[Deck] Dredge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laststepdown

Gnaw and Aura Thief were both suggested by my teammate while digging through an alpha-deep collection for 5 people's decks. I wouldn't recommend Gnaw without Sun Titan to get back LED, as getting 3 mana is far-fetched, and you want to win or have game on table by turn 2, effectively. He convinced me when he noted I could pay the flashback with LED, and recur the mana easy with Sun Titan (other cards we were possibly going to run in that slot that didn't make the board: Crippling Fatigue, Psychatog lol, Sadistic Hypnotist, Darkblast, Firestorm number 4) Going up to 11 5 color land was because in testing, I wanted to cast either Putrid Imp, Cabal Therapy, Firestorm, Wispmare, Ingot Chewer, and of course Faithless Looting. All on turn 1, all the time. I sacrificed the explosiveness of 4x Cephalid Coliseum to support the resilience of the deck-which included, as you mentioned, zero copies of Breakthrough in my 75. I had a long discussion with Feldman on facebook about the first 60, and he mentioned he was running zero Coliseum, 4 Undiscovered Paradise, and sideboard all the copies of Breakthrough (he recommended 3 vs combo), to add to consistency, since draw 2 is usually enough to win against decks that aren't combo. He disagreed about running any non Grave-Troll targets for Dread Return, but I felt Sun Titan recurring Golgari Thug's death triggered ability and Cabal Therapy meant I could probably recur the Lorwyn anti-hate evoke kids all day. This is probably much easier done with Tortured Existence, but none of the dealers had any, so whatever. I went with zero Breakthrough, because not only did I not need it, I had enough discard outlets that I didn't have to One for Nothing myself to do anything relevant-like Careful Study while keeping a Faerie Macabre in grip, nullifying a Snapcaster Mage completely. Or holding on to a Firestorm vs RUG Delver, or keeping Wispmare back against Enchantress.

Overall, I could have easily played -2 Chain of Vapor, +2 Wispmare, but then I may have had to run -1 Aura Thief, +1 Angel of Despair.

As for the spell portion of Cephalid Coliseum, no. I never missed it once. I actually left one copy in as you notice, just in case I could recur it with a Sun Titan, and didn't have an LED-Faithless Looting in the graveyard, or if I had an extra open mana. Most of the time I would just win by Dread Return on Sun Titan-bring back Thug-Therapy, sac Thug, trigger Thug, put anti-hate or Narcomoeba back on top, continue mind twisting them.

---

I have a few more inquiries that I'm curious about:

• Would going down to [2x] Dread Return have been enough in the main deck?
• How often did you keep a hand without a dredger? I'd like to ask about this because I find myself becoming more and more comfortable with keeping hands without dredgers if I had at least 2 Careful Study effects in it.

Kind Regards,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

[*]Would going down to [2x] Dread Return have been enough in the main deck?[*]How often did you keep a hand without a dredger? I'd like to ask about this because I find myself becoming more and more comfortable with keeping hands without dredgers if I had at least 2 Careful Study effects in it.

---

Two returns would have been fine, the third just gives you better percentages to reanimate a fatty, even if it's just troll. Usually I run two main, one board, but it actually made boarding a little easier to be able to pull a dread return and not affect the deck's consistancy.

Regarding keeping hands without a dredge card, I would rather not talk about it. You have to be a masochist to mulligan dredge. It's so painful. So many hands were one card away from absolutely broken. I was told I woke someone up at 6am because I screamed "no more mulligans!" in my sleep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laststepdown

Two returns would have been fine, the third just gives you better percentages to reanimate a fatty, even if it's just troll. Usually I run two main, one board, but it actually made boarding a little easier to be able to pull a dread return and not affect the deck's consistancy.

Regarding keeping hands without a dredge card, I would rather not talk about it. You have to be a masochist to mulligan dredge. It's so painful. So many hands were one card away from absolutely broken. I was told I woke someone up at 6am because I screamed "no more mulligans!" in my sleep.

---

I personally hate mulligans too, which is why I've been trying my best to minimize the probability of having to mulligan. I guess that it comes with the territory of handling cards that prefer to be in the graveyard (or in the library) rather than in our hands.

Thanks for the input.

Cheers,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laststepdown

Two returns would have been fine, the third just gives you better percentages to reanimate a fatty, even if it's just troll. Usually I run two main, one board, but it actually made boarding a little easier to be able to pull a dread return and not affect the deck's consistancy.

Regarding keeping hands without a dredge card, I would rather not talk about it. You have to be a masochist to mulligan dredge. It's so painful. So many hands were one card away from absolutely broken. I was told I woke someone up at 6am because I screamed "no more mulligans!" in my sleep.

---

Thing is, any number of non-dredging cards decrease the decks consistency.
If your goal is to win as fast as possible (let's say using Dread Return as a speed increase, while I actually think any number of Dread Returns decreases the decks avarage speed) there is a number of Returns that are needed, to reliably hit it but any copies above that hurt the deck.
Also, why do you even bother to run Anti- Burn/ storm cards that are really complicated to use(Gnaw to the Bone), if you could just run a dedicated return target? I really think Gnaw to the Bone is worse than Iona on every level.
As to mulliganing:
I don't know if its because of my version of the deck( I actually don't believe this) but I don't have much trouble mulliganing with Dredge. I also mulligan almost every hand with a dredger but without accelleration or Putrid Imp while I'm on the play. I do not, however, mulligan a hand with e.g. LED, Looting, Study, Land,Land, Therapy, Ichorid.
On the draw however, mulliganing with Dredge is almost a nonissue to me. You can keep almost every hand and start dredging turn 2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HokusSchmokus

Thing is, any number of non-dredging cards decrease the decks consistency.
If your goal is to win as fast as possible (let's say using Dread Return as a speed increase, while I actually think any number of Dread Returns decreases the decks avarage speed) there is a number of Returns that are needed, to reliably hit it but any copies above that hurt the deck.
Also, why do you even bother to run Anti- Burn/ storm cards that are really complicated to use(Gnaw to the Bone), if you could just run a dedicated return target? I really think Gnaw to the Bone is worse than Iona on every level.
As to mulliganing:
I don't know if its because of my version of the deck( I actually don't believe this) but I don't have much trouble mulliganing with Dredge. I also mulligan almost every hand with a dredger but without accelleration or Putrid Imp while I'm on the play. I do not, however, mulligan a hand with e.g. LED, Looting, Study, Land,Land, Therapy, Ichorid.
On the draw however, mulliganing with Dredge is almost a nonissue to me. You can keep almost every hand and start dredging turn 2.

---

Gnaw to the Bone actually reminds me more of Ancestor's Chosen rather than Iona, Shield of Emeria; and I would probably agree with the fact that a Dread Return target might be more worthwhile inclusion given that the deck does expect to DR frequently, though it won't be at instant-speed (which will hardly be an issue).

My most recent builds have also been much less of a problem in terms of having to mulligan - it might be worth noting that both our builds (if I remember correctly) no longer use Dread Return, a tweak that most certainly helped in lessening the need for mulligans.

It seems that I am not alone in keeping hands with more than one Careful Study effect and no dredgers. Would you keep a hand with lands, Putrid Imp, dredgers, but no acceleration?

Kind Regards,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

Gnaw to the Bone actually reminds me more of Ancestor's Chosen rather than Iona, Shield of Emeria; and I would probably agree with the fact that a Dread Return target might be more worthwhile inclusion given that the deck does expect to DR frequently, though it won't be at instant-speed (which will hardly be an issue).

My most recent builds have also been much less of a problem in terms of having to mulligan - it might be worth noting that both our builds (if I remember correctly) no longer use Dread Return, a tweak that most certainly helped in lessening the need for mulligans.

It seems that I am not alone in keeping hands with more than one Careful Study effect and no dredgers. Would you keep a hand with lands, Putrid Imp, dredgers, but no acceleration?

Kind Regards,
jares

---

Probably yes. If I know what Deck I'm up against, my decision will of course vary. Also depends if I am on the draw or on the play. E.g. on the draw against a controllish deck, I'd keep this hand but will DDD until I hit another Dredger so I can cope with Imp getting countered. Against combo or fast aggro, I probably won't keep.

Iona vs storm isn't always a win, and gnaw never got brought in if sun titan was boarded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

It seems that I am not alone in keeping hands with more than one Careful Study effect and no dredgers.

---

I have had hands with multiple draw effects and no dredgers that would easily lead to turn three kills on the play.

In games two/three when playing against slower decks, a hand with multiple lands and draw effects and no dredgers is sometimes the preferred hand. You can sculpt and dig for hate easier with those hands.

Just to feed the discution about LED lists:

I was joking with a friend this weekend that if I have this following 4 cards (LED, Breaktrough, GGT, land) in my opening hand I`m 95% sure I won the match, not mattering witch other cards I have.

Of couse it is not true, but it is a funny and feasible situation on Dredge.

I just want to highlight the point that LED can be a carefull study at 0 cost that allow you to discard your hand before start drawing.

Thinking in opening hands including LED... what is the feasibility to have an opening hand with this combination: LED +land +Dredger +Draw spell ... it is high since this deck was built to do it.

One thing I can notice following all the arguments in this forum is that the deck will adapt it self to the way the player`s brain works. I mean, If you are an "All in" player you will see the game and drive your deck this way. In other hand, if you think about going the secure mode ... your eyes will find a way to use the cards to go this way.

What about a hand like <no Lands, LED, Looting + 2xDredgers> ??

Then, lets think about the boarding plan...
it depends on the match, but it is commom to think about how to get an anti-hate... so CS + Looting help on it. and why not to keep LED to accelerate again then...

I use to SB out 1xLED, 1x Breaktrough, 1x Ichorid and 3x cards of the DR package when I Side in +6 anti-hate...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dravus Mallinard

Just to feed the discution about LED lists:

I was joking with a friend this weekend that if I have this following 4 cards (LED, Breaktrough, GGT, land) in my opening hand I`m 95% sure I won the match, not mattering witch other cards I have.

Of couse it is not true, but it is a funny and feasible situation on Dredge.

I just want to highlight the point that LED can be a carefull study at 0 cost that allow you to discard your hand before start drawing.

Thinking in opening hands including LED... what is the feasibility to have an opening hand with this combination: LED +land +Dredger +Draw spell ... it is high since this deck was built to do it.

One thing I can notice following all the arguments in this forum is that the deck will adapt it self to the way the player`s brain works. I mean, If you are an "All in" player you will see the game and drive your deck this way. In other hand, if you think about going the secure mode ... your eyes will find a way to use the cards to go this way.

What about a hand like <no Lands, LED, Looting + 2xDredgers> ??

Then, lets think about the boarding plan...
it depends on the match, but it is commom to think about how to get an anti-hate... so CS + Looting help on it. and why not to keep LED to accelerate again then...

I use to SB out 1xLED, 1x Breaktrough, 1x Ichorid and 3x cards of the DR package when I Side in +6 anti-hate...

---

LED is also a liability in situations where you don't necessarily want to dump your hand into your graveyard, and it can also create awkward mulligans where you have one in hand but no draw spell (this includes Coliseum).

LED is an all in card for sure, but why does everyone want to sideboard them out?

You don't see ANT/TES sideboarding out their LEDs ever, and it is just as much an all in card in their decks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laststepdown

Iona vs storm isn't always a win, and gnaw never got brought in if sun titan was boarded.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laststepdown

I wouldn't recommend Gnaw without Sun Titan to get back LED, as getting 3 mana is far-fetched, and you want to win or have game on table by turn 2, effectively.

---

+40 Life isnt always a win vs storm either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hollywood

LED is also a liability in situations where you don't necessarily want to dump your hand into your graveyard, and it can also create awkward mulligans where you have one in hand but no draw spell (this includes Coliseum).

---

That is certainly true.
However, I used LED as a poor man's Phantasmagorian before, it works, too.( though it hurts a bit to crack in upkeep/eot)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dravus Mallinard

Thinking in opening hands including LED... what is the feasibility to have an opening hand with this combination: LED +land +Dredger +Draw spell ... it is high since this deck was built to do it.

---

Maybe the following figures can help with the above considerations.

Consider the following:

• 60-card deck
• [4x] Lion's Eye Diamond in the deck
• [12x] Lands (including non-gold lands, for simplicity's sake)
• [12x] Dredgers
• [12x] Draw Spells (Breakthrough, Careful Study, Faithless Looting)

Probabilities:

• Probability to have at least [1x] Lion's Eye Diamond in your opening hand: 39.95%
• Probability to have at least [1x] Lion's Eye Diamond AND at least [1x] land in your opening hand: 30.16%
• Probability to have at least [1x] Lion's Eye Diamond AND at least [1x] land AND at least [1x] Dredger in your opening hand: 20.70%
• Probability to have at least [1x] Lion's Eye Diamond AND at least [1x] land AND at least [1x] Dredger AND at least [1x] Draw Spell in your opening hand: 12.44%

In summary, the scenario that you're describing will happen around once every nine games, given that the build of the deck runs the full set of dredgers and draw spells, and packs an average number of lands (for LED builds).

I believe that there has never been a lack of enthusiasm and praise for what LED is able to contribute to Dredge - in fact, no other card can compare to what it's able to bring to the table (pun intended). What seems to often be ignored, though, are the other interactions of the card other than just "going-off", which may or may not be as important, depending on what one is trying to achieve with a certain deck build. It might be more worthwhile to explore these avenues that currently aren't as obvious.

Cheers,
jares

I don't know enough math to actually back this up but isn't the chance a bit higher? I mean you have ~40% for every card of your 7-card hand. Dunno, seems off a bit.

Edit: if the number is right tho, it is absolutely not understandable for me to run another configuration than 4-off good cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

Maybe the following figures can help with the above considerations.

Consider the following:

• 60-card deck
• [4x] Lion's Eye Diamond in the deck
• [12x] Lands (including non-gold lands, for simplicity's sake)
• [12x] Dredgers
• [12x] Draw Spells (Breakthrough, Careful Study, Faithless Looting)

Probabilities:

• Probability to have at least [1x] Lion's Eye Diamond in your opening hand: 39.95%
• Probability to have at least [1x] Lion's Eye Diamond AND at least [1x] land in your opening hand: 30.16%
• Probability to have at least [1x] Lion's Eye Diamond AND at least [1x] land AND at least [1x] Dredger in your opening hand: 20.70%
• Probability to have at least [1x] Lion's Eye Diamond AND at least [1x] land AND at least [1x] Dredger AND at least [1x] Draw Spell in your opening hand: 12.44%

In summary, the scenario that you're describing will happen around once every nine games, given that the build of the deck runs the full set of dredgers and draw spells, and packs an average number of lands (for LED builds).

I believe that there has never been a lack of enthusiasm and praise for what LED is able to contribute to Dredge - in fact, no other card can compare to what it's able to bring to the table (pun intended). What seems to often be ignored, though, are the other interactions of the card other than just "going-off", which may or may not be as important, depending on what one is trying to achieve with a certain deck build. It might be more worthwhile to explore these avenues that currently aren't as obvious.

Cheers,
jares

---

Sorry, but this is not the correct hypotesis !!!

The correct question is: With LED already on my hand, what are the chances to have 1 land +1Dredger +1Draw spell ??? it seems to be around 31% ... I like the idea !!!

Remember you are questioning LED liability ... not the Deck liability !!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HokusSchmokus

I used LED as a poor man's Phantasmagorian before

---

I know how you meant it, but this sentence made my day. ^_^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HokusSchmokus

I don't know enough math to actually back this up but isn't the chance a bit higher? I mean you have ~40% for every card of your 7-card hand. Dunno, seems off a bit.

---

I actually made a mistake when I did the math for this for the first time (which suspiciously gave much higher results), but then I realized this: the probability is expected to be this small because you're calculating the probability of an event happening, given that another event already happened. This is why I also showed the probabilities step-by-step, to illustrate that realization:

• You have a 39.95% chance of getting a LED in your first 7 cards.
• You have a 30.16% chance of getting a LED in one of your first 7 cards while also getting a land in the other 6 cards.
• You have a 20.70% chance of getting a LED and a land in two of your first 7 cards while also getting a dredger in the other 5 cards.
• Etc...

Now that you mentioned it, I might actually have been wrong again, because the probabilities I used took into account the possibility of getting more than one of these cards, when in fact, we were really calculating the probability of getting exactly one - this might just be nitpicking though :laugh: (take note that the probabilities would go even lower if we didn't consider the cumulative probability of getting more than one card). For now, these numbers would seem to be sufficient for our considerations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HokusSchmokus

Edit: if the number is right tho, it is absolutely not understandable for me to run another configuration than 4-off good cards.

---

I'm glad that you came to the same conclusion. It's worth noting, though, that the changes to these numbers whenever we "cheat" on shaving-off a good card are very subtle - somewhere around 3-4% for cards that have around 10-14 "copies". The changes become more drastic when applied to cards that are more scarce (e.g. sideboard inclusions, etc.). Of course, we're only considering the probabilities from the context of an opening hand here - the numbers for when we're dredging are much more complicated :confused:.

I hope that helps.

Cheers,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

I actually made a mistake when I did the math for this for the first time (which suspiciously gave much higher results), but then I realized this: the probability is expected to be this small because you're calculating the probability of an event happening, given that another event already happened. This is why I also showed the probabilities step-by-step, to illustrate that realization:

• You have a 39.95% chance of getting a LED in your first 7 cards.
• You have a 30.16% chance of getting a LED in one of your first 7 cards while also getting a land in the other 6 cards.
• You have a 20.70% chance of getting a LED and a land in two of your first 7 cards while also getting a dredger in the other 5 cards.
• Etc...

Now that you mentioned it, I might actually have been wrong again, because the probabilities I used took into account the possibility of getting more than one of these cards, when in fact, we were really calculating the probability of getting exactly one - this might just be nitpicking though :laugh: (take note that the probabilities would go even lower if we didn't consider the cumulative probability of getting more than one card). For now, these numbers would seem to be sufficient for our considerations.

I'm glad that you came to the same conclusion. It's worth noting, though, that the changes to these numbers whenever we "cheat" on shaving-off a good card are very subtle - somewhere around 3-4% for cards that have around 10-14 "copies". The changes become more drastic when applied to cards that are more scarce (e.g. sideboard inclusions, etc.). Of course, we're only considering the probabilities from the context of an opening hand here - the numbers for when we're dredging are much more complicated :confused:.

I hope that helps.

Cheers,
jares

---

What's even worse is that we don't actually NEED cards like dread return AT ALL.
What makes me sad a bit is that if people want to run Dread Return they cut good cards:(
Y U NO CUT BREAKTHROUGH

Sorry... but you are again just calculating the chance the deck can win T1 !!! and even though I like this percentage !!!

However, since the analisys is going around LED, to evaluate the chance to combine it with other cards to create a massive efect you have to take into account LED is already in your hand ...