given the tightness of spots. The main deck is pretty much established as it is...and while you could SB Wretch, Crypt's instantaneous and zero casting cost allow it to be much more versatile (and harder to stop than a creature).

Also given the small curve in RD (and lack of instants sans Bolt), you generally won't have much open mana in the early goings and a mid to late Crypt is just as devastating as an early one (if executed correctly).

You are still ignoring the most important of all the reasons not to play Wrench Mind. Remand makes it not only inefficient but a time walk. 2cc spells do not worry Solidarity. Not to mention the fact that you already have so many 2cc spells that are relevent that your constraint is mana and not the quality of disruption. Given that you can only cast one spell a turn which would you rather cast, a Wrench mind or a Sink Hole/Hymn? And if you are agruing that you might not have those cards in hand and Wrench Mind gives you more of them, you were going to lose that game anyway since all you have is a Wrench Mind.

Solidarity only really cares once you get to 4 black sources, then you can cast two disruption spells or a disruption spell and a threat. And in that case they can generally go off in response. Not to mention you would have to be out of your mind to play a spell that lets them put a flash of Insight directly into the graveyard.

Citrus-God

03-23-2007, 09:42 AM

Personally, I still believe that Cabal Therapy is still better than Tormod's Crypt in testing. Then again, I dont see much IGGy-Pop in my Mpls metagame, but the metagame where I play locally at tends to have 1-2 show up.

Therapies IMO were awesome. They get sided in against the Big 3, but different things get taken out. Tormod's Crypt will only get sided in against one of those three decks. Besides, it's kinda hard for Solidarity to answer Cabal Therapy the first time, but when they Remand it, that's when Sinkhole, Hymn to Tourach, and Hippie kick in!

Tacosnape

03-23-2007, 11:28 AM

Wrench Mind is an awful sideboard tool. There isn't a deck in existence where boarding it in would be a good idea.

Against Solidarity, as mentioned, it falls into the "Remandable" category. The number one way Red Death loses to Solidarity is by walking into double Remand. Granted, you can also lose to Solidarity meditating back to life, or having an awful draw, or having your Ritual/Negator forced and not drawing another threat for eight turns to back up the Hymn/Sinkhole in your hand (I'm not bitter about this at all), but the main reason you lose is to Remand.

I even scrapped an entire deck over this concept. I had a B/W Confidant deck with a very efficient mana curve that didn't need Ritual. But because Solidarity could Remand the crap out of Hymn/Verdict, I could rarely get wins against it without having the Duress to clear away Remand (And yes, I will hit Remand or even Brainstorm if they aren't holding a Force and I have lots more disruption backing it up.)

Against faster Storm Decks, they all run LED/Petal/Mox. Therefore you're paying two mana to cause a deck to discard one artifact. On average, this is one mana for half a card. If you hit 50/50 with Therapy, and if you're good you should, you're breaking even. And Therapy can hit the card of your choice, not theirs.

Not to mention, Wrench Mind's a turn two drop to Therapy's turn one (Rituals aside.) TES is capable of killing you or dropping 12+ Goblins well before you can cast this, and while Iggy Pop can't go off before the Wrench as often as TES, it's also more resilient to Wrench Mind. Seriously. For the two weeks or so I actually played Iggy Pop, choice discard made me snort.

As for Therapy versus Crypt, That's tough. Since I usually have about 19-20 cards in a Sideboard and just narrow it down to 15 the day of a tournament based on the metagame or what I'm not in the mood to lose to, I'd probably make this a split second call. Crypt is going to help you against both Threshold and the rogue Reanimator deck (They do exist, acknowledge, yo). Threshold's beatable, but tough, and Reanimator's nearly impossible if they drop out a giant creature that has any sort of Dystopia immunity. Therapy's a godsend against Solidarity's ridiculous tendencies to Remand its way to victory. It would also help against TES, but so do Engineered Plague and Null Rod, if you run it.

On principle I'd pick the Crypt in a blind metagame. Crypt is easier to cast and doesn't slow you down at all, and I've always felt Red Death lacks the true creature base to support Therapy in all but a few narrow matchups. Iono about Wretch. There are times he's awesome (Threshold, Survival) and times where he's too slow and I want the Crypt (Iggy Pop, Reanimator), and matchups where he never survives long enough to do enough (Loam Control) to be worthwhile.

Happy Gilmore

03-23-2007, 12:40 PM

As for Therapy versus Crypt, That's tough. Since I usually have about 19-20 cards in a Sideboard and just narrow it down to 15 the day of a tournament based on the metagame or what I'm not in the mood to lose to, I'd probably make this a split second call. Crypt is going to help you against both Threshold and the rogue Reanimator deck (They do exist, acknowledge, yo). Threshold's beatable, but tough, and Reanimator's nearly impossible if they drop out a giant creature that has any sort of Dystopia immunity. Therapy's a godsend against Solidarity's ridiculous tendencies to Remand its way to victory. It would also help against TES, but so do Engineered Plague and Null Rod, if you run it.

On principle I'd pick the Crypt in a blind metagame. Crypt is easier to cast and doesn't slow you down at all, and I've always felt Red Death lacks the true creature base to support Therapy in all but a few narrow matchups. Iono about Wretch. There are times he's awesome (Threshold, Survival) and times where he's too slow and I want the Crypt (Iggy Pop, Reanimator), and matchups where he never survives long enough to do enough (Loam Control) to be worthwhile.
Yes, my thoughts as well, but not having something to bring in against TES (besides maybe Plague?) and Solidarity makes me want to reconsider Cabal Therapy for the SB.

The SB I would run if I could:

SB: 20 (I bet this is the same 20 cards you have )
3x Null Rod
3x Crypt
4x Dystopia
3x Jitte
4x Plague
3x Cabal Therapy

Finding a way of cutting that down to fifteen while still being competitive against every deck is a serious challenge.

On a Side note, Wretch is not all that good against thresh. Unless you consider crypting your opponent for 14 mana over three turns a strong play >_< .

Bane of the Living

03-24-2007, 09:39 AM

Yes, my thoughts as well, but not having something to bring in against TES (besides maybe Plague?) and Solidarity makes me want to reconsider Cabal Therapy for the SB.

The SB I would run if I could:

SB: 20 (I bet this is the same 20 cards you have )
3x Null Rod
3x Crypt
4x Dystopia
3x Jitte
4x Plague
3x Cabal Therapy

Finding a way of cutting that down to fifteen while still being competitive against every deck is a serious challenge.

On a Side note, Wretch is not all that good against thresh. Unless you consider crypting your opponent for 14 mana over three turns a strong play >_< .

Why isnt anyone considering Pyroclasm? I know it isnt as permanant as Plague but goblins are equiped to deal with it now. Whenever they see black mana they side in Grip or Disenchant. Pyroclasm cant be fought against aside from dropping more goblins. For a deck that wants to live in the present so much this seems like a good option. It would let us take a lackey hit and bait out more men to clasm.

It obviously deals with Empty the Warrens quite well.

AnwarA101

03-24-2007, 09:50 AM

Why isnt anyone considering Pyroclasm? I know it isnt as permanant as Plague but goblins are equiped to deal with it now. Whenever they see black mana they side in Grip or Disenchant. Pyroclasm cant be fought against aside from dropping more goblins. For a deck that wants to live in the present so much this seems like a good option. It would let us take a lackey hit and bait out more men to clasm.

It obviously deals with Empty the Warrens quite well.

Pyroclasm and Phyrexian Negator don't work very well together. Pyroclasm also has the added benefit of blowing up Hypnotic Specter. Nantuko Shade requires two additional mana just to survive a Pyroclasm. Its just not a very good card in this deck for all of these reasons.

laststepdown

03-24-2007, 01:16 PM

It obviously deals with Empty the Warrens quite well.

And since when did we have a problem with 1/1 creatures named "Goblin"?

Tacosnape

03-24-2007, 01:25 PM

And since when did we have a problem with 1/1 creatures named "Goblin"?

True. Rit/Plague solves ETW as well as anything.

Of course, if you don't have the Plague on the other hand, you're relying on a pre-emptive Null Rod if you run it.

Solpugid

03-24-2007, 04:07 PM

Just throwing it out there, but if you come to the concern of clasm hitting specters, just run the new red split card (rough//tumble). Then again, it still hits negator.

nitewolf9

03-24-2007, 04:32 PM

The issue with plague being better in my opinion comes from the fact that it is pro-active disruption against goblins, not a reactive answer. You can just drop it and keep going. With a sweeper, you have to wait to use it and it can hit your own creatures. Granted they probably can answer plague, but they better do it before they die...if they can't find that disenchant or krosan grip they are in very big trouble (last time I checked, goblin matron can't get instants...). And you also overload those answers with jitte as well.

The thing is, before with something like infest, it forced them to bring in dead cards against you because they were expecting plague. Now, if you run the sweeper w/ jitte, those cards are not dead anymore (they hit the jitte). It just seems bad, and pyroclasm is indeed terrible in this deck.

Firebrothers

03-24-2007, 04:53 PM

Citrus-God

03-24-2007, 08:42 PM

Even if they bring in the disenchants/grips/whatever it still dilutes there deck making ringleaders worse as well. E. Plegue is IMO the premiere answer to goblins for this deck with jitte/darkblast backing it up.

If you are afraid of them disenchanting it keep the duress in.

With all this sideboard talk going on what is everyones board plans against tier 1 and 1.5 decks. Do not just mention what you bring in but also what comes out on the play and draw. I think it will be informative for everyone that wants to pick this deck up but doesn't know how to properly sideboard.

Heres my board...

4 Engineered Plague
4 Dystopia
3 Cabal Therapy
2 Umezawa's Jitte
2 Masticore

As for the boarding plans;

Goblins:
-2 Negator
-1 Wrecthed Anurid
-4 Duress
-4 Sinkhole

+4 Engineered Plague
+3 Cabal Therapy
+2 Umezawa's Jitte
+2 Masticore

Gro:
-1 Wretched Anurid
-3 Chain Lightning
-4 Lightning Bolt

+2 Umezawa's Jitte
+2 Masticore
+4 Dystopia

Combo:
-3 Chain Lightning

+3 Cabal Therapy

Tao

03-25-2007, 04:56 AM

They look good, but you should make differences between Red Thresh and White Thresh because against the Red version you don't want Negators post board.

Citrus-God

03-25-2007, 05:15 PM

They look good, but you should make differences between Red Thresh and White Thresh because against the Red version you don't want Negators post board.

It's a true, since a Werebear can already put me in a devastating position. Lightning Bolts can already cause many things to happen to me. I may side differently, since Dystopia can fight Dragon, but then again, Wasteland and Sinkholes are enough...

-3 Chain Lightning
-4 Lightning Bolt
-3 Phyrexian Negator
-1 Wretched Anurid

+3 Cabal Therapy
+4 Dystopia
+2 Masticore
+2 Umezawa's Jitte

That seems good right?

nitewolf9

03-25-2007, 07:01 PM

Why take out the wretched anurid? His drawback isn't very severe at all in that matchup and he trades with geese.

Citrus-God

03-25-2007, 08:32 PM

Why take out the wretched anurid? His drawback isn't very severe at all in that matchup and he trades with geese.

Because siding him out allows me to side in better threats, like Masticore.

Happy Gilmore

03-25-2007, 09:54 PM

Because siding him out allows me to side in better threats, like Masticore.

Its a joke...right I get it. No seriously, Masticore is horrible against threshold. Your never going to be able to kill anything with it's pinging ability, it creates perpetual card disadvantage, and Masticore is going to run into the Naturalizes that thresh is boarding in for your Dysopias.

Masticore = Not tech / card disadvantage when they StP it during your turn after you discard to it >_< .

Besides you are already siding out 7x bolts. if your taking out more cards Jitte's would come in next IMO.

Citrus-God

03-25-2007, 11:01 PM

Its a joke...right I get it. No seriously, Masticore is horrible against threshold. Your never going to be able to kill anything with it's pinging ability, it creates perpetual card disadvantage, and Masticore is going to run into the Naturalizes that thresh is boarding in for your Dysopias.

Masticore = Not tech / card disadvantage when they StP it during your turn after you discard to it >_< .

Besides you are already siding out 7x bolts. if your taking out more cards Jitte's would come in next IMO.

Really? Masticores were insane in this MU. Besides, I already am put into a card disadvantage midgame. Masticore is at least card quality at it's best. I've found him to be amazing in testing thus far. Also, you can regenerate your Masticores against Naturalize.

Michael Keller

03-25-2007, 11:41 PM

Really? Masticores were insane in this MU. Besides, I already am put into a card disadvantage midgame. Masticore is at least card quality at it's best. I've found him to be amazing in testing thus far. Also, you can regenerate your Masticores against Naturalize.

1. I wouldn't spend two mana to have to regenerate anything in this deck. More often than not, I'll be tapped out from pumping up my Shade, an E.O.T. Bolt, etc. It just isn't worth the card disadvantage. Spend your mana/side-slots wisely: Ultimately, they make or break your day.

2. If you are already put into card disadvantage mid-game (which hopefully there isn't if you're playing the right build/board), then you actually can't afford to pitch anything to 'Core based solely on the fact your hand will be likely empty.

3. I'm not sure what you've play-tested against, but I'd like to know what you have, the results, and specifications as to what happened.

Citrus-God

03-26-2007, 12:06 AM

1. I wouldn't spend two mana to have to regenerate anything in this deck. More often than not, I'll be tapped out from pumping up my Shade, an E.O.T. Bolt, etc. It just isn't worth the card disadvantage. Spend your mana/side-slots wisely: Ultimately, they make or break your day.

2. If you are already put into card disadvantage mid-game (which hopefully there isn't if you're playing the right build/board), then you actually can't afford to pitch anything to 'Core based solely on the fact your hand will be likely empty.

3. I'm not sure what you've play-tested against, but I'd like to know what you have, the results, and specifications as to what happened.

So far I've only playtested agaisnt Goblins and Gro with Masticore Post-Board. I won some games with Masticore, and I'll admit I lose some games with Masticore. Masticore, like Negator, is a risk/reward card. Masticore is good because of so much it can do, and still do it well. Midgame, it sucks for me that I topdeck all this chaff like Hymn to Tourach, disruption in general, and spare mana. Masticore is just there for you when you need it, and I could easily run Flametongue Kavu instead to tell the truth. I just run Masticore because of his synergy with Plague, as well as the fact his a fierce win condition against many decks. Threshold cant keep chumb blocking Masticore, and Masticore also shouldnt be the first thing you play, and usually the first things you play get answered.

Michael Keller

03-26-2007, 12:28 AM

So far I've only playtested agaisnt Goblins and Gro with Masticore Post-Board. I won some games with Masticore, and I'll admit I lose some games with Masticore. Masticore, like Negator, is a risk/reward card. Masticore is good because of so much it can do, and still do it well. Midgame, it sucks for me that I topdeck all this chaff like Hymn to Tourach, disruption in general, and spare mana. Masticore is just there for you when you need it, and I could easily run Flametongue Kavu instead to tell the truth. I just run Masticore because of his synergy with Plague, as well as the fact his a fierce win condition against many decks. Threshold cant keep chumb blocking Masticore, and Masticore also shouldnt be the first thing you play, and usually the first things you play get answered.

I'd assume you boarded in Engineered Plague against Goblins. I see it this way: Masticore costs four mana to play, then an additional two to activate regeneration. The curve in this deck is low as it is, and seeing as how Goblins should have major threats already established turn two or three, it only seems plausible to concede that he's just too slow and costly in today's Legacy (1.5). I'm not saying he's bad, but too slow.

Threshold can't keep chump blocking Masticore because it doesn't need to. Masticore can be StPed out or even matched against a big 'Bear. But it would be difficult to have two mana open that soon. The deck plays like suicide - and there are much faster, effective solutions I would presume.

Tacosnape

03-26-2007, 02:14 AM

Masticore is to Legacy what Raging Goblin is to Standard. While sometimes they can be pretty good, any time you're running it, there's something better you could be running instead.

If slow, clunky, face-crushing guys were deemed to be a solid option, I'd be packing Rakdos Augermage, Grinning Demon, Aphetto Exterminator, or Flametongue Kavu long before Masticore. Or Liege of the Pit if Wasteland wouldn't get in the way. Grinning Demon's tempting as it is.

Masticore seems to be asking for trouble, though.

Citrus-God

03-26-2007, 09:47 AM

Happy Gilmore

03-26-2007, 09:49 AM

I guess Masticore isnt so great. I should get started on testing FtK. FtK may be the greatest thing at the moment. It might be decent agaisnt Goblins, as extra Rituals may come in handy if it's not playing Plague.

Are you already playing Jitte's in the board? If not try it, it is the awsome sauce against Goblins and possibly even thresh (although this is untested as far as I know).

Citrus-God

03-26-2007, 09:54 AM

Are you already playing Jitte's in the board? If not try it, it is the awsome sauce against Goblins and possibly even thresh (although this is untested as far as I know).

Actually, I am playing them at the moment in the board. I just cut the 3rd Jitte and the Darkblast for 2 FtKs. Jittes are insane, but the fact I draw more than 1 just makes my topdecks awful. I think 2 is a decent number, and if Goblin Tinkerers are around, I may switch those 2 FtK slots for another Jitte and maybe a Darkblast.

Phantom

03-26-2007, 01:44 PM

Are you already playing Jitte's in the board? If not try it, it is the awsome sauce against Goblins and possibly even thresh (although this is untested as far as I know).

Generally, Jittes are a pretty terrible idea against Threshold. They are already bringing in their needles for Waste, Shade, etc. so I doubt if you'll get too many swings in. Secondly, they run so many big creatures and creature removal that you will often have a difficult time getting an active one going on a creature. Either way, they often turn your Jitte into card disadvantage for you, which is simply playing right into their hands.

Citrus-God

03-26-2007, 05:20 PM

Generally, Jittes are a pretty terrible idea against Threshold. They are already bringing in their needles for Waste, Shade, etc. so I doubt if you'll get too many swings in. Secondly, they run so many big creatures and creature removal that you will often have a difficult time getting an active one going on a creature. Either way, they often turn your Jitte into card disadvantage for you, which is simply playing right into their hands.

When they've wasted most of their resources on trying to keep Dystopia, Shade, and Negator from taking over control of the board, that's when Jitte kicks in! Jitte is mostly able to get you a couple swings, since it's a Needle target, they've wasted most of their resources trying to keep everything else from doing anything. Chances are, Jittes can help you dominate the board unless an Enforcer comes right after Jitte is played...

Anarky87

03-26-2007, 05:59 PM

Generally, Jittes are a pretty terrible idea against Threshold. They are already bringing in their needles for Waste, Shade, etc. so I doubt if you'll get too many swings in. Secondly, they run so many big creatures and creature removal that you will often have a difficult time getting an active one going on a creature. Either way, they often turn your Jitte into card disadvantage for you, which is simply playing right into their hands.

This is assuming you don't play any of your disruption, Dystopia, or any of your creatures and they decide not to Needle Wasteland or Shade first. Then I guess your Jitte's would be in bad shape. Otherwise you're Duressing, Hymning, Wasting, Sinkholing, and pounding out threats or throwing down Dystopia to wipe their board. Unless they drew like 3 Needles and go Waste, Shade, Jitte with them, I believe Jitte will be likely the last thing they name.

Not really a big point, but I've had Needles MD in Thresh for some time now and I don't know of many people boarding them in. In actuality, I board a few out when I play against Death.

Tacosnape

03-27-2007, 08:10 AM

Not really a big point, but I've had Needles MD in Thresh for some time now and I don't know of many people boarding them in. In actuality, I board a few out when I play against Death.

Why?

I'm highly curious. I played this match a bunch online after seeing its loss result to Threshold in the recent top eight, and because in our local tournaments I used to go to before it became clear that the director/judge/owner and half the participants were all being bribed by one person and these weren't really tournaments at all, people ran Threshold and I wanted to learn the match better. At no point did anyone ever board out a Needle against me, as I tended to struggle a lot if they could Needle out my Shades and counter Dystopia.

I tested Jitte and didn't think it helped me incredibly in the matchup. It was better than Lightning Bolt, but so was just about everything else I could run. I found I kept wanting Engineered Explosives. Anyone given any thought to this?

I actually had the best results against Threshold with Pithing Needles of my own, as I won several games through mana denial as a result of blind needling fetchlands. My absolute nuts play was Land, Ritual, Duress (Seeing Strand/Strand/Heath/Werebear/Brainstorm/Swords/Somn else, I think Daze), Needle for Strand, Needle for Heath. My opponent got land four turns later, by which time a Rotting Giant and a Negator were pounding through.

Anarky87

03-27-2007, 10:07 AM

Why?

I'm highly curious. I played this match a bunch online after seeing its loss result to Threshold in the recent top eight, and because in our local tournaments I used to go to before it became clear that the director/judge/owner and half the participants were all being bribed by one person and these weren't really tournaments at all, people ran Threshold and I wanted to learn the match better. At no point did anyone ever board out a Needle against me, as I tended to struggle a lot if they could Needle out my Shades and counter Dystopia.

I tested Jitte and didn't think it helped me incredibly in the matchup. It was better than Lightning Bolt, but so was just about everything else I could run. I found I kept wanting Engineered Explosives. Anyone given any thought to this?

I actually had the best results against Threshold with Pithing Needles of my own, as I won several games through mana denial as a result of blind needling fetchlands. My absolute nuts play was Land, Ritual, Duress (Seeing Strand/Strand/Heath/Werebear/Brainstorm/Swords/Somn else, I think Daze), Needle for Strand, Needle for Heath. My opponent got land four turns later, by which time a Rotting Giant and a Negator were pounding through.

I don't side them all out, but I might take 1 or 2. Unless I see some really good Needle targets, I'm not going to leave them in. Wasteland is a pain, but can be played around and if you must Needle, go for it. I do it sometimes if I need to protect my manabase when it's fragile, otherwise I don't see Waste as a problem unless it's followed by 15 Sinkholes, which is really the only way I lose. As for Shade, really depends on what's in my hand. To me, answering Dystopia which is going to clear my whole board is important to me, then comes the other what not of shutting off an ability of a land or leaving their creature a 2/1.

I haven't played this deck in awhile, because I put it away when I started getting awful results with it on a regular basis. Last time I played it I lost 1-2 to a G/b Survival deck and 0-2 to some Lands/Stax/LftL deck. In all of the games I was mulliganing sometimes 2-3 times before I could keep a hand and that led to me losing. But it's good to see some interesting discussion on the deck.

Tacosnape

03-27-2007, 10:20 AM

I don't side them all out, but I might take 1 or 2. Unless I see some really good Needle targets, I'm not going to leave them in. Wasteland is a pain, but can be played around and if you must Needle, go for it. I do it sometimes if I need to protect my manabase when it's fragile, otherwise I don't see Waste as a problem unless it's followed by 15 Sinkholes, which is really the only way I lose. As for Shade, really depends on what's in my hand. To me, answering Dystopia which is going to clear my whole board is important to me, then comes the other what not of shutting off an ability of a land or leaving their creature a 2/1.

I haven't played this deck in awhile, because I put it away when I started getting awful results with it on a regular basis. Last time I played it I lost 1-2 to a Pox deck and 1-2 to a Tendrils Enchantress deck. In all of the games I was mulliganing sometimes 2-3 times before I could keep a hand and that led to me losing an otherwise winnable game against the Enchantress deck when I mulliganed to 5 to keep a 1 land hand. But it's good to see some interesting discussion on the deck.

Sounds like you have a pretty similar view of the keypoints of the matchup as I do. I agree that in many circumstances Shade is a much larger Needle target than Wasteland, though on occasion hitting that one land hand and being able to Needle wasteland (And Safety-Daze a Sinkhole) while being able to cantrip into more lands, threats, so forth is worth its weight in gold. What would you board -in- when you board out 1-2 Needles?

Threshold's results (Like Red Death's, stupid all Lightning Bolt metas,) have a lot to do with metagames. It's awesome against combo, and against decks that can't deal with a Mongoose or Enforcer (This is why I absolutely loved Helmut's 4C Thresh build, as it could Mage for STP.) I never had any luck with it against black-based control decks, though, and I played it against Pox to know that I've got a better chance of solving a Rubix Cube blindfolded in ten seconds, and I'm not even Japanese.

I really enjoy the Death versus Threshold matchup, as it's tough but not ridiculously unfair and often favors the more skilled player. Plus it's prevalent in my meta (There's 1 Bennett Toms build and 1 of that Gro deck with Grunt/Watchwolf/Dryad), so I'm trying to learn both as well as possible.

Firebrothers

03-27-2007, 05:16 PM

Tacosnape

03-27-2007, 05:26 PM

It does seem like a tough matchup but entirely unwinnable I think, if a threshed enforcer hits. Holding onto 2 bolts/chains is nearly impossible and having 2 sources to cast them is difficult to. Our only out against this is dystopia. For these reasons I absolutely advocate at least 2 crypt in the board to slow them down so you can find dystopia.

For that reason and the fact that Crypt is generally awesome. I suppose if you were running something exceedingly random like Dunerider Outlaw it would be similarly amazing against the Enforcer, but yeah.

Anarky87

03-27-2007, 05:56 PM

I agree, if you're boarding in a bomb against them like Dystopia, being able to bring in another bomb in the form of Crypt seems like it would help solidify the match even more. Then they'd not only have to deal with disruption, fast beaters and a board sweeper, but also you turning their guys into crap and plowing right through them. Not to mention being able to attack other such GY decks. Sounds like a good idea to me. I've had 3 in place my Therapies for a little while now, but I haven't played the deck since adding them.

Happy Gilmore

03-27-2007, 06:01 PM

Generally, Jittes are a pretty terrible idea against Threshold. They are already bringing in their needles for Waste, Shade, etc. so I doubt if you'll get too many swings in. Secondly, they run so many big creatures and creature removal that you will often have a difficult time getting an active one going on a creature. Either way, they often turn your Jitte into card disadvantage for you, which is simply playing right into their hands.

I can assure you that Jitte is in no way a terrible idea against thresh. It gives them more things they HAVE to deal with. A resolved and active jitte is a nightmare for thresh. And in general thresh will board out needles, although, if the thresh player knows Red Death is bringing in Crypts it might be another story.

Crypt helped me greatly against thresh when I played against it a couple of weeks ago.

nitewolf9

03-27-2007, 07:15 PM

I don't think there is a non-combo deck where jitte isn't simply amazing, I seldomly feel bad bringing it in. If you bring it in against thresh with crypt you overload their needles and naturalizes.

Firebrothers

03-28-2007, 01:53 AM

If we do decide to bring in jittes what do we take out?

Bolts/Chain-seem to be a good choice but it helps clear un-threshed bears, late game go to the head
Hymns- disrupt them early but also add fuel to their fire

I do not think there are enough bad cards in this matchup to pull out of the deck to put in 4 dystopia, 2 crypt and 2-3 jittes.

Jitte seems kinda weak to me in this matchup because even if you do invest throwing it down and equiping it they can just swords the dude away. You could have been sinkholing/hymning/laying down dudes instead.

Even if you do have a guy equiped with a jitte their guys are almost always bigger, or pro black. You can not kill 4 of their creatures with the jitte and it takes 2 successfull swings with a jitte to kill the bear. I do not see a jitte becomming active in this matchup and think it is a wasted effort to bring these in.

AnwarA101

03-28-2007, 03:06 PM

The question of whether to board in Jitte against Threshold is an interesting one (I was definitely wrong about Jitte in this deck). The question isn't whether Jitte is good, but rather what do you board out for it. I'm convinced that running Dystopia and Crypt is important. I always cut the 7 bolts as they always do almost nothing against Threshold. If my opponent get hits with a Crypt then I don't care about his creatures because they are small. I don't need to bolt Werebear. I've found Duress and Hymn better against Threshold after running Crypt as crypting them after multiple discard spells makes it hard for them to generate Threshold again as their hand will be very small. Sinkhole adds to the land destruction and sometimes works in at least temporarily creating mana problems. I guess you could cut part of the disruption package for Jitte, but I'm not sure which one would be good. I haven't been boarding Jitte agains this deck, but mainly because I didn't want to cut the disruption package.

nitewolf9

03-28-2007, 03:23 PM

I think with both crypt and dystopia bringing in jitte could be unneeded, but it is still powerful. If I were to cut some of the disruption in this mu I think sinkhole is the only thing that could go. Their spells are very low on the curve and sinkhole, while it does buy you tempo and makes them think about what they fetch, is the weakest of the 3 here. I'm really on the fence about whether or not it should go in, but if I did bring it in my board strategy (assuming I run the board of 4 e. plague, 4 dystopia, 3 jitte, 3 crypt, and 1 darkblast) would be:

-3 lightning bolt, -3 chain lightning, -4 sinkhole
+3 jitte, +3 crypt, +4 dystopia

I would rather have a random burn spell to go to the face or kill an enforcer after crypting than to have a random sinkhole be a topdeck, so a single lightning bolt stays. I don't know if this is stronger than just -burn, + crypt and dystopia, but it's worth trying.

Phantom

03-28-2007, 04:09 PM

Yeah, people seemed to take my anti-Jitte remarks out of the context of the deck (or maybe I stated them poorly). Of course the card is fucking great, and there's no matchup where it's bad, but the question is, is it worth boarding? I would say in Anwar's situation, no. I wouldn't board out Sinkhole in favor of Jitte, although it's certainly debatable. I prefer to keep the "oops, I win" that's faster, un-needleable, and doesn't require a living creature to be useful.

Now, if you've cut Crypts and the question is Bolt or Jitte, I'd almost certainly take Jitte.

Tacosnape

03-29-2007, 01:34 AM

Citrus-God

03-29-2007, 09:33 AM

It's worth noting that, although I seem to be the only man alive who runs the recently-demoted-to-noobish-jank Pithing Needle in the sideboard of Red Death, having it in the Threshold matchup really empowers Sinkhole. It allows me to play heavy land destruction, Needling Strand/Heath, Sinkholing basics, and Wasting duals. Again, early blind needles win me a lot of random games here. I rarely wanted Jitte in this matchup.

Well, here's the thing. The new fetchland configuration has changed... a lot. It's more like 2-3 heaths, 2-3 deltas, and 2-4 strands now. This is all just to play around Needle... of course, make their own Needles useful against certain MUs.

Happy Gilmore

03-29-2007, 09:55 AM

Well, here's the thing. The new fetchland configuration has changed... a lot. It's more like 2-3 heaths, 2-3 deltas, and 2-4 strands now. This is all just to play around Needle... of course, make their own Needles useful against certain MUs.

As far as I know even UGW runs a 2/2 spit on the blue fetches. Pithing Needle does little to nothing in this matchup (atleast from Red Death's perspective).

Solidatiry runs anywhere from 6-7 BLUE fetches, so in theory, Pithing Needle would be better against them then grow. However, it is fairly clear that Needle does very little against them. Less so for thresh.

Tacosnape

03-29-2007, 12:03 PM

Well, here's the thing. The new fetchland configuration has changed... a lot. It's more like 2-3 heaths, 2-3 deltas, and 2-4 strands now. This is all just to play around Needle... of course, make their own Needles useful against certain MUs.

That's interesting. I wasn't aware of that and the Threshold decks in our local meta have not yet evolved to that point. That certainly makes Needle a little less of a bomb.

Firebrothers

03-29-2007, 02:17 PM

Another thing I question about peoples sideboards is the single darkblast. If you are running 2-3 jittes do you think that the darkblast is unnecessary, especially against goblins where you have 4 e plegues and 2-3 jittes or do you just like the extra security over the first turn kill a lacky?

nitewolf9

03-29-2007, 02:40 PM

What else would that slot go to? You run 4 plagues and 4 dystopia already, 3 of jitte, and 3 of crypt.

If you want to have a single slot in the board it would have to be redundant in some way...darkblast acts as the 8th removal spell in matchups where you would need an extra. It also recurs and I feel is the best card for the slot.

Would you really want 4 crypts or 4 jitte? It seems that pithing needle on either one if you brought in 4 could be bad (add to that jitte's legendary status), going back to the whole idea of not having dead cards.

Having even more of a boost against what is probably the most powerful and played deck in the format can't be bad. What would you suggest though? The board is obviously up to debate...what configuration do you use?

Tacosnape

03-29-2007, 03:15 PM

If you want to have a single slot in the board it would have to be redundant in some way.

Why? I mean, why would you spent that slot on the Darkblast when you could spend it on something you don't have covered? In essence, why would you spend the slot fixing a problem you've already fixed rather than one you haven't fixed?

I think that slot could be a single of a lot of things. A single Null Rod increases your chances slightly against Affinity and LED-Based Combo decks. You may not draw it both games or either game, but when you do, it'll improve your chances greatly. A single Cabal Therapy could help. As could a single Meltdown. As could a single Pithing Needle. Etc, So forth, so on.

I don't agree with the logic at all that it's better to have redundant multiples than single bullets that might randomly steal you games against tough matches. If your board is a solid 14, which the 4 Plague/4 Dystopia/3 Jitte/3 Crypt pretty much is, there's no reason that last card should be the Darkblast. Everything the Darkblast fixes is covered by Bolt, Chain, Plague, and Jitte. That fifteenth card could even be a Swamp to shore up matches where your manabase is under attack, a single Dark Confidant for matches when you want more cards, or whatever your brain can work up.

nitewolf9

03-29-2007, 03:21 PM

Sure, you can make an argument for that. The one slot probably won't make too much of a difference percentage wise either way, since it is one card out of 60 in a deck with no draw.

I however really like the idea of a single swamp. You can take out a wasteland against something like solidarity to have better chances of getting BB by turn 2 and it can come in against land-d like you said.

Firebrothers

03-29-2007, 05:17 PM

I have the same 3 jitte, 4 plague, 4 dystopia, 3 crypt, 1 darkblast board that most people have.

Would one slot be better utilized for a mountain in the sideboard for decks packing wasteland? I do not think it matters much what the extra slot is or even that any deck has an "optimized sideboard" because it is essentially all luck on who you get paird against. But for me I feel that a solid red source can be used and fetched for after you already have set up 2 swamps. Bolts are essential in alot of matchups and not being able to play them when it matters has hindered me from winning in the past.

Tacosnape

03-30-2007, 02:25 AM

Sure, you can make an argument for that. The one slot probably won't make too much of a difference percentage wise either way, since it is one card out of 60 in a deck with no draw.

That could be true, but you still have fair odds to at least -see- the card in game 2 or game 3, especially since Red Death tends to end up in more Game 3's than any deck I've ever run in my life due to the fact that you can very easily randomly steal a game from or give a game away to any deck in existence.

I think I would recommend it being a card that would make a pretty huge difference in the situation like Null Rod, or a card which could have a light use in almost any matchup, like Cabal Therapy or Pithing Needle. The High Impact single could swing a match if you draw it in even one of the two games, whereas the single versatile one would have its impact spread out much more lightly over a long series of matches.

On the subject of boarding manabase related stuff, I've actually been running 2 Chrome Mox in the sideboard over the last week or so. I board it in whenever I don't need Wasteland or whenever I need more speed and I'm on the draw. Or on some occasions where I'm just facing ungodly amounts of land destruction.

On the draw, the card advantage loss is often worth it, especially if you're facing something dangerously aggressive or fast. Against Solidarity, it'll let you get a Hymn or Sinkhole off before they have Remand mana. If you draw too much acceleration, you can either imprint a Ritual on a Mox, or just play the empty Mox to feed to a Negator.

On the play, I almost never board it in except on rare occasions, like against Storm Combo where I desperately want the turn one Hymn option or am likely to need a Plague by turn two at the latest to handle Empty the Warrens. Or in matches that Wasteland won't help a whole heck of a lot and aren't ridiculously heavy on threat removal, like Angel Stompy.

The downside of the Mox is that it makes Null Rod a virtual no go, although against Storm Combo you could always make the bizarre play of Land/Mox/Rod and then hopefully follow it with Land/Threat or Land/Disruption next turn.

Firebrothers

03-31-2007, 02:26 AM

On the play, I almost never board it in except on rare occasions, like against Storm Combo where I desperately want the turn one Hymn option or am likely to need a Plague by turn two at the latest to handle Empty the Warrens. Or in matches that Wasteland won't help a whole heck of a lot and aren't ridiculously heavy on threat removal, like Angel Stompy.

Speaking of the TES deck is it worth it to board in the e plagues against them? I have been weary against bringing them in because they could go for the tendrils combo just as easily. I feel like we have a pretty decent matchup against all combo but is it worth it to board out the chains and bolts just to be safe to shut them off of the warrens part of the combo or just leave the plagues out.

What do y'all think?

Tacosnape

03-31-2007, 04:27 AM

Speaking of the TES deck is it worth it to board in the e plagues against them? I have been weary against bringing them in because they could go for the tendrils combo just as easily. I feel like we have a pretty decent matchup against all combo but is it worth it to board out the chains and bolts just to be safe to shut them off of the warrens part of the combo or just leave the plagues out.

What do y'all think?

I do. No question. Sometimes they can't -get- a lethal Storm Count, especially when you're attacking their hand with Duress and Hymn. The fact that Epic Storm can partially "Go off" with ETW for 10-14 tokens without having a truly lethal storm count is one of the things that makes the deck great.

Boarding in the Plagues ensures one of two things, assuming you draw it: Either they won't expect it and will walk into Engineered Plague with Empty the Warrens, or they will expect it and you take away their easier kill condition. (They also might on rare occasion Duress it out of your hand, but there you go.) Make them Tendrils you through Duress/Hymn/Specter. They may do it, but you'll be making it harder.

I'm very very quick to board in Plagues. I board them in against all kinds of matches. What you have to realize about Plague is that not only does it kill an X/1 Creature to break even for cards, it can kill multiple and shuts down that creature from coming back. In Epic Storm's case, it's hitting Empty the Warrens. I'll board it in when I see Dark Confidants, as Plague for Wizards is stout. I'll board it in to shut down Birds or Elves against Survival, bring it in alongside Dystopia to name Clerics against Angel STOMPY, and so forth. I've even been known on occasion to board in Engineered Plague against white control decks packing Decree of Justice.

Bane of the Living

03-31-2007, 11:00 AM

I'll board it in to shut down Birds or Elves against Survival, bring it in alongside Dystopia to name Clerics against Angel Stax, and so forth.

Why? Angel Stax runs 2-3 Magus of the Tabernacle. Is it worth taking a good card out of your deck to make my guy a 1/5? lol

Hummingbird TG

03-31-2007, 11:36 AM

I think he meant Angel Stompy, with it's Mothers of Runes...

Tacosnape

03-31-2007, 11:52 AM

Why? Angel Stax runs 2-3 Magus of the Tabernacle. Is it worth taking a good card out of your deck to make my guy a 1/5? lol

Errrr. Yeah. I meant Angel Stompy. Too many decks that start with "Angel St." In fact, we should change this deck's name to Angel Stred Death.

Also, I shouldn't post while incredibly sleepy.:cool:

AnwarA101

04-02-2007, 10:45 PM

So I actually got out of work at a reasonable time today and I had time to do goldfish Red Death. Actually all I did was open up 20 opening hands to check for land count.

These are the results -

1) Delta, Badlands, Wasteland, Ritual
*2) Badlands, Wasteland
3) Swamp, Delta, Badlands
4) Delta, Badlands, Wasteland
*5) Swamp, Dark Ritual
*6) Mire, Dark Ritual
*7) Mire, Wasteland
8) Swamp, Mire, Badlands
9) Swamp, Swamp, Swamp, Dark Ritual
*10) Delta, Dark Ritual
11) Swamp, Badlands, Wasteland
*12) Badlands, Wasteland
13) Delta, Delta, Wasteland
14) Badlands, Badlands, Mire, Delta
15) Wasteland, Wasteland, Swamp, Dark Ritual
16) Mire, Mire, Delta, Swamp, Badlands, Wasteland
*17) Delta, Dark Ritual
*18) Wasteland
19) Mire, Mire, Delta
20) Swamp, Swamp, Swamp

My mana base -

4 Polluted Delta
4 Bloodedstained Mire
3 Badlands
6 Swamp
4 Wasteland
4 Dark Ritual

I ran the extra fetch to try it out, but the overall results weren't too encouraging as I would mull 9 hands out of 20 and only Hand 15 is borderline but only on the draw. I'm not sure adding one more land would do much better and perhaps on another day I will do that, but I'm unable to bring myself to cut anything. Am I being foolish?

Kronicler

04-03-2007, 12:05 AM

This may be a terrible idea, but what about adding 2 coppies of Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth? With it in play all of your wastelands as well as fetchlands can tap for black mana, making double black much easier to achieve.

Kronicler

nitewolf9

04-03-2007, 12:34 AM

Tacosnape

04-03-2007, 02:22 AM

AnwarA101

04-03-2007, 09:38 AM

It might be okay to cut the anurid for a fetchland actually. I don't think going down to 15 creatures is that bad.

Urborg might be okay, but it's still wasteable. Both are things to try I suppose. 20 hands, while it seems like a big number, really isn't that much. Some of those hands you were flooded as well. That may just be magic. See how many hands are keepable within one mulligan, that might be better. I'll try that out myself.

I am not very found of dropping the 16th creature. While you could run with only 15 creatures I find that I want every creature I draw even if its Anurid.

20 hands may not be conclusive and this doesn't take into account the games you will get mana flooded because you do run 25 mana sources. I mean how much of this deck can we really expect to run as mana. If I would cut anything it might be a Chain Lightning, but again I want answers to Lackey and I usually want a removal spell. I am sometimes forced to mulligan with this deck, but I'm not sure thats better than keeping 7 card hands and drawing into lands. Drawing more than 3rd or 4th land is like a dead draw as well except in some cases where Negator or Shade need to be fed.

Happy Gilmore

04-03-2007, 09:50 AM

Rather than go up to 22 lands, I was thinking. We have that one rogue spot in the sideboard that we were all debating about for awhile. What if we just moved a Wasteland to that slot and added a Swamp? This would give us 21 land maindeck, 18 black sources, still with 3 of the 4 Wastes, with the 4th Wasteland boardable should it prove to be a solid option in the matchup.

Thats definitely an idea, but I really like Darkblast as a one of. Problem is...I am still trying to fit in 2-3 Null Rods in the board and I can't find anything to cut.

nitewolf9

04-03-2007, 11:14 AM

Out of curiosity, I goldfished 20 hands myself to see if my results would be similar to Anwar's. It was done with this mana base (original one):
4 delta, 3 mire, 3 badlands, 7 swamp, 4 waste, 4 ritual

Results:

*1. 0
2. swamp, 2 ritual
3. delta, badlands
*4. swamp
*5. swamp, wasteland
6. swamp, mire, wasteland, wasteland, wasteland
7. waste, swamp, delta, swamp, swamp
8. swamp, mire, mire
9. mire, waste, delta, mire
10. delta, mire, swamp, swamp
11. badlands, ritual, badlands
12. mire, waste, mire
13. mire, mire
14. swamp, waste, ritual (keep: giant, sink, duress)
15. waste, delta, delta, mire, ritual
16. badlands, swamp, swamp, waste
17. waste, swamp, badlands, delta
18. mire, waste, swamp, rit
19. swamp, mire, badlands, rit
20. mire, badlands

That's 3 out of 20 hands that weren't keepable due to not enough black sources. Notice there are quite a few hands with an abundance of mana. These are interesting results when compared to the last set.

hugo_waterloo

04-05-2007, 01:40 AM

I think GP Philly was probably the best time to play main deck plague because so many people were playing Goblins (25%) that day. I'm not sure that is ever the case anymore.

Goblins is still far and away the most popular deck in the format. It is also likely to be an increasingly important part of the metagame as Legacy's scope begins to include more than just the elite coterie of its seasoned devotees (GP Columbus, for example). First, it happens to be fairly inexpensive to build; second, its being a mono-colored red-zone deck makes for a less than complicated play strategy; third, it has existed in some form or another in almost every instance of every format in Magic history, which makes it attractive to players looking for something comfortable. All of this is ignoring the inherent advantages of the deck, most of which have been discussed ad infinitum elsewhere and which should be obvious.

I can understand not running Plagues main in order to preserve the aggressive mission of the deck, but if you're omitting them because you doubt for a second the ubiquity of the Goblins deck then you're making a big mistake.

Anarky87

04-05-2007, 08:19 AM

Goblins is still far and away the most popular deck in the format. It is also likely to be an increasingly important part of the metagame as Legacy's scope begins to include more than just the elite coterie of its seasoned devotees (GP Columbus, for example). First, it happens to be fairly inexpensive to build; second, its being a mono-colored red-zone deck makes for a less than complicated play strategy; third, it has existed in some form or another in almost every instance of every format in Magic history, which makes it attractive to players looking for something comfortable. All of this is ignoring the inherent advantages of the deck, most of which have been discussed ad infinitum elsewhere and which should be obvious.

I can understand not running Plagues main in order to preserve the aggressive mission of the deck, but if you're omitting them because you doubt for a second the ubiquity of the Goblins deck then you're making a big mistake.

I'd omit them MD because they're a narrow answer to a deck that you already go 50% with pre-board and close to 75% post board. Red Death is more than capable of beating Goblins game 1. I've done it a few times myself, going 2-0 against them.

Tacosnape

04-05-2007, 12:59 PM

Random note: I recently started testing with Flesh Reaver and Drinker of Sorrow in place of Giant and Specter, and I'm actually pretty pleased with the results. I lowered the crap out of my matchups against anything packing any sort of burn (and goblins), but I seem to be doing a little better on almost every other front.

Second random note: I've also been experimenting with Price of Progress in the sideboard. It's been a great finisher against control decks I'd otherwise struggle against (Landstill, 43, etc)

Drathro

04-05-2007, 02:14 PM

My mana base -

4 Polluted Delta
4 Bloodedstained Mire
3 Badlands
6 Swamp
4 Wasteland
4 Dark Ritual

4 delta, 3 mire, 3 badlands, 7 swamp, 4 waste, 4 ritual
nitewolf - I can't see what's significantly different about your test when compared to Anwar's test. As far as I can tell, your manabase is different by exactly -1 Mire, +1 Swamp, which, since you are obviously willing to keep hands with no access to Red, essentially changes nothing about how you decide on the mulligan.

I would propose that the percentage variation you observed between Anwar's test and you own is a consequence of the small sample size each of you used (or possibly a difference in the criteria for taking the mulligan), not the result of a near-trivial single card change. In essence, you would probably have a more accurate mulligan-based-on-mana percentage by combining the two results -> 12/40 (30%).

nitewolf9

04-05-2007, 02:43 PM

I posted my results to prove the exact point that the sample size is too small to be significant. I sometimes feel the manabase of this deck needs some tweaking but that might just come from either keeping bad hands some days or just getting screwed by the game of magic. I think it is probably fine and very balanced right now, although an additional fetch land might not hurt (simply to have an additional red source and more giant food).

Michael Keller

04-05-2007, 02:45 PM

Round 1 Hanni Fish
Game 1: He wins the die roll, plays a Tundra and a Mother of Runes. On my turn I play a Badlands and Chain the Mom and pass. He plays another Mom, for which I don't have burn for and sends the turn to me. I go on to miss my 2nd land drop for about 5 or 6 turns...

I wasn't going to say anything because I know a lot of hate could arise, but I play 4x Foil Timeshifted (the nutZ) Shadow Guildmage in my Red Death build. The proof is in the pudding...it's things like this - look up - that happen that make him so good...better than Grim Lavamancer. Yeah...she'll tap to prevent it...but that will only last so long...

I suppose you're all asking how and why? Well:

- Shadow Guildmage is only one mana to cast (as well).
- Shadow Guildmage trades with Lackey on the draw.
- Shadow Guildmage saves you precious burn spells (as well).
- Shadow Guildmage goes online faster.
- He beats. Darkblast doesn't. And in sui-builds...EVERY draw counts.
- Is the extra point really worth it? I mean, come on: How many creatures in the format have two toughness that people play? Siege Gang/Warchief? It would be...quite a while before they hit the board when Lackey is burning in hell. Warchief deserves to be lightning bolted. Use the stack to your advantage when blocking. No problem.
- Shadow Guildmage stays online irregardless of how many cards are in your graveyard.
- The one point of damage to you is irrelevant...no more than a fetch-land (which I only run 4 in my build to make up the difference).
- He knocks off some of the most prevalent creatures in the format (Lackey, Confidant, Mother of Runes, Birds, Rofellos, Xantid, Witness, etc.).

He's that good. Remember, this deck is also about maintaining board advantage so fatties like Negator and Shade can get through. Why waste a three damage burn spell on a one toughness creature? The answer: desperation. He's too versatile in the battlefield and I like him.

Ultimately, I've traded Rotting Giant/Anurid for the Guildmages. That equals more burn to the dome. I want my Negator getting in for the full 5 and not 4 and losing a permanent to a 1/1 crit. And if that's the case, Mr. Guildmage can always help out when Negator takes a bad hit.

I didn't want to say anything because the list has pretty much been solidified by Anwar and everyone else. I just see things a little differently. At the very least, missing your second land drop wouldn't have mattered for at least another turn or two with him out there.

http://www.trollandtoad.com/images/products/pictures/93238.jpg

Tacosnape

04-05-2007, 03:15 PM

It'd be really funny if you had an Underground Sea in the deck too, and could toss Negator on top of your library. Shadow Guildmage would then sort of be the Black Mother of Runes. We'll call him Dad.

The problem with Dad is that he's a 1/1 who pings for 1, and in any matchup where you're short of threats, he sucks without that blue ability. I can see where he'd be awesome at being Disruptor Jones, but he can't back it up with any sort of hit.

Michael Keller

04-05-2007, 03:21 PM

The problem with Dad is that he's a 1/1 who pings for 1...

That's why he's there.

Actually, it's the blue ability on him that is rather useless. All that does is set you back a turn, giving your opponent a virtual "time walk" of sorts. You get your threat back, but it will cost you a draw. Any deck should play indefinites if it seeks to win. And this deck indefinitely shouldn't include blue.

The deck packs so many devastating creatures, Guildmage paves the way for lethal damage. And again, dealing with mid to late game theory with Suicide builds - he helps a ton in clearing the board and lowering an opponent's life total for a potentially lethal Bolt/Chain.

hugo_waterloo

04-05-2007, 06:39 PM

I'd omit them MD because they're a narrow answer to a deck that you already go 50% with pre-board and close to 75% post board. Red Death is more than capable of beating Goblins game 1. I've done it a few times myself, going 2-0 against them.

Is the match-up really this good? I did some testing of my own last night, and by no means was there a clear advantage for Red Death. In fact, Goblins tended to pick up first games (they were, to be fair, usually close games) and only after board was I able to turn things around. Even the post-board match-up wasn't awesome. I haven't tested the Plagues in the main, and I'm not even certain they belong there, but thus far I'm not entirely satisfied with the arguments against them.

Anarky87

04-06-2007, 12:01 AM

Is the match-up really this good? I did some testing of my own last night, and by no means was there a clear advantage for Red Death. In fact, Goblins tended to pick up first games (they were, to be fair, usually close games) and only after board was able I turn things around. Even the post-board match-up wasn't awesome. I haven't tested the Plagues in the main, and I'm not even certain they belong there, but thus far I'm not entirely satisfied with the arguments against them.

Well, if you think 50/50 game 1 is good, like I do, then yeah. Being able to at least break even against the best deck in the format is pretty good I'd say. The 50% (Actually it was 47.__%) I got from 15 pre-board games, where the ending results were like Red Death won 7 and Goblins won the other 8. When I switched and did 15 post-board games, I jumped out by a huge margin and that was before I included Jitte in the board. I've done some post-board games now with Jitte and the matchup just gets even better.

Most of the games I lost post board (Which was like 5 or something, I don't know, it's back a couple pages if you want to look) were because I kept getting crappy land hands. In actual tournament play, I haven't lost a game 1 to Goblins yet, or any post-board. Nitewolf9 has done similar testing so he can back this up as well. I'm not saying it's an awesome, God given, 90-10 postboard matchup, but it does get increasingly positive in your favor against them.

hugo_waterloo

04-07-2007, 11:49 PM

Well, if you think 50/50 game 1 is good, like I do, then yeah. Being able to at least break even against the best deck in the format is pretty good I'd say. The 50% (Actually it was 47.__%) I got from 15 pre-board games, where the ending results were like Red Death won 7 and Goblins won the other 8. When I switched and did 15 post-board games, I jumped out by a huge margin and that was before I included Jitte in the board. I've done some post-board games now with Jitte and the matchup just gets even better.

Most of the games I lost post board (Which was like 5 or something, I don't know, it's back a couple pages if you want to look) were because I kept getting crappy land hands. In actual tournament play, I haven't lost a game 1 to Goblins yet, or any post-board. Nitewolf9 has done similar testing so he can back this up as well. I'm not saying it's an awesome, God given, 90-10 postboard matchup, but it does get increasingly positive in your favor against them.

That's essentially my question. I don't begrudge your knowledge of either deck, but despite close games (which themselves are occasionally deceptive--many decks can grind into the "close but not yet there" category without being genuine contenders) Red Death's ability to reliably go toe-to-toe in the game one Goblins match-up is at this point by no means self-evident to me. Moreover, notwithstanding the point about Engineered Plague, one would think that a left-field deck should endeavor to force a better game one match-up against a deck which we all admit dominates the format. This isn't to say that the 50/50 ratio which you posit is poor (if we presume it is realistic in the first place), but other decks with at least comparable match-ups against Goblins (Threshold) happen also to have exceedingly good play against much of the rest of the format.

Shriekmaw

04-08-2007, 12:33 PM

I was wondering how you guys are coming out with game 1 to be around 50/50 against goblins. I've played the deck before and goblins is one of your worse aggro matchups for Red Death. The sideboard does shift games 2 & 3 into your favor, but game 1 you are at a huge disadvantage according to my results.

Can you please explain into more details on your results for Vial Goblins on game 1. I used the standard decklist that Anwar used in his tournaments that he attended. Maybe some of you have used a little different version?

Tacosnape

04-08-2007, 04:07 PM

It could have something to do with Anwar's tendency to win the die roll against Goblins and then go Swamp, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Duress, Negator, Negator, Specter, Specter, Shade, Giant, Sinkhole, Mind Twist for 7.:tongue:

But I agree. I find it slightly disfavorable against most builds. Against the R/G Tin-Street build with no maindeck removal spells like STP or Kinesis, I'd say it might be as good as 50/50, but I've found it to be closer to 40-60 or 45-55.

nitewolf9

04-08-2007, 04:28 PM

Pre-board it is definitly a coin flip from what I've seen, with red death slightly behind. If you go first it is huge, as duress actually matters (ripping their vial is very big) and you can get such a tempo boost on them. When they go first it is an uphill battle but still winnable. Post board you smash them. Seriously. Plague and jitte are retarded against goblins coupled with huge monsters. Don't keep bad hands, mulliganing this deck properly is how you beat goblins.

hugo_waterloo

04-09-2007, 12:05 AM

Post board you smash them. Seriously.

This might well be the case, but I want a better game one against Goblins before I seriously consider any deck in the current metagame.

Happy Gilmore

04-09-2007, 10:21 AM

This might well be the case, but I want a better game one against Goblins before I seriously consider any deck in the current metagame.

I have yet to loose game 1 vs. goblins but maybe I am just getting lucky. Its 50/50 at best, normally it comes down to who goes first. 1st turn Specre or a duress hitting a Vial is a nightmare for them. I have never seen goblins come back from that (atleast first turn specre on the play).

Anarky87

04-09-2007, 12:02 PM

This might well be the case, but I want a better game one against Goblins before I seriously consider any deck in the current metagame.

Define your definition of 'a better game 1 against Goblins.' How high do you want the percentage to be in order for it to be acceptable to you? I hear Rifter has stellar game 1 against Goblins (Neither of the those comments were meant to be inflammatory, I just really want to know). In tournament play, I've yet to drop a game, let alone a match, to Goblins. The results aren't overly positive, but they're enough that you aren't completely blown out by them and they don't god draw you everytime. I've seen just as many Mountain>Fanatic/Vial openings as I've seen Lackey openings.

I did some testing tonight only against Goblins to start with. I played 30 games, dividing 15 into pre-board games and 15 into post-board games and this is what I came up with:

-Pre Board-

Red Death: 7 wins
Goblins: 8 wins

Overall: About 45-47% in Red Death's favor.

Goblins started out with two quick wins to begin the session, but then Red Death went on a hot streak to win 6 games straight in a row. After that, Goblins decided it was time to go on a streak itself and won about 3-4 in a row, with Red Dea winning one more before Goblins finished the sessions with a couple more wins. The pre-board game's were very swingy, as Anwar stated earlier in this thread, with neither deck having a clear advantage.

-Post Board-

Red Death: 11 wins
Goblins: 4

Overall: About 73% in Red Death's favor.

Boarded in: +4 Engineered Plagues, +2 Cabal Therapy, and +1 Darkblast
Boarded out: -4 Duress, -2 Sinkhole, -1 Negator

Goblins against started out the second half of the session with a close win...And that was it for Goblins until 10 games later. The SB cards really push this matchup over the top and it's not always Plague that does Goblins in. Most of the time it was a combination of burning/Darkblasting 'Chiefs, Lackeys, and Piledriver and then just beating in with your fat. I wasn't overally impressed with Therapy in this matchup, but it did nab some Lackeys and Ringleaders from time to time. Double Plague, while very crippling and usually fatal, isn't always game winning, as I was playing against the green splash of Goblins with SB Tranquil Domain's.

There's the testing I did against Goblins from earlier. This was also before I added Jitte's into the board against them, so I'd imagine it's even better post-board. Sure, you can lose some game 1's, which is why you have an uber strong SB to make you win 2 and 3. If you wanna rag on Death's game 1 to Goblins, fine, it's 45-47% like my testing showed. Though through actual tournament play, I'm willing to bump that up to 50%. And post-board is just nuts like Nitewolf said. (Which everytime I type your name I want to type Nightwish).

Machinus

04-09-2007, 01:14 PM

Anwar had me calculate the probability of opening with two or more black sources when there are 17 in the deck. Out of 50 games you should draw two or more black sources 32.4 times on average.

hugo_waterloo

04-09-2007, 01:18 PM

Define your definition of 'a better game 1 against Goblins.' How high do you want the percentage to be in order for it to be acceptable to you?

In tournament play, I've yet to drop a game, let alone a match, to Goblins.

I'd be more than happy to "settle" for a deck that doesn't lose a single game to Goblins, but we can probably both admit that your tournament results aren't likely to be representative of the more objective character of the match-up. (Also, I'm confused: you say at one point that you've "yet to drop a game" in tournament play, but later you argue that the game one tournament match-up is probably at best 50%. Which do you honestly believe?) Really, however, your question is fair. One ought not to be overly picky about already moderate game one match-ups in such a diverse metagame, especially if the post-board match-up is solid. Still, my requirements are pretty simple: given that other competent decks have the same sideboard tools at their disposal (Plagues / Tivadar's Crusade / Pyroclasm & Jitte), and given that some of these decks are likely to have better game one match-ups against Goblins, I just stray away from a deck that doesn't put up the same numbers. Seems risky.

Since you mention it in your last post, I'd have to agree--Rifter is still an excellent metagame choice (depending on what the anticipated combo presence will be) primarily because of it's match-up against Goblins (pre- and post-board). But other decks which are less situational still appeal to me more in light of the scary Goblins match-up than does Red Death. Threshold, for instance, which happens also to have great game against the rest of the field.

nitewolf9

04-09-2007, 06:02 PM

(Which everytime I type your name I want to type Nightwish).

Great band, too bad Tarja left.

But yeah, Red Death has solid game against goblins, and game against combo and control as well. If you want to play a deck that smashes goblins (or claims to) but folds to combo then be my guest. Threshold is a very good deck however, but I feel Red Death has better game against goblins. They can't attack your yard effectively, chalice is not as game-winning as it is against threshold, you get plague post board, your creatures are huge, you have ritual to make sure your stuff gets cast...what more do you want? I have never worried about the goblins matchup when I play this deck, even though they can most certainly still win (goblins can win against anything, that's what's so annoying about it...but they will have a rough time with you if you play this deck).

Anarky87

04-09-2007, 06:45 PM

(Also, I'm confused: you say at one point that you've "yet to drop a game" in tournament play, but later you argue that the game one tournament match-up is probably at best 50%. Which do you honestly believe?)

That it is, in fact, closer to 50%. In tournament play, I've been matched up against Goblins 3 times, totalling 8 games played. Out of those 8, I haven't lost a game pre or post board. Out of 15 games, I won 7 games -in testing-. Certainly different factors play into this. Perhaps my IRL opponents had to mulligan more to get better openings or decided differently what hands they wanted to keep, whereas my testing opponent made different choices and plays. I can't say that the two are equal, there's too much variation to factor in.

But I can say, that when I sat down and knew I was playing against Goblins, I was more relieved than knowing it was something random, because you have a 50% game 1 (IMO, I guess I should start saying this), and a crushing game 2 and 3, if need be.

Lemuria

04-12-2007, 11:17 AM

Hi all.

Anwar, congrats for the development of the deck. That's genius stuff :wink:

I've been playing this deck for a while and not only fits my play style, but is also veeeeery effective against all decks. My opponents have serious problems because its very difficult to name a card with meddling mage and it's also hard to SB against Red Death. Of course, it does better against some decks and worse against others, but who's invencible?

The metagame here where I live (São Paulo - Brasil) it's kind of weird. Lots of reanimator, goblins, affinity and Iggy Pop. Not a single Solidarity, 43 Land (what's that?) or even threshold!!

Anyway, in 28/04 it's the Regional here and I'll definetively play Red Death. The good thing about is that this deck in unexpected, so I can take them all by surprise. I'll run the following sideboard:

4 dystopia
4 plague
1 darkblast
3 null rod (as I said, too many affinity around)
3 cabal therapy

I'll report the results as soon as I get my prize (I hope:cool: )

Sorry for my bad english:tongue:

Happy Gilmore

04-12-2007, 02:37 PM

Lemuria

04-12-2007, 04:07 PM

Thanks bro.

I cannot say for sure, but I can assure you we have a LOT of players here, and good ones. Also, there's that guy who won the Standard World Champ with Psychatog deck. I can't remember exactly the year, 2004, 2005 maybe...but his name is Jaba and he is from São Paulo, same city as me :smile:

The most popular deck here is, like all other places, Goblins. Maybe I am the only one from my city who runs Red Death, and my friend who plays TES. All other players go for some random control like W/G/U, wrath, plowshares, Dregatogue, Madness...as I said, you can't find a Solidarity or a 43 land yet.

Just to have an idea, I played a 9 land Stompy on last Championship and placed 4th LOLLLLL. It ended up like this:

1 - Survival
2 - Goblins
3 - Ubber Madness
4 - 9 Land Stompy (me)

Standard is the most popular format in here but i think it's too slow and boring for me, so i decided to invest in Legacy as my personal preference. Slowly, legacy starts to take place here and I hope soon we are going to the Worlds :wink:

Anyway, thanks all of you guys. You all did an awesome job on development, deck builds and sugestions.

Speaking on sugestions, have anyone tested Extirpate? I know the card seems amazing when you read it and I tried instead of Cabal Therapy. The only thing that it didt for me was breaking Iggy Pop's combo, but just that. And even against Iggy PoP, cabal therapy did a better work for me. IMO, it's a high cost card for a low reward. What you guys think?

nitewolf9

04-12-2007, 04:25 PM

I tested extirpate a bit and it is only ok against combo decks. Against TES you really can't screw them over completely like you can with iggy pop and aluren, and solidarity kind of doesn't care about it to a degree. It really shines against loam based decks, which are a problem if they are red based, and against board control decks with few win conditions (which also can be problems)...see landstill and wombat.

My advice is to test it yourself, but I run crypt/jitte/dystopia/plague and like it alot. Extirpate is a very meta dependent card I think.

Oh, and I was born in Sao Paulo.

Boa sorte!

SillyMetalGAT

04-13-2007, 12:12 AM

I actually find a lot of use for Extirpate. Against Goblins I use them to get rid of Gempalms and then drop Negator. He's a lot more effective when the only direct damage they have is Mogg Fanatic. Against Threshold, its a bomb. It gets by their counters, and it can rip them out of their deck too. I love when people FOW my first spell, then I Extirpate the FOW. Its a pretty neat card.

Anarky87

04-13-2007, 12:43 AM

I love when people FOW my first spell, then I Extirpate the FOW. Its a pretty neat card.

I like when people do that to me. It means they did nothing on their turn and allowed me to take my turn undisrupted and solidify my board position.

Happy Gilmore

04-13-2007, 06:58 PM

Firebrothers

04-15-2007, 07:19 PM

So I tested some withered wretches in the sideboard this weekend. At the Mox tournement that I attended I saw alot of graveyard based decks, iggy pop, 2 threshold decks and a few survival decks. So I brought 2 wretches.

Here is my list
20 land
3 badlands
7 swamp
3 bloodstained mire
3 polluted delta
4 Wasteland

17 Creatures
4 Phyrexian Negator
3 Rotting Giants
2 Withered Wretch
4 Hypnotic Specter
4 Nantuko Shade

23 Spells
4 Dark ritual
4 Duress
4 Sinkhole
4 Hymn to Tourach
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Chain Lightning

I will bore you with the details but read Death did its thing stealing some games and dominating others. This ended me up in 4th place behind my teamates who got 1st and 3rd. I will say that the wretches were underwhelming but it seems like the deck needs something to give it the edge in the thresh matchup I felt outclassed in the three matches we played and am looking to test all forms of thresh extensively to see what the deck needs that wont hurt its other matchups.

I was thinking 2-3 cabal therapy and if anyone else has any input about there threshold experiences it would be great. Plus sideboarding strategies both on the play and draw as I feel all cards are powerful against threshold but only a combination of all of them would win me the match.

URABAHN

04-15-2007, 07:47 PM

I was thinking 2-3 cabal therapy and if anyone else has any input about there threshold experiences it would be great. Plus sideboarding strategies both on the play and draw as I feel all cards are powerful against threshold but only a combination of all of them would win me the match.

Based on my experience, Therapy and Crypt are pretty good against Gro. I like Therapy a bit better because I like having it against Combo. Anwar runs Crypt for Gro, Friggorid, TES, and IGGy. What was your board at the tourney?

Firebrothers

04-15-2007, 07:51 PM

Based on my experience, Therapy and Crypt are pretty good against Gro. I like Therapy a bit better because I like having it against Combo. Anwar runs Crypt for Gro, Friggorid, TES, and IGGy. What was your board at the tourney?

3 crypt
2 jitte
4 plague
4 dystopia
2 therapy

I know that post board it gets a little better with the dystopia and therapy but I still find it difficult to win. I was thinking of including the therapy main board but do not really know what to exclude.

AnwarA101

04-16-2007, 10:08 AM

I will bore you with the details but read Death did its thing stealing some games and dominating others. This ended me up in 4th place behind my teamates who got 1st and 3rd. I will say that the wretches were underwhelming but it seems like the deck needs something to give it the edge in the thresh matchup I felt outclassed in the three matches we played and am looking to test all forms of thresh extensively to see what the deck needs that wont hurt its other matchups.

I was thinking 2-3 cabal therapy and if anyone else has any input about there threshold experiences it would be great. Plus sideboarding strategies both on the play and draw as I feel all cards are powerful against threshold but only a combination of all of them would win me the match.

The problem with Withered Wretch is that he is a bear. I've tested him against Threshold and while he did sometimes crypt them, the rest of the time he just got pithing needled, bolted, or my opponent continued cantripping into more creatures and answers. Then he answered Withered Wretch and my board development was awful because I had to focus on denying my opponent Threshold. He ties up your mana and doesn't allow you to play disruption or creatures. While Wretch seems like disruption in a sense he isn't, because he doesn't represent a real clock and your opponent will find an answer as you sink your mana into eating his yard.

Firebrothers

04-16-2007, 01:27 PM

The problem with Withered Wretch is that he is a bear. I've tested him against Threshold and while he did sometimes crypt them, the rest of the time he just got pithing needled, bolted, or my opponent continued cantripping into more creatures and answers. Then he answered Withered Wretch and my board development was awful because I had to focus on denying my opponent Threshold. He ties up your mana and doesn't allow you to play disruption or creatures. While Wretch seems like disruption in a sense he isn't, because he doesn't represent a real clock and your opponent will find an answer as you sink your mana into eating his yard.

I came to the same conclusions about him but I still feel the need to have a stronger first game against threshold that is not too limited and still powerful.

There does not seem like anything good is comming from future sight with

Tombstalker 6bb
Creature - Demon(TS) R
Flying
Delve (You may remove any number of cards in your graveyard from the game as you play this spell. It costs 1 less to play for each card removed this way.)
Illus. Aleksi Bricot
#91/180
5/5

being a remote possibility but not begin able to cast first turn with one ritual pretty much got rid of any thoughts of him being in the deck.

Lemuria

04-16-2007, 01:53 PM

I came to the same conclusions about him but I still feel the need to have a stronger first game against threshold that is not too limited and still powerful.

There does not seem like anything good is comming from future sight with

Tombstalker 6bb
Creature - Demon(TS) R
Flying
Delve (You may remove any number of cards in your graveyard from the game as you play this spell. It costs 1 less to play for each card removed this way.)
Illus. Aleksi Bricot
#91/180
5/5

being a remote possibility but not begin able to cast first turn with one ritual pretty much got rid of any thoughts of him being in the deck.

I'm afraid this creature is too slow. By the time you will drop it on the table, thresh's creatures will already be stabing you on the face. Besides, you won't be able to run Rotting Giant if you board Tombstalker.

Clark Kant

04-16-2007, 02:00 PM

Yes, testing the card in Red Death was the first thing I did when I saw it. It was pretty meh, never coming into play before the fourth turn, and that's only if you use up all your burn spells. And it led to numerous bad hands where you had few good plays the first several turns. I think Rotting Giant is almost always better in this particular deck.

P.S. It did however turn out to be exceptional in Vaka Pox (each Pox effects feeds 3-4 cards to the yard) letting you cast it turn 3, and thats after getting your opponents down to just one land.

AnwarA101

04-16-2007, 02:03 PM

I'm afraid this creature is too slow. By the time you will drop it on the table, thresh's creatures will already be stabing you on the face. Besides, you won't be able to run Rotting Giant if you board Tombstalker.

I believe that he will be too slow as well as not being able to run Rotting Giant seems not so good.

I've found that beating Threshold pre-board is pretty tough, but I have won some games but they usually involve one of the following -

first turn Hyppie or Negator that goes unchecked,
draw mostly creatures ie 4 or more in the early game,
my opponent stalls in getting Threshold and I continue the beating,
my opponent helps me out and plays Meddling Mage in the main (he's a bear too if you were wondering)

Otherwise, I usually lose game 1 and hope for the best by boarding 7 cards for the matchup that should be very strong. I'm debating brining in Jitte in from the board as well because Jitte plus Crypt could allow me to knock off Werebears, but I'm not sure what the weakest spell against Threshold is to board out after the 7 bolts.

Lemuria

04-16-2007, 02:10 PM

I believe that he will be too slow as well as not being able to run Rotting Giant seems not so good.

I've found that beating Threshold pre-board is pretty tough, but I have won some games but they usually involve one of the following -

first turn Hyppie or Negator that goes unchecked,
draw mostly creatures ie 4 or more in the early game,
my opponent stalls in getting Threshold and I continue the beating,
my opponent helps me out and plays Meddling Mage in the main (he's a bear too if you were wondering)

Otherwise, I usually lose game 1 and hope for the best by boarding 7 cards for the matchup that should be very strong. I'm debating brining in Jitte in from the board as well because Jitte plus Crypt could allow me to knock off Werebears, but I'm not sure what the weakest spell against Threshold is to board out after the 7 bolts.

Perhaps hymn? Not sure, but it seems to help them get their threshold faster

nitewolf9

04-16-2007, 03:24 PM

I wouldn't board out hymn; I'd take out sinkhole way before hymn. Card advantage is big in that matchup and their curve is very low, so sinkhole pretty much helps them get to threshold faster as well (aside from the times it mana screws them or cuts off a color). Sinkhole is still good against them but I'm not sure if it would be as good as jitte. However if they leave in needles sinkhole is most definitely stronger.

Game one is rough but winnable, and I really don't think it's going to get significantly better unless you sacrifice some of your other matchups. Crypt and dystopia from the board really swing it though so you might just have to do what Anwar said and hope for the best.

By the way, I have lost only once to threshold in a tournament while playing Red Death, and it was a small tournament at that. The record is probably something like 21 - 1, so maybe that's saying something about your post board chances.

Just because Anwar doesn't draw dystopia doesn't mean other people don't :smile: .

AnwarA101

04-16-2007, 03:47 PM

Lemuria

04-16-2007, 04:45 PM

nitewolf9

04-16-2007, 05:13 PM

Don't you think that a first or second turn dystopia might hold their forces, giving you enough time to beat them with your creatures?
Besides, you still have jitte (if you board), crypt for the long game, and three more dystopias.

I can't think of a time where I'd want dystopia on the board on turn one or two (maybe against survival, but we are discussing threshold). They won't have threshold and are playing cantrips to build it, not dropping creatures (unless they are terrible and then you win I guess). Dystopia is excellent when you have some pressure on the board as well. Oh, and daze exists.

Cutting ritual seems very dangerous. This is because you will be down to only 17 black sources in the deck, and even though they aren't disrupting your manabase, you will probably have to mulligan more. I have been considering dropping the 1 of anurid for another fetchland because of the tendancy to lose to your own manabase (even though statistically it may not be very significant, it really is better to er on the side of the more stable mana base I think...and having another red source could have won me a few games where my stranded burn spell was lethal, so I duno).

It also seems that boarding out dark ritual opens you up more to daze...but I'm not sure about that. You'd really need to change roles for this to work.

Firebrothers

04-16-2007, 06:32 PM

I was actually considering boarding out Dark Ritual. The reason is that post-board you really don't want the card disadvantage and you are hoping to go a little longer as you'll have Dystopia and Crypt to help you in the long game. It hurts the mana base, but Dark Ritual isn't really reliable as a mana source especially against a deck that can remove your early creature. This idea came from me stating that Dark Ritual is pretty bad against Threshold and IBA suggested I board it out. I really didn't think I could and I'm still not sure you can, but it seems interesting.

It does seem rather risky but I think we ought to test it. Topdecking it mid to late game against a deck like threshold allmost always gives them the advantage. A lot of my threshold games end up around turn 6-7 and we are battling for cards and whoever draws better usually wins. All of our cards are threts against them but if you draw a ritual anytime you cant use it they gained an atvantage because ritual is useless that late in the game.

I question siding out all the bolts because a bolt is your only out to a mystic enforcer, double bolt will take down threshed bears also.

nitewolf9

04-16-2007, 06:57 PM

I question siding out all the bolts because a bolt is your only out to a mystic enforcer, double bolt will take down threshed bears also.

...dystopia? Although with crypt they might be stronger, because you can use one to take out a bear or enforcer after it.

Firebrothers

04-16-2007, 07:48 PM

Zilla

04-16-2007, 08:16 PM

Too high for the curve or red death material?
Almost certainly too high for the curve, although its effect is rather awesome. Hypnotic Specter is likely the superior choice, however, simply because it can hit play first turn. It has the side benefit of being able to hit lands, which Shimian can't.

georgjorge

04-17-2007, 04:08 AM

Lemuria

04-17-2007, 07:24 AM

Do you think Magus of the Moon (Blood Moon on a 2/2 creature) would fit into that deck ? True, it's three mana, but it just kills so many decks out there, especially when you've played Duress before to get rid of their removal, or they are tapped out. Many decks would have a hard time winning if he lands on the table (off the top of my head: Loam-based decks, Fish, Threshold, Countersliver, Survival builds, Aluren, Landstill, Iggy, Truffle Shuffle-style decks). The biggest drawback would probably be that the manabase would have to be altered a bit, and you would have to fetch Swamps more frequently than Duals, but I think it could be worth it.

If you drop blood moon, your fetches will become mountain as well and you cannot fetch anything.
Anyway, I'm not sure if there's any spot for him or blood moon itself, since Red Death SB already take care of most decks you have mentioned. Sure, it completly locks 43 Land but that's the only deck I can think about it. Dystopia still a better choice against Threshold, for Aluren you can side therapy and drop plague naming beast, etc...

I actually thought about side blood moon, but that depends much on the metagame.

Happy Gilmore

04-17-2007, 02:03 PM

If you drop blood moon, your fetches will become mountain as well and you cannot fetch anything.
Anyway, I'm not sure if there's any spot for him or blood moon itself, since Red Death SB already take care of most decks you have mentioned. Sure, it completly locks 43 Land but that's the only deck I can think about it. Dystopia still a better choice against Threshold, for Aluren you can side therapy and drop plague naming beast, etc...

I actually thought about side blood moon, but that depends much on the metagame.

As you said most of sb deals with those matchups more efficiently. Of all the decks in the LFM Red Death has the most agreed upon deck list.

The Questions still left unanswered are these:

1. Do you cut the 4th wasteland for another black source to increase the chances of opening up a double black source hand?

2. Is Wretched Anurid the best choice for the slot?

3. SB:is another disruption spell vs. Combo needed (I.e. Cabal Therapy/Null Rod)?

4. Does Jitte come in for the Thres matchup?

5. 3 or 4 Badlands? 6,7, or 8 fetches?

6. Are any of the new black or red cards viable alternatives to the current deck makeup? (From Futuresight)

7. Should Dystopia be renamed Kryptonite (see Mystic Enforcer aka. Superman)?

8. Should Phrexian Negator be renamed Cohones (Spanish Cajones)?

9. Does Red Death require submission to the dark side, and at what point do you get your soul back?

10. Is the fact that AnwarA101 always wears black or a dark color just a coincidence?

nitewolf9

04-17-2007, 02:52 PM

I was not under the impression that #7 was up for debate. I just need to find a metallic green sharpe (I did however manage to find another marker company that makes metallic green).

AnwarA101

04-17-2007, 03:23 PM

1. Do you cut the 4th wasteland for another black source to increase the chances of opening up a double black source hand?
9. Does Red Death require submission to the dark side, and at what point do you get your soul back?

10. Is the fact that AnwarA101 always wears black or a dark color just a coincidence?

1) I've been trying this and my opening hands have been much better. I often still see a wasteland in my opening hand often enough that I think 3 Waste plus 4 Sinkholes is very strong LD package.

9) Ofcourse it does and the fact that you haven't submitted to it means that you can't win with it. You have to believe in what you play and Red Death exemplifies this more than any other deck. You sometimes have to go first turn Phyrexian Negator and believe that it is for the win instead of the loss. Even when they Shrapnel Blast it and you still win because you don't give up.

10) Yeah, just a coincidence. :wink:

ps I've found the theme song for Red Death, just like Red Death its about the attitude who plays it. "Reckless" by Judas Priest from their 1986 album, Turbo. If you sign up at www.napster.com for a free account you can listen to the song a few times as a sample. Here is the second verse -

Around me I feel the shock waves,
Building for the energy
A force field no one can break through
Solid as rock no wonder
I am indestructible
First placed in everything I do

TheInfamousBearAssassin

04-17-2007, 05:12 PM

Too high for the curve or red death material?
Shimian Specter 2bb
Creature - Specter Rare

Flying
Whenever Shimian Specter deals combat damage to a player, that player reveals his or her hand. Choose a nonland card from it. Search that player's graveyard, hand, and library for all cards with the same name as that card and remove them from the game. Then that player shuffles his or her library.

Illus. Anthony S. Waters

2/2

This question occurred to me, and then I realized I really couldn't convince myself that such an expensive, relatively weak creature could ever fit in this deck. Which made me wonder, in turn, if Hyppie was really justified. While he's amazing at disruption and semi-control, he doesn't seem to fit the uber-aggro mindset of this deck, with a power only 2/3 his mana cost.

barron

04-17-2007, 05:18 PM

I have only seen red death in action and I have never played it myself so I will be honest when saying that I don't as much as others here, but this is my perspective on hippie.

I play solidarity and the hippie can be really annoying, but he never seemed to really be a problem when I played iggy-pop and I can see him being even less of a problem for EPIC storm decks, both of which seemed to now be played in greater numbers than solidarity.

I can't think of a better creature to put in his place, since I am not much of a black mage, but if he is weak in aggro matchups, which I suspect, and the threshold matchup, which I have never seen. I think maybe he should be replaced for more of a beat stick, or faster disruption, or maybe maindeck the beatstick and SB the disruption.

I am really just talking from my experiences with it, though I will say that I never tested the igg-pop match with firbrothers who is a better player with the deck than the others I have tested with.

blackguard90

04-17-2007, 05:20 PM

This question occurred to me, and then I realized I really couldn't convince myself that such an expensive, relatively weak creature could ever fit in this deck. Which made me wonder, in turn, if Hyppie was really justified. While he's amazing at disruption and semi-control, he doesn't seem to fit the uber-aggro mindset of this deck, with a power only 2/3 his mana cost.

I honestly think that he is just in here because the sheer possibility of playing him turn 1. Turn 1 hippie resolved hippie is very much so gg in a lot of cases. Backed up with turn 2 disruption, hippie won't die to 2 mana removal and run over those decks.

BTW, I used to play sui black all the time, and now that such an ingenious combination of burn with suicide is available, I have to say that this makes me happy. Credit to you Anwar, you make suicide players around the world wish they could be you!

georgjorge

04-17-2007, 05:28 PM

As you said most of sb deals with those matchups more efficiently

I was rather suggesting the Magus of the Moon for the mainboard...cutting another disruption element (Hippie / Sinkhole). Of course, then the deck turns into another thing altogether, sacrificing some explosiveness for mid-game power - but again, I think that the power of the Magus to lock many decks out of the game could be worth it.

Zilla

04-17-2007, 05:33 PM

I think that the power of the Magus to lock many decks out of the game could be worth it.
I doubt it. The card is too low-impact to be a maindeck contender. It does essentially nothing against Goblins, which is a matchup you really want to have a solid maindeck against at a large tournament. It also vastly weakens the power of your Shades by making 13 cards that would otherwise be Swamps into Mountains. The lack of synergy there alone is likely too relevant to ignore.

Lemuria

04-17-2007, 11:14 PM

I doubt it. The card is too low-impact to be a maindeck contender. It does essentially nothing against Goblins, which is a matchup you really want to have a solid maindeck against at a large tournament. It also vastly weakens the power of your Shades by making 13 cards that would otherwise be Swamps into Mountains. The lack of synergy there alone is likely too relevant to ignore.

Agreed.

Not to mention that you have to face Daze, FoW, Plowshares and all that shit stuff that gives you headache...
I rather spend 3 black sources and drop the Big-Frightfull-Who's your daddy?-Alien 5/5:cool:

TheInfamousBearAssassin

04-18-2007, 03:49 AM

nitewolf9

04-18-2007, 09:40 AM

AnwarA101

04-18-2007, 09:51 AM

So, any thoughts on cutting Hyppie for something more proactive and less Ritual dependant like, say, Flesh Reaver? Anwar?

Also, the deck's theme song would clearly be Ace of Spades (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQu91gvb0CY).

OMG! Jack is suggesting me run Flesh Reaver after he made fun of me for running Suicide at The Frog Invitational like a year and a half ago?

I use to run him in the earlier version of mono-black Suicide, but I've found that in too many matchups he is too conditional of a threat. He has a tendency to turn himself off during certain matchups and he's so poor against most decks with creatures. While I will always love a 4/4 for 2 mana, I think its best not to run Flesh Reaver in the current environment. If you were wondering I'm pretty sure I would never cut Hyppie for him anyway. Hyppie is simply amazing.

Lemuria

04-18-2007, 10:22 AM

I don't remember this issue being discussed (forgive me if I missed) but how shall we deal with Chalice? Many times that I've lost to Faerie Stompy, I did because of chalice, usually for 1, since it stops you from duress, bolt, ritual.

Shall we reconsider the idea of playing meltdown? shattering spree? Anyway, I just don't know how to get the fuck out of that.

nitewolf9

04-18-2007, 10:33 AM

Happy Gilmore

04-18-2007, 11:02 AM

You could try running engineered explosives in the board. I run a singleton copy over the single darkblast now just because I think it is more versatile; it certainly gets rid of chalice effectively. Against fairy stompy you could probably take out most of the burn for jitte, singleton explosives and maybe even engineered plague (depending on their build) so you aren't raped as much by chalice/pro red dudes. If there was a lot of FS around I'd probably run null rod in the board over meltdown. Null rod really wrecks them.

Depending on the version of F-stompy they could have as many as 11 Faeries, all with buts of 1. E-plague could help in this situation. You would probably be better off cutting all of the Chain Lightnings and some number of Bolts for a combination of plagues/Jittes.

yea, as nightwolf9 said, if you see alot of faerie stompy run 2-3 Nullrod in the board and bring in plague and the Rods.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

04-18-2007, 01:59 PM

OMG! Jack is suggesting me run Flesh Reaver after he made fun of me for running Suicide at The Frog Invitational like a year and a half ago?

I use to run him in the earlier version of mono-black Suicide, but I've found that in too many matchups he is too conditional of a threat. He has a tendency to turn himself off during certain matchups and he's so poor against most decks with creatures. While I will always love a 4/4 for 2 mana, I think its best not to run Flesh Reaver in the current environment. If you were wondering I'm pretty sure I would never cut Hyppie for him anyway. Hyppie is simply amazing.

Are cards "simply amazing" without explanation? Is Hyppie ever really simply amazing without a Ritual?

AnwarA101

04-18-2007, 02:04 PM

Are cards "simply amazing" without explanation? Is Hyppie ever really simply amazing without a Ritual?

Hypnotic Specter is one of the best "bridge" cards for Suicide. By bridge it brings together your two strategies - disruption and killing your opponent. He is both in one card not to mention he flies and he can be ritualed on turn 1. Suicide is held together by the delicate balance of disruption and creatures and Hypnotic Specter helps to keep that balance as he essentially gives you 16 disruption spells and not just 12. He also supports your LD strategy as he can hit lands if he comes into play off a ritual. While decks like Threshold are held together by their cantrip engine, Red Death is held together by the cards having overlapping effects, Hypnotic Specter is a perfect example of such a card.

Tacosnape

04-19-2007, 01:24 AM

Flesh reaver is actually a bit too suicidal I think. I've tried him before and it really pushes your goblins matchup down. If he had trample then sure, but this format is ripe with too many creatures (namely goblins...god damn goblins...) and he just winds up getting chump blocked. Hyppie is better than you people make him out to be. He doesn't need to be ritualed out to be good. He is better against goblins than reaver and is a key to the solidarity matchup (I'm not sure how I'd feel against that deck without him)...although I guess reaver really would be a monster there as well.

In conclusion, I'd like to say goblins keeps me from running him. Thank you.

So let me get this straight. Goblins doesn't deter you from running Phyrexian Fucking Negator, but it'll keep you from running Flesh Reaver?

I like Flesh Reaver. A lot. I started out of sheer curiosity a deck with the four most suicidal black guys I could think of, just to see what the limit I could get away with was. I picked Negator, Reaver, Drinker, and Shade. Reaver replacing Giant for :1::b:, and Drinker replacing Specter in the 3-drop slot. The deck was certainly much more fun to play and debatably won as many games. I don't really advocate Drinker just yet, but Reaver's a house. Stick a Jitte on him and his drawback's negated as often as you choose. And I rarely find myself getting outraced by Goblins with that creature configuration.

I will say, however, that excluding Solidarity, I think both Drinker and Reaver are as good against combo as Hyppie. The ridiculous clock they put the opponent on is as dangerous as the disruption, given that you've got additional disruption backing it up.

I seem to recall reading about 40 billion times that Red Death isn't for the faint of heart. So why is everyone afraid to go into a game with Flesh Reaver?

Lemuria

04-19-2007, 07:54 AM

So let me get this straight. Goblins doesn't deter you from running Phyrexian Fucking Negator, but it'll keep you from running Flesh Reaver?

I seem to recall reading about 40 billion times that Red Death isn't for the faint of heart. So why is everyone afraid to go into a game with Flesh Reaver?

I agree that flash reaver has a ridiculous clock, but that would be useful only against combo and control. He does absolutely nothing against aggro and his life loss is high considerable.

There's no way to compare Revaer with Negator. Negator is a 5/5 and has trample. Flesh Reaver doesen't have trample.
Your opponent might think "I'll hold my three creatures and block that Big Alien, then he will sacrifice all his permanents". But then you bolt two of his creatures and send the Big Alien to his throat. "Who's your daddy?" you ask him now.
Even if negator become blocked, he will kill his dude and deal damage to that player, something that reaver will never do.

As for hyppie, man, he is my favorite flying creature ever. He is ridiculous, a nightmare, I've won so many games because of him, even against aggro.

Well, that's my conclusion for reaver. I might be wrong, but for me, he only works agains combo and control. He also might work well in another build, but not in Red Death.

blackguard90

04-19-2007, 09:42 AM

So let me get this straight. Goblins doesn't deter you from running Phyrexian Fucking Negator, but it'll keep you from running Flesh Reaver?

I like Flesh Reaver. A lot. I started out of sheer curiosity a deck with the four most suicidal black guys I could think of, just to see what the limit I could get away with was. I picked Negator, Reaver, Drinker, and Shade. Reaver replacing Giant for :1::b:, and Drinker replacing Specter in the 3-drop slot. The deck was certainly much more fun to play and debatably won as many games. I don't really advocate Drinker just yet, but Reaver's a house. Stick a Jitte on him and his drawback's negated as often as you choose. And I rarely find myself getting outraced by Goblins with that creature configuration.

I will say, however, that excluding Solidarity, I think both Drinker and Reaver are as good against combo as Hyppie. The ridiculous clock they put the opponent on is as dangerous as the disruption, given that you've got additional disruption backing it up.

I seem to recall reading about 40 billion times that Red Death isn't for the faint of heart. So why is everyone afraid to go into a game with Flesh Reaver?

OK, if reaver had trample, I would instantly run 40 of them. The problem is he gets owned by chump blockers, and the life loss DOES matter, don't get me wrong, he is a really fast clock, and if your at 1 and your opponent is at 4, he dies first. The drawback is very crucial because tons of people are playing goblins, and he sucks against goblins. They will keep a matron or something just to block the guy, because he sure isn't going to block. NOW, if he had trample, he would be a house! I would cut either hippies or giants.

Now on to drinker of sorrow... 2 things I don't like:

1) ritual out a drinker isn't optimal, it requires you to sac lands the next turn, so he is essentially a 3rd turn drop, which hippie is not (rit)
2) his toughness is also an issue. Gator doesn't die a lot, even if he get pis blasted or kinesised (mid game), while sorrow can be blocked and killed, not to mention he doesnt have trample. I have tested sorrow and grinning demon, and I would say that their draw backs matter because they lack trample or evasion. Shade doesn't have a drawbacck, rotting giant has a very irrelevant one, and gator is the motherf***ing monster, so it doesnt matter.

Nihil Credo

04-19-2007, 09:58 AM

If you wanted to cut Hyppie for a more suicide-style creature, then Lurking Evil is a very likely candidate over Flesh Reaver. The life-loss is comparable, but Evil can block and instead of staring dumbfounded at chumpblockers, it flies over them. The price for that is an annoying mana-cost, so I think it should be restricted to 3-Wasteland decklists.

There is also Dross Harvester - an StP-proof, Enforcer-dodging critter that, in an aggro meta, *might* overall cost you less life than either Reaver or Evil. Might be worth testing, IMHO

Anarky87

04-19-2007, 10:15 AM

I wouldn't play with creatures that are just as symmetrical to you as they are towards your opponent and that only get worse if they have creatures out. Negator has the ability to just be a 5/5 trampler with a drawback that doesn't always affect you. Flesh Reaver will always deal you 4 damage no matter what and Drinker will always make you sac a permanent no matter what. No thanks.

AnwarA101

04-19-2007, 10:23 AM

I seem to recall reading about 40 billion times that Red Death isn't for the faint of heart. So why is everyone afraid to go into a game with Flesh Reaver?

I have no fear of running Flesh Reaver. At Grand Prix Philadelphia I played him in the maindeck of my Suicide Black build. The fact that aggro exists means that he is bound to be hit or miss. This makes him a conditional threat something you really don't want as you want to be able to keep your creatures in against aggressive decks as you only have 16 of them. Phyrexian Negator can be conditional too against decks playing burn, but that is a much more narrow group of decks than decks that play creatures in Legacy.

Happy Gilmore

04-19-2007, 10:35 AM

The real problem with Reaver is that it is not good against combo. You can look at it this way, for every 4 points of damage you take from Reaver you are effectively increasing your opponent's hand by 2 cards (4 damage = 2x storm for tendrils). Aginst ETW it is even worse. A 3/3 for two is not that bad.

Back at GP: Philiy there were very few Tendrils based combo decks. Most of the combo was salvagers game, possibly Alluren?, and Solidarity. All of which win in such a way that being at 2 life is the same as being at 20.

now because of ETW we have:

Belcher (with ETW)
TES
Iggypop
Solidarity
Alluren
Slavagers game
SI
"insert random combo deck here"

the point is, three of the four most prevalent combo decks win through damage. Therefore, running Reaver will be more of a liability than a plus.

Lemuria

04-19-2007, 10:40 AM

Before someone says "you don't need to attack with Reaver every time if his drawback is such a problem" (like my friend once told that to me) Then I ask:

Why should I hold my creatures in a deck like Red Death, when the objective is to put your big creatures on the table to cause a huge pressure on your opponent?

You have to attack. You must attack and make your opponent to retrocede. If you find yourself in a situation that you must hold your creatures for block, then you will be already in a bad position, none that never happend before, but that's not what this deck is about. As far as I know, the bolts should clear the path for your creatures and sometimes go to the dome.
Red Death is not a deck that can recover itself, once you run out of gas, if your opponent is not dead, near death or agonizing, then you're fucked.

That's what I understand about Red Death's philosophy. Your opponent must be the one blocking, must be the one on the defensive, and not you.

Tacosnape

04-19-2007, 02:27 PM

Ok. Lots of valid points about Flesh Reaver.

What about Gathan Raiders? He seems to fit the suicide black mold amazingly well, even without the red mana to cast him.

blackguard90

04-19-2007, 02:57 PM

Ok. Lots of valid points about Flesh Reaver.

What about Gathan Raiders? He seems to fit the suicide black mold amazingly well, even without the red mana to cast him.

Gathan Raiders RR:3:

Hellbent: +2/+2
Morph: Discard 2 cards

3/3

right?

This guy is ALMOST as bad as Avatar of "I pitch 2, bolt me"

Several Things:

1) He isn't consistantly a 5/5, and even when your hellbent, the dude can get bolted at the end of your drawstep
2) The ditch 2 cards cost is quite severe for a deck like this, when all your cards are business cards, you don't want to ditch a bolt and a shade for a 3/3
Also, consider the fact that to get him hellbent on turn 3, you need a good start, which is very likely because your essentially playing at least 1 spell a turn and ritualling out stuff. I think that gathan is good for mid game when sinkholes and duresses and hymns arn't worth much anymore, but not good as a fast beater for suicide.
3) If you happen to go into mid-late game and don't have the cards to ditch to raiders, you would like to hardcast him, which requires 2 red, not an easy amount to get access to, as you have 10 sources of red (fetches), LD elements like wasteland, sinkhole, vindicate all will target your badland, which you have 3 of. Not to mention, players of red death usually search out basics with the early fetches to make sure their manabase isn't disrupted by a wasteland.

Edit: He also lacks evasion, which isn't a great deal because he has a nice body, but that would argue more that he isn't worth the 3 mana and 2 cards. If he had first strike, haste, trample, or ditch 1 instead, he would raplace hippy or giant almost immediately.

Lemuria

04-19-2007, 04:06 PM

Gathan Raiders RR:3:

Hellbent: +2/+2
Morph: Discard 2 cards

3/3

right?

This guy is ALMOST as bad as Avatar of "I pitch 2, bolt me"

Several Things:

1) He isn't consistantly a 5/5, and even when your hellbent, the dude can get bolted at the end of your drawstep
2) The ditch 2 cards cost is quite severe for a deck like this, when all your cards are business cards, you don't want to ditch a bolt and a shade for a 3/3
Also, consider the fact that to get him hellbent on turn 3, you need a good start, which is very likely because your essentially playing at least 1 spell a turn and ritualling out stuff. I think that gathan is good for mid game when sinkholes and duresses and hymns arn't worth much anymore, but not good as a fast beater for suicide.
3) If you happen to go into mid-late game and don't have the cards to ditch to raiders, you would like to hardcast him, which requires 2 red, not an easy amount to get access to, as you have 10 sources of red (fetches), LD elements like wasteland, sinkhole, vindicate all will target your badland, which you have 3 of. Not to mention, players of red death usually search out basics with the early fetches to make sure their manabase isn't disrupted by a wasteland.

Edit: He also lacks evasion, which isn't a great deal because he has a nice body, but that would argue more that he isn't worth the 3 mana and 2 cards. If he had first strike, haste, trample, or ditch 1 instead, he would raplace hippy or giant almost immediately.

That pretty much explain everything.

So far, I think the main board is pretty solid, maybe the only spot that remains in doubt it's the Anurid spot. He still a good creature for me though.

Tacosnape

04-19-2007, 04:11 PM

According to MtgSalvation, Gathan Raiders' Morph cost is "Discard a card." not "Discard two cards."

Happy Gilmore

04-19-2007, 04:24 PM

According to MtgSalvation, Gathan Raiders' Morph cost is "Discard a card." not "Discard two cards."

Holy Amazing madness outlets batman! A solid beater to be sure..but its too much of an investment on the board (requires you to commit everycard in your hand to making it bigger). And as a 3/3 for three I would rather have Rotting Giant.

Stop trying to mess with a good thing. The decklist works the way it is. Determining the strengths and weeknesses in each matchup, creating SB strategies, and sculpting the SB is more constuctive then debating MD cards that have proven themselves over and over again.

blackguard90

04-19-2007, 04:55 PM

According to MtgSalvation, Gathan Raiders' Morph cost is "Discard a card." not "Discard two cards."

hmmm, if it is indeed 1 card, then it can be considered, but when it was spoiled, I am pretty sure they said it was 2 cards.

Obfuscate Freely

04-19-2007, 05:26 PM

How can you post, on the internet, and still be unsure about something else that is on the internet? My first reaction to the mention of this card was to look it up on mtgsalvation. About three seconds later I found out that they have a freaking preview-quality picture (http://mtgsalvation.com/image.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Fforums.mtgsalvation.com%2Fattachment.php%3Fattachmentid%3D46017%26stc%3D1%26d%3D1176704153) of the thing.

Gathan Raiders
:3::r::r:

Creature - Human Warrior
Hellbent - Gathan Raiders gets +2/+2 if you have no cards in hand.
Morph - Discard a card (You may play this face down as a 2/2 creature for . Turn it face up any time for its morph cost.)

Illus. Parente #99/180
3/3

So, to settle this once and for all, the Morph cost is discarding one card, not two. I'd say that that makes it worth trying, but blackguard did raise several points against it that still stand.

Tacosnape

04-20-2007, 12:10 AM

How can you post, on the internet, and still be unsure about something else that is on the internet?

(Cracks up) Man. I literally just fell out of my chair.

So, to settle this once and for all, the Morph cost is discarding one card, not two. I'd say that that makes it worth trying, but blackguard did raise several points against it that still stand.

True. There's a deck for this guy somewhere, and I don't know if Red Death's it, but still. Just thought I'd suggest it.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

04-20-2007, 05:25 AM

Stop trying to mess with a good thing. The decklist works the way it is. Determining the strengths and weeknesses in each matchup, creating SB strategies, and sculpting the SB is more constuctive then debating MD cards that have proven themselves over and over again.

This is fundamentally retarded logic. Main decklists do and should change constantly. Even in Legacy, the metagame is always updating and evolving. Clinging to a decklists simply because they've worked in the past leads to stagnation and deck-death.

Anwar: I have myself been tinkering with a list that was -4 Duress, -4 Hyppies, -1 Swamp for +4 Flesh Reaver, +3 Lotus Petal, and +2 Wretched Anurid. Obviously this changes the playstyle, but I think it only serves to streamline what the deck is after- blazing fast speed with a quick, hard disruption suite. Hymn, Sinkhole and Wasteland are more than enough to disrupt your opponent if they only have a handful of turns to begin with. It also has allowed for some extremely explosive starts in my testing so far. I imagine this might make the Threshold matchup more difficult, but I'm not sure where else you would really be hurt. It's definitely improved Goblins from my testing so far, making it much harder for them to establish any sort of board before they're already dead.

Also, I found you a deck inspirational poster:

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/1779/powertq5.jpg

Happy Gilmore

04-20-2007, 11:03 AM

You have chosen to run Reaver in your build and yet you do not address the issues I have stated in earlier posts. What is the justification for running Reaver when

TES
Belcher (with ETW)
Iggypop
Borus deck wins/ Three color agro
Goblins
Faerie Stompy
Angel Stompy

and other decks make running it a liability? Wretched Anurid is subject the some of the same issues, i.e. making ETW absolutely insane when he is on the board. You suggest removing Hypnotic Spectre and Duress, your best anti combo setup, for creatures that lose even more to combo. The changes you suggest make your matchups worse across the board with the possible exception of Thresh. GG.

And regarding my post, currently there are no viable alterantives to the card choices that have been selected for the maindeck. Everything including Wretched Anurid, Withered Wretch, Dark Confidant, Hand of Cruelty, and Flesh Reaver have been tested. As of right now I don't think there is going to be anything new for the MD from Future Sight either, with the possible exception of the creature discussed above. Regardless, he will not be legal till after the GP. And that should be the focus of the discussion at this point.

blackguard90

04-20-2007, 01:18 PM

and other decks make running it a liability? Wretched Anurid is subject the some of the same issues, i.e. making ETW absolutely insane when he is on the board. You suggest removing Hypnotic Spectre and Duress, your best anti combo setup, for creatures that lose even more to combo. The changes you suggest make your matchups worse across the board with the possible exception of Thresh. GG.

And regarding my post, currently there are no viable alterantives to the card choices that have been selected for the maindeck. Everything including Wretched Anurid, Withered Wretch, Dark Confidant, Hand of Cruelty, and Flesh Reaver have been tested. As of right now I don't think there is going to be anything new for the MD from Future Sight either, with the possible exception of the creature discussed above. Regardless, he will not be legal till after the GP. And that should be the focus of the discussion at this point.

Is it possible to run 4x rotting giants, instead of the 3x giant/1x anurid? It seems like I have yet to run into a problem (both in real life and MWS) where giant cannot enther the red zone, maybe because I am running an extra delta in place of a swamp. Even at times when I have 2x giant out, I can attack for at 2 more turns with both, which is usually enough.

Ewokslayer

04-20-2007, 01:22 PM

@ Everyone that has a hard on for Gathan Raiders.

Am I missing the part of the card that is good?
It seems like a very conditional threat that won't be impressive much of the time.
Oh look an elephant that causes me to discard a card. Woot!

Firebrothers

04-20-2007, 01:33 PM

Is it possible to run 4x rotting giants, instead of the 3x giant/1x anurid? It seems like I have yet to run into a problem (both in real life and MWS) where giant cannot enther the red zone, maybe because I am running an extra delta in place of a swamp. Even at times when I have 2x giant out, I can attack for at 2 more turns with both, which is usually enough.

Well I would watchout with running four because even though you dont think that having two giants out eats up your graveyard too much it really does. It especially becomes apparent when playing against a jotun grunt or something. You do not want to be stuck in a position where you should be attacking with two giants but can not get cards in the yard to feed them.

Once I had to wasteland my own land to squeeze in some more damage with two giants so sometimes it gets pretty tight. Overall though I vote agaisnt running 4.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

04-20-2007, 04:28 PM

You have chosen to run Reaver in your build and yet you do not address the issues I have stated in earlier posts. What is the justification for running Reaver when

I'm sorry, I must've glazed over your earlier posts. I tend to do that when they contain nothing relevant or interesting.

TES

I don't think turn three 2/2 Flyers are good against TES, but maybe I'm playing it wrong.

Belcher (with ETW)

I'm still waiting for an actual... you know... reason that Flesh Reaver is worse than Hyppie against Belcher.

Iggypop

Still waiting.

Borus deck wins/ Three color agro

Let's pretend for a moment people play this deck. I'd still rather have first turn pressure that causes me some pain than a slow 2/2 and Duress in this matchup.

Goblins

Flesh Reaver is actually fine against Goblins, as long as he's not completely by himself and/or you don't draw removal (unlikely). They have a very hard time developing their board fast enough to matter.

Faerie Stompy
Angel Stompy

Yeah. How is Flesh Reaver any worse than Hyppie in these matchups again? I understand that you enjoy talking, but you really ought to be saying something at some point.

and other decks make running it a liability?

Man. If you had proven anything or put forth any arguments, this is the point at which I'd be in some real trouble.

Wretched Anurid is subject the some of the same issues, i.e. making ETW absolutely insane when he is on the board. You suggest removing Hypnotic Spectre and Duress, your best anti combo setup, for creatures that lose even more to combo. The changes you suggest make your matchups worse across the board with the possible exception of Thresh. GG.

Duress is actually the only relevant card here, and only if you're on the play. I suppose if they wait to get Hymned, and/or to get their manabase destroyed, first playing Anurid, then getting ETW'd out is a liability. On the other hand, some might view actually being able to capitalize on disruption with speed as a strength. It's a... crazy idea, I know.

And regarding my post, currently there are no viable alterantives to the card choices that have been selected for the maindeck.

Pssst.

If you were saving some actual arguments to that effect, this would be the point in your post at which you would want to dramatically reveal them.

When you're ready...

In truth, even were you to have proven some point about specific maindeck cards, your post is irrelevant, because I am not proposing a simple swap of one card for another, but a change in the decklist that accommodates a faster clock overall.

Double Rotting Giant can be a pain to maintain, although double Anurid is often just as bad. I'm unsure whether 3 and 3 is better, or 4 and 2.

nitewolf9

04-20-2007, 04:51 PM

@ Jack: I have actually played with your idea of cutting the hyppies for reaver, but not cutting duress. With lotus petal I suppose your other disruption gets sped up a bit. With my green suicide list I tried lotus petal and it seemed okay. If I were to try it with red I'd probably do something like:

4 flesh reaver
4 phyrexian negator
4 rotting giant
4 nantuko shade

3 lotus petal
4 dark ritual
4 hymn to tourach
4 sinkhole
4 lightning bolt
4 chain lightning

3 wasteland
4 polluted delta
4 bloodstained mire
3 badlands
7 swamp

board:
4 dystopia
4 infest
4 tormod's crypt
3 diabolic edict

With the loss of hyppie and addition of reaver I think infest may be a better board option (and once again goes with the making goblins side in dead cards thing). I really like the -1 wasteland +1 fetch idea of Anwar's, and I think the 4th chain lightning would be good as well. This would be so much fun to play...if you can beat goblins that is.

Happy Gilmore

04-20-2007, 05:57 PM

Bold is edited so I can address each question seperately

1. I don't think turn three 2/2 Flyers are good against TES, but maybe I'm playing it wrong.

2. I'm still waiting for an actual... you know... reason that Flesh Reaver is worse than Hyppie against Belcher.

3. Lets pretend for a moment people play this deck. I'd still rather have first turn pressure that causes me some pain than a slow 2/2 and Duress in this matchup.

4. Yeah. How is Flesh Reaver any worse than Hyppie in these matchups again? I understand that you enjoy talking, but you really ought to be saying something at some point.

1. Yes you are. Although, if he was only a 2/2 flyer you would be correct.

2.

The real problem with Reaver is that it is not good against combo. You can look at it this way, for every 4 points of damage you take from Reaver you are effectively increasing your opponent's hand by 2 cards (4 damage = 2x storm for tendrils). Against ETW it is even worse. A 3/3 for two is not that bad.

3. You would rather play a game of un-interaction than prevent them from beating you in the first place? Duress and Hypnotic Spectre do this, Reaver does not. And as I stated, every time you hit with Reaver you have made it that much easier for them to kill you.

4. I hate to say it Jack but it is you who enjoys talking, but I'll appease you and go through it step by step. All your suppositions are theoretical, no testing, nothing.

TES/Belcher/Iggy Pop

a. Hypnotic Spectre and Duress give you a way to prevent them from going off, Reaver and Petal do not.
b. Flesh Reaver allows them to kill you quicker for the reasons stated above.

Angel/Faerie Stompy/Agro decks in General

a. Blocking Reaver with any creature yields 4 damage to your dome. They have more creatures than you do, and I can't see them trading a 1/1 for a 5th of your life total and feeling bad about it.
b. You have absolutely no way of blocking a single creature that flys.

Sigh...I got sucked into arguing with you again Jack. I don't know why I bother, since you will always always be right. However, I can't forgive myself if someone on this board takes you seriously and makes your mistakes. It’s not fair to them.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

04-20-2007, 06:17 PM

1. Yes you are. Although, if he was only a 2/2 flyer you would be correct.

He is little besides a 2/2 flyer without a Ritual, as at turn three you must have either already disrupted the deck, in which case you would want a faster clock, or you're already dead. And if we depend solely on Ritual, a lot of cards become good that otherwise would not be and are correctly not run. Negator can actually make an impact when cast without Ritual. Hyppie cannot.

2.

I have no experienced such an issue, and Anwar has not, listing only decks that run creatures as possible reasons against Flesh Reaver. Erego, as you are the only one who has found Flesh Reaver bad against combo, and as I have adequate reason to dismiss your opinion, the point is irrelevant. It's not even logically sound unless you're imagining that Flesh Reaver is doing nothing but attacking alone, so that actually salvaging a game with Ritual, Ritual, Tendrils somehow becomes feasible.

3. You would rather play a game of un-interaction than prevent them from beating you in the first place? Duress and Hypnotic Spectre do this, Reaver does not. And as I stated, every time you hit with Reaver you have made it that much easier for them to kill you.

Duress and Hyppie do not do this. They're absolutely terrible against the best and most popular deck in the format. Leave your illusions at the door. Flesh Reaver is tempo, Hyppie is not.

4. I hate to say it

I don't believe you.

Jack but it is you who enjoys talking, but I'll appease you and go through it step by step. All your suppositions are theoretical, no testing, nothing.

I would counter by pointing out that it is your supposition that I have nothing but supposition that is, in fact, without testing.

Also, history has taught us repeatedly that appeasement doesn't work. You would do well to pay more attention in class.

a. Hypnotic Spectre and Duress give you a way to prevent them from going off, Reaver and Petal do not.

This is transparently false, as an opponent cannot go off if they are dead. You already have adequate anti-combo measures. Focusing excessively on the combo matchup to the point of not having what you need to win in any matchup with this deck, which is speed, is suicidal in the bad sense.

b. Flesh Reaver allows them to kill you quicker for the reasons stated above.

Unless, of course, they simply cannot kill you as fast as you can kill them. Which is the point.

a. Blocking Reaver with any creature yields 4 damage to your dome. They have more creatures than you do, and I can't see them trading a 1/1 for a 5th of your life total and feeling bad about it.

I suppose if I were planning on giving these decks the time and luxury of assembling their terrible manabase to cast their slow creatures, this would be relevant.

b. You have absolutely no way of blocking a single creature that flys.

... "Blocking"? Vat is this? Are you actually using Hyppie to block? That's hilarious.

Sigh...I got sucked into arguing with you again Jack. I don't know why I bother, since you will always always be right. However, I can't forgive myself if someone on this board takes you seriously and makes your mistakes. It’s not fair to them.

Well, clearly if you refer to them as mistakes, they are not, as you falsely say, right, at least in the theoretical instance where your opinion is correct. But, given that you correctly identify that for reasons that need not be beaten upon, you are completely incapable of summoning any kind of real argument against me or defending a point that you believe to be correct, perhaps you should stop posting and leave it to those that can, since you will, as you say, always be "wrong".

Happy Gilmore

04-20-2007, 06:30 PM

The real problem with Reaver is that it is not good against combo. You can look at it this way, for every 4 points of damage you take from Reaver you are effectively increasing your opponent's hand by 2 cards (4 damage = 2x storm for tendrils). Aginst ETW it is even worse. A 3/3 for two is not that bad.

Back at GP: Philiy there were very few Tendrils based combo decks. Most of the combo was salvagers game, possibly Alluren?, and Solidarity. All of which win in such a way that being at 2 life is the same as being at 20.

now because of ETW we have:

Belcher (with ETW)
TES
Iggypop
Solidarity
Alluren
Slavagers game
SI
"insert random combo deck here"

The point is, three of the four most prevalent combo decks win through damage. Therefore, running Reaver will be more of a liability than a plus.

Your decision to ignore my points are up to you, but they still stand.

Anwar clearly stated that at GP: Phily there was little to no Tendrils decks, and obviously no ETW based combo. The situation has changed, and the decklist has changes in response to these changes. Going backwards is not very productive Jack.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

04-20-2007, 06:37 PM

ignore

This word. It does not mean what you think it means.

Happy Gilmore

04-20-2007, 06:49 PM

This word. It does not mean what you think it means.

I'm very confused Jack, what does that have to do with the current discussion?

I have given you a very good reason not to play Reaver: it is bad against Combo. I have stated why this is so. You have responded by saying that Reaver kills them first. So I would like to know, how this is possible when you have made it substantially easier to generate the storm count needed to kill you?

TheInfamousBearAssassin

04-20-2007, 07:00 PM

That's not a very good reason, actually, for the same reason the following is not a very good reason for running Flesh Reaver:

Running Flesh Reaver wins the tournament because it will kill all your opponents.

I've said something that we have a clear reason to desire- beating my opponents. I've even given a vague idea of how this happens- Flesh Reaver keeps damaging them until they're not alive anymore. But is this an adequate reason? Obviously not.

You've likewise simply asserted something and given a vague outline of a way in which it might be true, but it hasn't been demonstrated at all. For instance, you say that Flesh Reaver functionally puts "extra cards" in their hand by giving them a lower life total to target in order to win. Yet Hyppie actually gives them more cards in hand by taking twice as long to win and to draw the Burning Wish or Ill Gotten Gains or what have you they need to bounce back.

Lemuria

04-21-2007, 12:30 AM

I've won many games against TES by disrupting them as much as I can, and then, dropping a good clock on the table. I love hyppie, but I know that his clock sucks against combo, then to solve this, I just drop Negator or 3/3 guys instead. In my experience, I would say that this match is 50/50.

Ok guys, but I have a question:

TES can kill you on turn 2 or 3, sometimes on turn 1, right? ok....
So, with or without flash reaver(doesn't really matter), how can you kill them before that? (assuming that you haven't disrupted them enough).

AnwarA101

04-21-2007, 12:01 PM

This is fundamentally retarded logic. Main decklists do and should change constantly. Even in Legacy, the metagame is always updating and evolving. Clinging to a decklists simply because they've worked in the past leads to stagnation and deck-death.

Anwar: I have myself been tinkering with a list that was -4 Duress, -4 Hyppies, -1 Swamp for +4 Flesh Reaver, +3 Lotus Petal, and +2 Wretched Anurid. Obviously this changes the playstyle, but I think it only serves to streamline what the deck is after- blazing fast speed with a quick, hard disruption suite. Hymn, Sinkhole and Wasteland are more than enough to disrupt your opponent if they only have a handful of turns to begin with. It also has allowed for some extremely explosive starts in my testing so far. I imagine this might make the Threshold matchup more difficult, but I'm not sure where else you would really be hurt. It's definitely improved Goblins from my testing so far, making it much harder for them to establish any sort of board before they're already dead.

Also, I found you a deck inspirational poster:

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/1779/powertq5.jpg

I really think the -8 disruption spells +8 faster guys makes this deck pretty much an aggro deck. Just Sinkhole and Hymn (and possibly wasteland) provide the only real disruption along with a much faster clock. While this might be an avenue that is interesting to some, I don't particulary find it interesting myself. I've won games with Duress against Goblins because I hit Aether Vial on the play. I've ritualed into so many Hyppies on turn 1 that I know that this play is devastating (yes he's weaker without ritual, but not awful) especially against combo and control. I don't want to imply that there aren't other directions that the deck can be taken, but I just prefer the mixture of disruption and creatures that the current strategy employs. But changing this deck to a more aggro approach changes the nature to a degree that it becomes a different deck in my opinion.

The poster is pretty cool. Rock on!

Lemuria

04-21-2007, 12:22 PM

I don't want to imply that there aren't other directions that the deck can be taken, but I just prefer the mixture of disruption and creatures that the current strategy employs.

The poster is pretty cool. Rock on!

If we change those directions, we will change the deck at all and his nature. Red death is about disrupt+clock, and not a simple aggro deck. If we take off duress and hyppie, we will change the deck's philosophy of disruption/damage and that will became a red/black aggro, and not Red Death. I don't know why people keep complaining about hyppie. He's fucking amazing. Course he can't kill the opponent completly by himself (sometimes I did) but he paves the way for your big guys with a deadly combination of evasive disrupt+damage.

Also, Happy Gilmore is right. Flesh Reaver does sucks a lot agains TES. That's such an obvious thing. One hit and you are at 16 life, I don't see any problems for a TES player hit 7 storm (8 with tendrils) and combo in your face.

georgjorge

04-22-2007, 09:43 AM

Anarky87

04-22-2007, 09:46 AM

Also, has anyone else been finding that four Dystopias in the board is one too much ?

More of the opposite, I find that if I could run more, I probably would since it destroys the decks you'd be bringing it in against.

nitewolf9

04-22-2007, 03:10 PM

since the Goblins matchup doesn't seem to be that easy with Negator, and would maybe be better this way.

I duno what you're talking about here, he eats them for lunch. Trample kills that deck. Yes kinesis post board is annoying, but so is getting beat in the face for 5 on turn 2.

blackguard90

04-22-2007, 07:45 PM

Does anyone think that Gathan Raiders might be playable in this deck ? It's a conditional 5/5 for three. It's not as explosive as Negator with Ritual, but may be less disavantageous later on. Now I know that everyone will instantly respond with "This deck is based around Ritual, so the card is bad", but since I a) won't always have a Ritual opening and b) even if I do have a Ritual opening, I will have other cards to take advantage of it, I think it should be considered, especially since the Goblins matchup doesn't seem to be that easy with Negator, and would maybe be better this way.

Also, has anyone else been finding that four Dystopias in the board is one too much ?

Ok, starting with Gathan Raiders:

As I said, since his cost for morph is 1 card, it can be considered, but at 3 mana cost, it would not be wise to cut giants or shades, so the only other option are:

a) Negator => HELL NO! Gator owns people, its flavor text makes control players piss their pants, and even goblins quake at the sight of a turn 1 gator. For most mono red goblin decks, their only genuine out is gempalm incinerator, fanatic only hinders it, and blockers are pathetic that gator just tramples through them. Now, white goblins, no problem. Let them swords your guy, you gain life. The only thing remotely bad for negator is Pyrokinesis, but if they kinesis on turn 1, you can still come back, as they lose 2 cards for your 2 cards (land and gator), but what is scary is when they chump block, and then kinesis the gator, making you sack 5 when you have 5. But whatever, don't be a pussy if your playing suicide, thats the way it works. CONCLUSION: GATOR EATS GOBLINS, GATOR NOT BAD AGAINST GOBLINS, TEST IT AND SEE!

b) Cutting hyppy => Meh.... Gathan raiders doesn't have that "Bam" factor that would tempt me to do this. Sure, he beats for 5 conditionally, but otherwise he pretty much suck.

Reasons:

1) No evasion
2) Boltable, no matter what (even hellbent)
3) RR IN THE MANA COST!!! This is a piss off factor. Play a few games with goblins or anydeck packing wastelands and tell me how many times you have 2 badlands. It means that he is a pathetic 2/2 for 3 in mid game after you've thrown all your spells at your opponent. Also, know that your going to have 4 of them, so how reliable is it that your able to hard cast them?
4) See 1)
5) Hyppy makes them ditch randomly, which is good against anydeck, and hippy is a LEGITIMATE threat on turn 1, unlike raiders.

K. Dystopia: I run 3 in the SB, this is up to your metagame and how many threshold decks are there.

Ok, change of topic:

This deck is pretty expensive and frankly it took me 5 monthes to get all the cards, it costs a lot more than any standard goblin decks, so what would make people more tempted to play? For me, its because I love suicide black, ever since I started magic when Planeshift came out. And also, how much cheaper is the deck than threshold? The only expensive cards in thresh are the mana base and forces, but as you can see, our manabase is pretty damn expensive too.

Sims

04-22-2007, 08:15 PM

I'm not disagreeing with the points you've made, but I would like to point out that on turn 1 if Goblins casts a Kinesis on your 'Gator, it's a 2-for-3. You lose 'Gator, Land, and the ritual used to cast it when they burn 2 cards and if they play mountain-lackey same turn, could potentially gain a strong tempo advantage....

Just sayin'.

blackguard90

04-24-2007, 11:04 AM

Happy Gilmore

04-24-2007, 11:40 AM

so what about this card:

Nihilith

4BB
Fear
Suspend 7-1B
Whenever a card is put into an opponent's graveyard from anywhere, you may remove a time counter from Nihilith

4/4

Is this a good addition? Lets say it gets suspended turn 2, then your opponent plays stuff like brainstorm, force of will, mental note....:tongue:
you get a fat 4/4 with evasion really quick! and no one can even block him in this format, except black and artifacts (who play with those?)

Nihilith is a conditional threat, requiring a large number of cards to hit the opponent’s graveyard before it can come into play. In other words, probably not.

The question I would like answered is whether or not the SB needs to be changed in preparation for the GP.

finley

04-24-2007, 12:25 PM

I'm not so sure that dismissing Nihilith immediately is such a good idea. He has great synergy with your other forms of distruption. You can first turn ritual, suspend, and duress, already taking off a time counter. Forcing cards into your opponent's graveyard isn't a hard task to do with this deck. Not only do you force them to put several cards there, but your opponent also has to play spells if they want to win. He seems like a solid choice and at least should be tested before the automatic denial.

jettwenzingo

04-24-2007, 12:41 PM

@ Nihilith: He's ok if you can play him turn one or two, but to do that consistently you need to run multiples. If you run multiples, you will draw extra copies that require six mana or 3-5 turns to come into play by the mid-late game. If you don't run multiples, you will only draw him late game.

Red Death doesn't often have six mana available, so hard-casting is seldom an option, not to mention the possibility of counters. I'd much rather pump a shade for six mana than get dazed on a 6cc spell, and I'd much rather ritual out a negator on turn 1 and/or play hymn on turn two than nihilith.

Cute card though, I think they are talking about it in the Pox thread.

Lemuria

04-24-2007, 02:17 PM

Yea, he looks like a good card for pox, or another black deck, but doesn't fit in Red Death. I'd rather go for mana+ritual+duress+hymn/sinkhole/giant instead of Nihilith.

Anyway, I don't know if you guys consider playing against Reanimator, but I did some playtest with my friend yesterday, and I can say that this deck is a pain in the ass for us. They have a slight advantage pre-board. We played 15 games and the results was 9-6 for him. You can try by disrupting them as much as you can on the beginning, since they run 17 lands, I found that LD strategy is huge here. If they win the dice roll, you are preety much screwed because they go mana+ritual+imp, discards akroma, reanimate of some sort. (God, why such a creature exists?)

On the post-board games, I found heavily in my favor. Board in 4 dystopias and 3 cabal therapy. Out the 7 bolts, since it cannot reach any of their creatures.

You can start therapy naming ritual or imp, cutting his engine. If he's able to reanimate Phantom Nishoba or Akroma, you throw a Dystopia on their face. (Boom Headshot!!!! Take that, Bitch!!). In 15 games, the final results was 10 - 5 in my favor.

So, basically its that. Hope for the best on the first game and fist fucking them on post-board.

ps: for those who still doubt Hyppie, he won 6 games for me. He is devastating with the support of your disruption and dystopia.

blackguard90

04-24-2007, 02:53 PM

Happy Gilmore

04-24-2007, 03:02 PM

Reanimator have never been a huge problem for me, as there is a guy that plays it every week here. The nuts dark rit, imp exhume doesn't happen often, and I have experience playing the deck, and I can say honestly that the chances they get a big fatty turn 1 is not big. Usually, they get a dude on turn 2 or 3, which is enough time for us to disrupt them, mainly duress. I suggest cabal therapy as you said, but also tormod's crypt, which kills buried alive and is playable turn 1.

The 3x crypt plan in the Sb is so solid, after running it for a little while I can't see myself cutting them. Against Reanimator, having a creature in the yard and then crypting them in response to an exhume seems very funny indead.

The impression I am getting from everyone in the thread leads me to believe that this board is working as intended.

4 Dystopia
3 Jitte
4 Plague
3 Crypt
1 Darkblast

I would like to bring in Cabal Therapy for the Solidarity matchup but I can't seem to find the space. Too much of the board is set in stone imo.

blackguard90

04-24-2007, 05:24 PM

The 3x crypt plan in the Sb is so solid, after running it for a little while I can't see myself cutting them. Against Reanimator, having a creature in the yard and then crypting them in response to an exhume seems very funny indead.

The impression I am getting from everyone in the thread leads me to believe that this board is working as intended.

4 Dystopia
3 Jitte
4 Plague
3 Crypt
1 Darkblast

I would like to bring in Cabal Therapy for the Solidarity matchup but I can't seem to find the space. Too much of the board is set in stone imo.

actually my board is:

2x Umezawa's Jitte
3x Tormod's Crypt
3x Dystopia
3x Cabal Therapy
4x Engineered Plague

I don't find that I need 4 dystopias, cause it sure sucks when you have 2 in your starting hand. Also, I don't think I want the lone darkblast, instead I run therapy. Also, 4 extra kill plus 2 jittes and the 7 lightning spells is enough for goblins. The only thing I can't deal with are those pesky 0 mana artifacts or artifacts in general, which brings about the topic of:

Null Rod, yea or nay? Also, Meltdown yea or nay? (These questions are regarding the GP metagame)

Happy Gilmore

04-24-2007, 05:37 PM

actually my board is:

2x Umezawa's Jitte
3x Tormod's Crypt
3x Dystopia
3x Cabal Therapy
4x Engineered Plague

I don't find that I need 4 dystopias, cause it sure sucks when you have 2 in your starting hand. Also, I don't think I want the lone darkblast, instead I run therapy. Also, 4 extra kill plus 2 jittes and the 7 lightning spells is enough for goblins. The only thing I can't deal with are those pesky 0 mana artifacts or artifacts in general, which brings about the topic of:

Null Rod, yea or nay? Also, Meltdown yea or nay? (These questions are regarding the GP metagame)

There is no way I would play less than 4 Dystopia, It pwns like no other. I thought about the board you are suggesting but with only 2 therapies and 4 Dystopia.

nitewolf9

04-24-2007, 05:51 PM

Nihil Credo

04-24-2007, 06:14 PM

laststepdown

04-24-2007, 06:56 PM

I think a single Street Wraith could solve quite nicely the problem of that damned "4th Rotting Giant" slot, which still lacks a satisfactory solution (we all agree Wretched Anurid is quite unimpressive).

I think you misunderstand whether or not this deck cares about drawing cards. We don't run Bob for the same reason. If you don't want the Anurid in the spot, run a 4th Chain Lightning, but don't pollute this deck with suboptimal new cards, please.

Nihil Credo

04-24-2007, 07:51 PM

It's not about drawing cards, it's about whether paying 2 life is worth the privilege of not having to run Anurid as your 16th creature. Considering Anurid usually costs me way more than 2 life, I think it could be worth it, especially when you consider that in a pinch Wraith can become an emergency 3/4 Swampwalker (Bolt-proof and unblockable! This guy will rule the mirror! /sarcasm).

blackguard90

04-25-2007, 09:24 AM

I have always been a fan of the idea of running null rod in the board but I am not sure it is necessary. What matchups are you worried about that null rod would come in against? TES/iggy pop? Your matchup is already fine there and crypt/plague help out alot.

Therapy is really strong and I wish I could find room for it, but I'm not sure what I'd cut. Going down to 2 jitte does not seem attractive since that card is freaking retarded and I want to draw one when I need it. You could make an argument for running 3 dystopia but I am always weary about the threshold matchup (perhaps running crypt as well might allow you to go to 3 but I'm not sure). If I cut the 1 dystopia I'd probably cut the darkblast as well and run 2 therapy to bring in against thresh and solidarity (or maybe even 2 engineered explosives?).

Null rod is for affinity, its also good against iggy, TES and to a lesser extent angel/fairie stompy. I can see why 3 jittes are good, but against threshold, I have 3 crypts, 3 dystopia, and 3 cabal therapy (therapy for their removal/guys). Crypts make their guys crap, dystopia kills the now very crappy 1/1 guys, and cabal therapy takes away their sneaky crappy guys hiding in their hand. I have never really needed that 4th dystopia, but that depends on what happens.

So I have tested several games against UGR thresh, and its pretty bad... Fire/Ice, lightning bolt, all of that stuff is pretty hard on our guys. Hows this match-up for you guys?