Printable View
In 4C Thresh, we have had the Snare vs Seize discussion a lot of times. The reason, or at least, my reason to play TS is that it helps in your difficult match-ups: Loam, Muc (with Sowers and stuff), Staxx, Eva Green and anything that runs Intuition and/or Deed. (btw: It takes tombstalkers ;)). Thereby, it's slightly better against combo, since it can take a Chant or Ad, both cards that Spell Snare doesn't counter.
I really don't think Thoughtseize is a card that should be discussed. It's a cornerstone of the dec and imo the best Black spell in the format (if it's better than DC is arguable). The only question regarding Thoughtseize is if 4 is perhaps too many since it's not a good late game topdec. The only MU in which it sucks is Burn and that is negible.
Just curious, does any one else think there's merit in cutting Nimble Mongoose and Wonder for Tombstalkers and turning the deck into a more controlling and mid/end game version of Team America? Instead of aiming for Stifle and Sinkhole, we aim for Intuition and the Wasteland/Raven's Crime lock or just recur threats until we GG. The Intuition, Life from the Loam and Cephalid Coliseum draw engine or Life from the Loam and Raven's Crime lock just has so much synergy with Tombstalker, I can't think of a good reason not to be running him.
Don't do it! Because then you'll be playing my deck.
And nobody's allowed to play my deck...
But seriously Tombstalker is the 2nd best creature in the game of magic.
Just as in Survival, cutting Nimble Mongoose for more high-end creatures will cost you significatively against Goblins (and similar aggro decks - Elves etc.) and very slightly against combo, while paying off almost everywhere else.Quote:
Originally Posted by BreathWeapon
I actually have tested that yeah. I was also incorporating CB into that list and I really couldn't get it to work. Problem is that here your grave matters so that tombstalker can't be played as aggresively as in TA. Also you'd weaken your Goblins MU but also your Landstill MU since this is where mongoose really shines. So I'd propose changes along theses lines.Quote:
Originally Posted by BreathWeapon
- 4 mungo
- 1 Wonder
- 1 Genesis?
+ 3 Tombstalker (My impression from playing TA is that 4 is too many)
+ 3 Spell Snare?
I just finished testing it and it looked promising, the Goblins match up did suffer, but the Combo match up improved because Tombstalker was a much faster clock than Nimble Mongoose. The Control match up was about the same, you may not have Shroud for Swords to Plowshares but you do have a CC for Pernicious Deed, and the 5/5 Flyer is so hard for them to deal with.
Edit: My threat composition was 4 Tarmogoyf, 3 Tombstalker and 1 Gigapede with -4 Nimble Mongoose, -1 Genesis and -1 Wonder.
Just going to say a few things.
- Snuff Out has really been working out very well for me, and I think it’s a keeper. It doesn’t stop Tombstalker, but being free if you want is a huge bonus.
- 3x Wasteland has its ups, the main one being that you no longer (usually) need to fetch it out with Intuition. I’m not enamoured with the manabase, however, and the Wastelands make it a little shaky. If I’m facing mana-hate of some sort, Wasteland becomes a liability.
- The manabase I was testing just doesn’t satisfy me: it caves to only a slight amount of hate, and with Team America and the like cropping up so much more often, I really can’t say that I’m inspired with confidence. I’m going to tinker a bit more, but I’d appreciate input on what would make for a generally steadier manabase. Relying on a single Life from the Loam just doesn’t cut it, so don’t mention that: I know ITF claims it’s enough, but it’s really not. It’s just too slow to fetch it out. It’s possible, however, that another LftL might make a difference: I’m not sure.
- I still feel as I did about Volrath’s Stronghold. With both Stronghold and Genesis, however, the deck is pretty fearsome. If both are available, however, Genesis has tended to prove more useful.
The easiest way to build in life gain would be a single Darkheart Sliver or--dare I say it?--Spore Frog. I tried Darkheart Sliver before, and it was just too gimmicky to keep. Spore Frog might be a way to help with Goblins, Aggro-Loam, and Goyf-Sligh, but on paper it also looks gimmicky. It looks like it would need at least three slots somewhere to be particularly effective there, and I doubt I want to devote more than one slot to it. It would be a rather amusing solution to Ichorid, however.Quote:
Originally Posted by mackaber
As for Thoughtseize, I really don’t think that the fourth Thoughtseize is better than Raven’s Crime. Raven’s Crime has proven to be an amazing resource despite my initial skepticism, and it’s far more effective as Thoughtseize #4.
Duress is an adequate replacement, but the real reason to run Thoughtseize is to add to your removal package. With only 3 ‘Seizes, I think that the life loss is acceptable. Generally, you will want to cast a maximum of two ‘Seizes per game anyway, with Raven’s Crime filling in later and your remaining ‘Seizes being discarded to Coliseum/dredged away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Cynic87
I tested that out this morning, but found that Team America just has a better gameplan if you go that route, simply because the mana denial strategy makes it so much harder to answer Tombstalker. I’m not sure what you mean by the Loam-locks having synergy with Tombstalker... more often than not, I found them to deter me from playing the big guy. You’re right that you can put a lot into the graveyard that way, but that’s more of a late-game tactic than anything else. I wouldn’t mind having maybe two hanging around for that purpose, but then it seems to me that using Wonder to make things fly is just as easy at that point in the game, and far more devastating. Tombstalker’s high cost also makes it harder to cast after grave-hate has been employed. I dunno, I’m not convinced. I think that Team America just does Tombstalker a whole lot better.Quote:
Originally Posted by BreathWeapon
Finally, I don’t think that there’s actually much of a payoff. Not based on the limited testing I did this morning, anyway. The combo boost was negligible, simply because it does nothing to fend off the initial combo, which is my main concern anyway. Once that’s done, it’s easy enough to cruise to victory. Speeding it up by a turn just isn’t a significant boon. It also weakened the deck against ITF (Shackles and StP), Team America, Landstill, and, surprisingly, Threshold (edicts were far more effective, StP was horrible, and I didn’t have enough control to handle counterspells and so on, especially if Counterbalance resolved). Protecting Tombstalker is just too hard unless you smack your opponent’s manabase around, I think.
It would be feasible to cut Wonder and Genesis for two Tombstalkers, and that might work out. It’s basically a permanent Psychatog, after all. If that’s the case, I think I’d like to find some extra room for another Life from the Loam, or other card with Dredge. I’ll look into it and give it a whirl.
Don’t let me discourage you, though. If Tombstalker seems to be working, I’d love to hear about it, and how exactly he’s working. Maybe I’m just too hesitant with him in my playstyle.
First I Must mentionned that I am a Huuuuge fan of intution loam deck (I helped Sakimmd to create togless, as mentionned is this topic (I am Thomas Epelbaum). but since I don't play as well as him and not have time to do as much tournament... history only remeber winners...long story short^^)
then, I must add that I basically agree with all darkalucard said: i find the deck too dependent on intuition and thus on the graveyard. because you rely quite a lot on genesis, you are more sensible to graveyard hate than every other intuition loam deck (ITF, togless). sure, those decks have the same vulnerability when lftl is on the yard, but they don't have "dead cards" if genesis is not on the yard.
Wonder? as said, it's the worst topdeck possible
GIgapede? sure it's a good card, but stalker is cheaper, fly without wonder...
cephalid colliseum? you still play only 19 lands, and if the lftl engine is shut down, that will be a bad island that SOMETIME cycle one or two lands.
And I think this must be take into account very seriously since every decent deck packs a lot of graveyard hate (ichorid has rule legacy during several months).
IMO, the deck should play 21 lands with 4 waste and 1 volrath.
with the free slots, they are several option:
- stalker, this guy doesn't need presentation.
- bob: if we take out genesis, one of the CA engine is shut down. why not include this one? the deck kills fast enough, so the life loss is not so relevant (about 1.5 per turn in average)
- I wonder if, because we already play 4 waste, the mana denial plan could fit here. this means 4 stifle -> 4 nought 2 trickbind. I know this sounds weird, but in a metagame infest of blood moon effect, 12/12 and blast( I play a heavy survival goyf sligh dreadstill like metagame), this looks like a strong plan B.
my list:
-4 polluted
-2 flooded
-1 island
-1 swamp
-4 tropical
-4 underground
-4 waste
-1 volrath
-4 tarmo
-4 bob
-4 nought
-1 imp (this guy steals a TON of games)
-3 deed
-4 brainstorm
-3 intuition
-1 lftl
-1 raven's crime
-4 Fow
-4 stifle
-4 daze
-2 trickbind
if the plan is more to fit with the original spirit of the list:
-4 polluted
-2 wooded
-1 windseapth
-1 forest
-1 island
-1 swamp
-3 tropical
-3 underground
-4 waste
-1 volrath
-4 tarmo
-4 bob
-4 mangoose
-1 imp
-3 deed
-4 brainstorm
-3 intuition
-1 lftl
-1 raven's crime
-4 Fow
-3 spell snare
-4 daze
-3 seize
only 18 blue cards in the second list..
Thank you for your comments, Solknar. I disagree with most, but that doesn't mean they're not appreciated. If you're currently playing some version of the deck, I'd like to hear about your testing results.
No cards are dead if Genesis is not in the yard; you just can't recur things. Similarly, you can't recur things with Stronghold unless you have dead creatures. You'll notice that the version that I'm currently playing runs Stronghold in addition to Genesis. The problem is that Stronghold eats a draw, and this loss of card advantage, while insignificant over a turn, becomes VERY serious if it's repeated over several turns (e.g. recurring Shriekmaw). I actually think that running both is best.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solknar
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "reliance on Intuition". Intuition helps the deck to steamroll its opponent; that's the whole point of running it, and so some sort of reliance is to be expected. The deck runs perfectly well without casting Intuition (thanks to the cantrip engine and similarity to Threshold), but being able to cast it helps it to react (or pre-act) that much more efficiently. If we look at the lists you posted, for example, I don't see much reason to be running Intuition at all: it's become a glorified cantrip, but perhaps less consistent in its effect on the game-state.
As said by who? Hanni and I have tested the most with this deck: I think it's fair to say we each have more experience with it than most posters here combined. We've provided reasons why we feel it's so good; the onus is on you to show us why not. I can tell you that I've often tested without it, and I always go back to it, for reasons that I've mentioned extensively.Quote:
Wonder? as said, it's the worst topdeck possible
The one exception I can see is if it's decided that we should run Tombstalker; in that case, running Wonder wouldn't really be feasible or necessary any more. But, as I've mentioned, I have reasons to doubt that Tombstalker is the way to go.
Tombstalker is not cheaper: yes, you can delve for it, but it requires you to sacrifice potential resources in your graveyard. You must also consider that this deck doesn't put things in the graveyard quite as fast as Threshold or Team America, meaning that Tombstalker is going to come out later and eat up significant graveyard resources. This deck also doesn't have the same resources as TA for capitalizing on/protecting Tombstalker.Quote:
GIgapede? sure it's a good card, but stalker is cheaper, fly without wonder...
Hanni and I have explained at length our reasons for running Gigapede. I don't see that any of these have yet been compromised.
You seem to be assuming that the deck relies on Coliseum rather heavily; Coliseum pulls its weight even if you can't recur it by performing one of two functions:Quote:
cephalid colliseum? you still play only 19 lands, and if the lftl engine is shut down, that will be a bad island that SOMETIME cycle one or two lands.
1.) Discarding Incarnations (obviously).
2.) Acting as a card quality filter. Cards like Thoughtseize, for example, are useless in the late game, when Raven's Crime is simply better. Coliseum allows you to trade cards that don't work in a certain situation for cards that will. Or, rather, it brings you closer to cards that will, and usually nabs at least one (such as a threat). Cycling lands are simply inefficient because they take up slots, come into play tapped, and can't really be played as lands.
This deck can run pretty well without a graveyard, and we've explained how and why. Yes, there are difficulties with hate--that's the case for any deck--but they can be dealt with pretty easily. The only really graveyard-dependent part of the deck is the recursion that enables an extended control role: the version I'm currently testing, you'll notice, gets around that by running Stronghold in addition to Genesis. That's the most that can be done, however: even Stronghold can't recur creatures that have been removed from the graveyard. You just have to play around the hate, and that's not all that hard. Part of the reason for that, in fact, is that you can tutor up a Wonder for a massive Tarmogoyf strike at any moment, an advantage obviously lost if the card is cut.Quote:
And I think this must be take into account very seriously since every decent deck packs a lot of graveyard hate (ichorid has rule legacy during several months).
I'm currently running 3 Wastelands and 1 Stronghold (as well as Genesis). Already, this is rough on the manabase, and significantly weakens matches against decks that hate the manabase. 4 Wastelands would be too much for too little payoff, in my opinion. 3 works, but I think it needs an overhaul.Quote:
IMO, the deck should play 21 lands with 4 waste and 1 volrath.
I'd like to see a presentation, actually. I've tested with Tombstalker in early incarnations of the deck and recently, and I've presented a case against using it as a main creature. As a Psychatog replacement (so, maybe a 2-of), maybe. Any more than that, though, and I think that we're really compromising the deck's integrity to achieve things that other decks already do better.Quote:
with the free slots, they are several option:
- stalker, this guy doesn't need presentation.
Out of the question: please refer to my initial two posts to see why not. The average mana cost is just too high, and we also run fetchlands, Thoughtseize, and Force of Will. Couple that with Tombstalker, and you'll be lucky to win any games.Quote:
- bob: if we take out genesis, one of the CA engine is shut down. why not include this one? the deck kills fast enough, so the life loss is not so relevant (about 1.5 per turn in average)
Stifle is a possibility. I don't think that maindecking it is the solution, though: decks like Team America have a much stronger mana denial plan already, and I think that if we commit to this kind of plan, we have to sacrifice this deck in favour of Team America. Tombstalker obviously plays into TA's gameplan very nicely: the deck denies its opponents resources and drops a huge flying threat very early on, making it very hard to deal with it--especially through a wall of counterspells and removal.Quote:
- I wonder if, because we already play 4 waste, the mana denial plan could fit here. this means 4 stifle -> 4 nought 2 trickbind. I know this sounds weird, but in a metagame infest of blood moon effect, 12/12 and blast( I play a heavy survival goyf sligh dreadstill like metagame), this looks like a strong plan B.
As far as Dreadnought goes... well, it's possible, but again, I worry that Dreadstill already does that better, and trying to work that plan into this deck is just to make the deck too schizophrenic. By all means, try it and report your results, but I have strong initial concerns. It's also worth noting that your whole argument against 3 of the cards in this deck (Genesis, Wonder, and Coliseum) has been that they need other cards to be useful (and again, I don't think that argument holds much water here); the same applies to this plan.
One question that your comments invite is just how important the cantrip engine is. It does, after all, take up quite a lot of slots that could be devoted to other cards. That's a fair question, and worth asking.
@ Goaswerfraiejen
It's hard to take your posts seriously when your defending cards that are absolutely horrible and not playable in Legacy at all. We are all posting on here because we love the idea/concept of the deck, some of us playing around with the same core soul of the deck. But seriously how can you defend such horrible cards? I've looked up your past versions of this deck and it seems to me that you just cant let go of all T2 decks in the days of Madnes s and Psychatog. Sure these cards can be good/cool but we are talking competative here.
Here is a list of cards not playable in Legacy that you have stood by over the past year:
Wild Mongrel
Psychatog
Genesis (Besides Survival)
Wonder
Gigapede (IBA Decks don't count.)
Ghastly Demise
Cephalid Coliseum (Besides Ichorid)
I would go so far as to even say Pernicious Deed isn't playable in Legacy. At least in a deck with 19 Lands and 8x Creatures that is obviouslly confused or a well disguised aggro-control deck which shouldn't play Deed. Deed is only playable I think strictly in control decks.
I love the soul of the deck but I will not play cards that do not match up in todays competative events.
I have posted tangible reasons for the cards that I've included. I'd like to be done the courtesy of the same when other cards are suggested in their stead. Forgive me if that is unreasonable.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkalucard
For the record: "X is a good card" is not an argument for its inclusion, nor is it an argument for why it would be good in this deck.
You'll notice I'm not dismissing suggestions out of hand: I'm explaining why I disagree, providing arguments for the inclusion of other cards where such things have been asked for, and stating what my concerns are when it comes to other cards. At that point, dissenters have to take up the challenge and show me that my concerns can be placated by their strategies.
How else do you suggest I tackle the issue?
You need to recognize that this deck was originally a Psychatog deck, hence its initial similarities. It has since progressed beyond that, but it's natural that some ideas might stick. If these ideas are what inform the deck, then they are the core/soul of the deck...Quote:
But seriously how can you defend such horrible cards? I've looked up your past versions of this deck and it seems to me that you just cant let go of all T2 decks in the days of Madnes s and Psychatog. Sure these cards can be good/cool but we are talking competative here.
Also, for the record, I have never played T2.
Quote:
Here is a list of cards not playable in Legacy that you have stood by over the past year:
Wild Mongrel
Psychatog
Genesis (Besides Survival)
Wonder
Gigapede (IBA Decks don't count.)
Ghastly Demise
Cephalid Coliseum (Besides Ichorid)
And fully 50% of those cards have been replaced because it was determined through testing and dialogue that they didn't pull their weight throughout a changing metagame. This is how the scientific method works: it endorses a paradigm and gradually, as anomalies crop up, that paradigm is revised and then discarded for a new one. Seems to me that this is an excellent approach to deckbuilding; what else do you suggest?
Also, let me point this out: if the argument against a particular card is that it should be replaced by another, and if I show that alternative to be less desirable, why adopt the alternative? I am thinking, for example, of Cephalid Coliseum: it has been suggested over and over that it be replaced by cycling lands which, as I've argued, are rather worse. If you disagree, then show why my arguments against cycling lands and for Coliseum do not apply or are invalid. Don't just approach the issue by making categorical statements and then expecting me to comply. If I show you the courtesy of taking your suggestions seriously and presenting my concerns with the issue, I'd like to see you do the same (this is a general you, not you specifically).
What is the real issue here? Is it the absence of Tombstalker? If so, then I think that I've explained my concerns with that issue already. I will absolutely run Tombstalker if those issues can be overcome without turning this deck into a bad version of Team America. If not, then why should I?
That's possible. So make the case against Deed, present it in detail, and suggest an alternative that plays better into the deck's overall structure. I'm perfectly open to cutting Deed; my question is only "what for?"Quote:
I would go so far as to even say Pernicious Deed isn't playable in Legacy. At least in a deck with 19 Lands and 8x Creatures that is obviouslly confused or a well disguised aggro-control deck which shouldn't play Deed. Deed is only playable I think strictly in control decks.
I'm not asking you to play suboptimal cards. I'm asking you to present arguments for your card choices so that the relative merits of all of the cards in question can be tested. EDIT: Again, a general you. You'll notice that the deck I'm currently running is much closer to your own suggestions, and I've talked at length now about what I like and dislike about it. I think I'm being more than fair.Quote:
I love the soul of the deck but I will not play cards that do not match up in todays competative events.
Most of all your list and card choices doesn't seem very solid. I don't know how much you have tested this deck competitively, or how much you have played with it. It seems to me that you have allot of testing ahead of you. If I'm wrong let me know. It's just the impression I got. Anyways I'm interested to know how your testing goes.
@ darkalucard
It's hard to take you seriously when you think Accumulated Knowledge is a good card in Legacy.Quote:
It's hard to take your posts seriously when your defending cards that are absolutely horrible and not playable in Legacy at all. We are all posting on here because we love the idea/concept of the deck, some of us playing around with the same core soul of the deck. But seriously how can you defend such horrible cards? I've looked up your past versions of this deck and it seems to me that you just cant let go of all T2 decks in the days of Madnes s and Psychatog. Sure these cards can be good/cool but we are talking competative here.
Here is a list of cards not playable in Legacy that you have stood by over the past year:
Wild Mongrel
Psychatog
Genesis (Besides Survival)
Wonder
Gigapede (IBA Decks don't count.)
Ghastly Demise
Cephalid Coliseum (Besides Ichorid)
I would go so far as to even say Pernicious Deed isn't playable in Legacy. At least in a deck with 19 Lands and 8x Creatures that is obviouslly confused or a well disguised aggro-control deck which shouldn't play Deed. Deed is only playable I think strictly in control decks.
I love the soul of the deck but I will not play cards that do not match up in todays competative events.
Just because certain cards were supported in earlier versions does not give either Goas or myself less credibility. Regardless of how much experience you think you have with this sort of deck concept, you're opinions fall short.
You greatly undervalue and clearly misunderstand some key concepts and some key cards to the deck.
Pernicious Deed is not playable in Legacy? Aside from how rediculous I think that statement is, you again fail to understand the reasoning behind how and why we are able to run the card in the deck.
The deck doesn't utilize Pernicious Deed unless it switches into control mode (unless it needs to come back from behind for whatever reason, like against Goblins or something). To switch into the control role, the deck relies on Intuition. This does not in any way mean the deck relies on Intuition whatsoever to play and win games; it simply means it needs it to effectively switch into the control role. Once Intuition resolves, Loam creates consistent land drops regardless of total land count in the deck, and therefore enables Pernicious Deed and the other mana hungry control cards in the deck (namely Genesis).
Intuition needs to be looked at like Survival in this deck; both serve a similar function, with this deck running less creatures and blue based control rather than more creatures and black based control. Intuition creates more mana (land drops), similar to Birds/Rofellos being grabbed with Survival. Intuition sets up Genesis creature recursion to cause card advantage via creatures, similar to Survival. The deck is obviously different, but considering Intuition an (card advantage) engine card in a similar fashion to the way Survival operates is important for understanding Intuition's role in this deck.
You fail to realize the elegance between Pernicious Deed and Genesis. You can Deed your creatures knowing that you're getting your guys back. The card advantage generated by both of those cards rivals card advantage cards like Standstill, especially when you throw Loam into the mix. Card advantage is crucical to being a control deck; Pernicious Deed, Genesis, and Loam are all fantastic at generating card advantage.
How can you possibly think Volrath's Stronghold is a good card, yet criticise Genesis? Do you even recognize the difference between the two? Genesis is a means of card advantage, Stronghold is simply card parody. Compare using Genesis twice (+2 CA) to Stronghold twice (+0 CA), and you'll notice that it's comparable to the difference between Ancestral Recall and Ponder (as an abstract, not as a literal comparison).
Wonder is simply in the deck because he gives everything flying. Since it's not very hard for the deck to get cards into the graveyard, especially specific cards, why not include it as a 1-of? At it's worst, yea, it's pretty bad; 3U for a 2/2 flyer is not very good. It's still not worthless though. Wonder has always been a debatable spot; I personally find flying invaluable in some games. Others don't like it, and so they don't run it.
Gigapede. You said in Togless that you think the card is crap, yet I've seen absolutely no worthwhile arguments for why he's crap. Graveyard hate and infinite chump blocking aside, Gigapede is impossible to deal with, has a good power to cost ratio, and provides inevitability independant of Loam. He's the best finisher this deck has access to; far better than Tombstalker, which seems to be what you're suggesting for that spot. I'm not even going to get into much detail about why the card is amazing until I first read a worthwhile argument about why it's bad, and I'm going to have to ask you to actually try the card before you make assumptions or theorizations.
Coliseum is simply in the deck because it is a discard outlet for Genesis/Wonder that operates independant from Gigapede (which is necessary in games 2 and 3 when graveyard hate is available). Since it provides blue mana, it's not a dead card, and it's ability to filter through cards to create card quality isn't bad either. Overall I've often questioned its effectiveness as well, and it is definitely the weakest card in the deck. I am not going to defend its inclusion. The only thing I want to say is that I find the deck to operate a little smoother with it and a little rougher without it.
All I said was AK > Ponder in Togless and there is no room for FoF in the deck for mana curve purposes. Also I didn't say Deed wasn't playable I said it sucks outside of control decks. It's obviously playable in 4C Landstill, ITF, Control Rock decks, etc.
As for the rest of your comments... thats exactly my point.
I don't think I need to say anymore on those card choices.
BTW I didn't argue against Gigapede because it's not a card worth arguing over.
LOL. Why are you even posting in this thread, then? To say that you think that this deck is bad, that Togless is a better deck or something, or that we should conform to your faulty ideas? I'm confused entirely about the purpose of your posts, and I disagree with every single thing you've said in this thread so far. If you can't post any substance about why said cards are bad, and/or why other cards are better, you're doing little more than spamming the thread with worthless information.Quote:
All I said was AK > Ponder in Togless and there is no room for FoF in the deck for mana curve purposes. Also I didn't say Deed wasn't playable I said it sucks outside of control decks. It's obviously playable in 4C Landstill, ITF, Control Rock decks, etc.
As for the rest of your comments... thats exactly my point.
I don't think I need to say anymore on those card choices.
BTW I didn't argue against Gigapede because it's not a card worth arguing over.
Just because the deck doesn't have the same following that ITF, etc, does not make this deck any less relevant. Myself and Goas are unable to play in tournaments and the deck has little to no following, but that by no means equates to other decks like ITF or Togless being strictly better or superior, far from it. I've a great deal of development into this entire hybridized deck concept over the years and to sit there and basically insult the deck with unproven, unsubstantiated claims is, for lack of a better word, retarded.
I like your deck better than ITF, and I do not play Togless Tog.
Edit: I also see Strengths and Weaknesses in all three decks Yours, ITF, Togless, and Mine. I'm mainly hoping to perfect a balance between them all.
I just don't want to talk about certain cards in your deck. I agree with allot of the cards purposes but think in the long run something else would be better. Also I haven't seen a consistent list of the deck either because it seems like its still in allot of testing and the people playing the deck are still trying new things.
Other than that we can talk about other things and I will try to be more productive.
BTW Do you have a current decklist Hanni? Or is it the same as the primer?
Edit: Also I have explained allot of my thoughts already in this thread and it seems we are just restating the same things over and over which is why I will drop the discussion on those things.
Gigapede kills quickly and is almost unstoppable, and almost always survives your own Deeds. What exactly is bad about Gigapede?
I think you need an point in order to be part of the conversation.
It doesn't do anything until you get around to actually killing your opponent.Quote:
What exactly is bad about Gigapede?
edit: It still might mean you have to play it, but it's probably the card I would hate the most.
Seeing that I have tested this dec considerably and am also the dude with the most actual tournament sucess with this dec I'd like to bring up some thoughts about the dec which actually feed into both sides of the above argument (not the one about Gigapede).
I personally have after some sucess with the dec abandoned it again after stumbling over a few problems I just couldn't handle. As Hanni and Goas have correctly argued this is a Hybrid-dec, not just an aggro control dec which attempts to sustain a clock with control elements but a dec that can either attempt to go the aggro control route or play a real control game with intuition functioning as the CA engine.
While this strategy has it's merits, especially versus control decs but also against permanent heavy aggro/aggrocontrol decs which deed totally rapes it comes with a built in disadvantage: that of inconsisteny.
This is due to a number of issues and I will attempt to adress them accordingly:
a) Inability to play the primary role of the aggro dec.
This is a scenario I have witnessed quite often and it usually goes something like this: I'm playing against combo and I have gotten out of the gates well enough with a beater on the board and some early disruption in form of thoughtseize I'll need either two or three more turns for the kill while I know my opponent will likely be one quicker and my sole FoW is likely not enough to protect. I cast brainstorm in the hopes to either up the clock with another dude or draw more disruption to grind him out and brainstorm gives me deed, wonder, bayou or something such and I'll lose because of it.
b) Dissynergies, Situationality and the weakness of one offs
Even if Genesis recycles critters after deeding no one can deny that there is some inherent dissynergy between mongoose and deed. Dazing stuff on turn 2 is swell but if it keeps you a turn further away from intuition it really blows. Raven's Crime/Loam rocks the socks of of any Control or StormCombo dec but what does crime do on it's own? It's frikkin funeral charm. And while I've actaully done 20 damage to a landstill opponent with a sole Wonder I really don't want to enjoy the sensation again any time in the near future. Gigapede can work wonders in the lategame but early on it just hangs in my hand and reminisces of the good ol days of Onslaught block when it actually wasn't overcosted.
c) The dependence on Intuition (and also on Loam)
Just like Hanni said Intuition is to this as Survival is to Survival. Well do you see Survival winning often without it's namesake on the board? Well maybe with lot's of thoughtseizes and Goyfs you might reply. This dec can too and actually better than survival but you won't win the lategame without resolving intuition.
d) Clunkyness
Intuition for Lft, colluseum, genesis. Dredge lftl. Play colluseum sac next turn use genesis to get back a goyf and play it in the following turn. With this move you paid a total of 7 mana and a landrop before netting actual dividends from intuition and a full 10 mana and 2 full turns before getting a dude back on the board.
Another point which adds to clunkyness is the fact that the dec runs 7 3-mana spells with 18-19 lands.
Overall I think there's just too many cards in the dec that are dependent on the combination with some other cards or which only shine in certain situations. While yeah this makes the dec an awesome toolbox and a helloflaot of fun to play it also makes it inconsistent. I think to make the dec truly competetive we have to reevaluate the usefullness of a lot of cards and streamline the build foregoing some of the nifty tricks. The problem of this approach is that by doing so we will likely worsen the decs lategame and thus take away from it's attractiveness.