Kay, did you run 19 lands? 61 cards but only 18 lands (especially with 2 Arbors) would have been crazy gambling
@Dice_Box
Judge FOIL Cradle or it doesn't count ;)
Printable View
Kay, did you run 19 lands? 61 cards but only 18 lands (especially with 2 Arbors) would have been crazy gambling
@Dice_Box
Judge FOIL Cradle or it doesn't count ;)
Judge foils are for next years Tax. Good god I have spent so much on Magic this year. Hell I just built painter and lets not talk about what that cost ON TOP of changing my elves from mono green to what it is today. I would also be more interested in Judge NO's over Cradles. They look sick Holo.
On Dryad.
2 is not a number I like. Ok yes the card is most effective when I do not see it, when its still tucked away in the library, but sometimes you just have to deal with a dead draw. I do not want to increase my chances of a dead draw just so I can have some redundancy against said draw. Yes I do get that having two opens more options with fetch's and NO, but dam, I can deal just fine having one game in ten go south because of this one little quirk not being available to me. The reason is that 4 games in ten I was draw that dreaded card and have more or less time walked myself. Also in my mind Dryad is a creature and there are far better Creature choices in this deck.
Anyway, four Birchlore? I like that, drawing towards that myself. On three right now but I really want to go four. No real issues with that plan. I think I have made this suggestion myself in the past.
On the topic of doing badly, I have had some rotten luck these past 2 weeks. I can put down two games to testing bad hands intentionally knowing that I would have been better off Mulling. But not all were like that. When up against lands with a great hand only without a Tutor knowing I would have at least 6 turns to find one. There was not one for the top 12 cards. Still not putting it down yet. I want to win a week with this deck and I know it's more that able to do so.
How is Dryad Arbor a dead draw? We miss land drops on the reg. A majority of the time, there is no opportunity cost to playing one. Is it ideal? Typically not. But if you also have a Q. Ranger in hand, then I actually enjoy playing Arbor from my hand as an uncounterable blocker with protection. And I (or anyone else) do not play a second to negate the setback of drawing the first. That's actually backwards logic. I play two because I utilize them every single game. They are fetched or GSZed very frequently. I get the impression that I don't value my GSZs as much as Danyul, for example. First turn GSZ for Arbor is an exciting play in my book. I rarely feel any remorse there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
You don't have to play a second Arbor. It's not going to make or break your deck. You also don't have to play four Birchlore, which is basically just streamlined elves. Take a look at the agreed upon configuration:
19 lands
4 GSZ
4 Glimpse
3 NO
26 core creatures
4 meta slots
Birchlore in those slots would definitely help your Glimpse chains, and that would be perfect if your meta is all combo. I agree with that. I'm not about to condone it as the optimal build though. I've tried additional Birchlores as a result of this thread, yet that build lacked some tools I wanted game one. I see a large amount of success with those four slots as Llanowar, Birchlore, Viridian, and Sylvan Library.
@Lemnear. If our board gets swept, we have not likely lost. Granted, that's occasionally true. In my meta, I see Supreme Verdict, Terminus, and Deed. Two of those from as many decks and I can tell you I've won a respectable number of games after being swept. I was struck as very surprised when you said that. It's not likely they have it all: a sweeper, a win condition, and the clock to keep you from rebuilding. It's happened before, but not more often than I see my opponent sweep everything away as desperation.
I say "Dead Draw" because there is almost never a time where I draw a Dryad that either a one drop elf of another land would not have been better in the situation. Fetching them in the opening turns with a GSZ is a common trick yes, it also proves that the best location for the card is not my hand, further pushing the point that I just don't want to draw it.
I guess since I am more or less the only big creature player locally, since the other goblin player has move back overseas, that I can not care much for an uncounterable blocker. Also the term "Uncounterable blocker" seems a touch out of place to me as well since anyone with a working knowledge of the deck is not going to be countering most one drops. That is unless they are going to cause you some kind of massive advantage. Say Symbiote for example when you have Visionary on the table.
As for the trick with Q ranger, its cute and useful yes and maybe once I start pairing up against my friends new U/R/W Delver thing I might have more of a respect for it. But as of right now Q Ranger almost feels to me to be one of the few cards that I can't bring myself to cut because I know how good it is, but I never want to see in my hand because I almost never need the effects it offers me.
Urw Delver and Lightning Blade are both present in my meta. Two guys I play with frequently actually built the deck in the recent weeks. I think specifically to gain an advantage on Elves by having more removal. I can tell you, those MUs are some of the grindiest in memory. In the last tournament, Urw Delver killed 14 elves game one and I still won. Thank you, Sylvan Library. It's actually a really fun MU and it puts your skills to the test.
18 Lands. 1 Arbor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Go big or go home I guess?
I guess the odds for having lands between a 60/19 (card/lands) split compared with 61/18 are clear. I hate mulligans because i have no lands or just Cradles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kayradis
That's assuming 4 Cradle 2 Dryad Arbor, so 12 useable lands for 61/18 and 13 lands for 60/19:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
61/18
Chance to mull for no lands in hand: 19.69%
Chances of 1 or 2 lands: 67.31%
61/18 (but only 1 Dryad Arbor, thus 13 lands)
Chance to mull for no lands in hand: 16.88%
Chances of 1 or 2 lands: 67.18%
60/19
Chance to mull for no lands in hand: 16.28%
Chance of 1 or 2 lands: 67.12%
These two scenarios are not as easily comparable because we're both increasing the size of the deck and removing a land; so that's two steps away. Regardless, insignificant changes between 60/19 (with 2 Dryad Arbors) vs 61/18 (with only 1).
The 60/19 list features only 1 Arbor, like the 61/18 list does, so i expect the numbers for the primer would be much better than the listed 60/19 with 2 Arbors which is pretty much on par with the 61/18/1 Arbor list which is obvious because, in essence it only differs 1 non-land card for calculation
Yeah I need to update that thing. Read it with a grain of salt for now.
How do you like the new Hydra?
2GG
Legendary Creature - Hydra Mythic Rare
{X}{X}{G}: Monstrosity X. (If this creature isn’t monstrous, put X +1/+1 counters on it and it becomes monstrous.)
When Polukranos, World Eater becomes monstrous, it deals X damage divided as you choose among any number of target creatures your opponents control. Each of those creatures deals damage equal to its power to Polukranos.
5/5
I wrote about my plan vs. Candian before. I board out 0 creatures but reduce NO/fattie and board in decay and another ooze (1 ooze maindeck). My plan is to be the control deck. Stalling the ground - killing delver - taking over with a glimpse that resolves, symbiote/visionary and ooze.
To take over with ooze you need essentially 4-5 mana (with GSZ) since you don't want ooze to die to lighnting bolt, which means a "late ooze" has essentially the same costs as the hydra. The hydra cannot gain live but it is immediately bigger than goyf (whereas ooze needs often another turn) and it can pick up delvers.
Against Jund and Shardless the hydra might also be useful since it is very hard for them to deal with it. She is surely much better than ooze in those matchups. In general non-swords decks which do have the potential for strong hate like plague or access to a lot of removal making NO weaker this 4 mana creature is another very good angle.
I'll surely test it out instead of my 2nd ooze in the SB.
Well that did not take long.
The card is good, just not for us. At no point does it really offer anything to either of the two Combo's in the deck. As for Sideboard tec, it offers nothing that Progenitus is not better suited to fix.
yes did indeed not take long for the first dull statement rejecting something new without any reasonable thought or trying it out.
comparing it too progenitus does not make sense. one is an affordable gsz target, the other obv. for natural order. also my primary motivation is also against rug instead of the second ooze where no/prog is just bad.
Ok, what's the cost to GSZ the Hydra (ignore FoW, Daze and Spell Pierce just for the sake of the argument) and getting rid of a mid-size Tarmogoyf?
4G + 4GG!? Pew... that's a bulk even considering you get a 10/10 for that. Will think about it and test then. Test > Theory here
Well gsz for it is indeed weaker to pierce than gsz for ooze, but as i said i dont want to pass the turn with ooze being weak to bolt so as i said ooze is often virtually more expensive.
As for removing goyf, I don't think it's necessary if you can block it. Killing delver is key.
I am with you trying out is necessary. In my list he would be an easy fit instead of ooze #2.
I honestly don't know if it should replace your graveyard hate. I'd rather consider cutting the other Hydra which I find less and less use for. What's your recent experience with the 5-headed-god?Quote:
Originally Posted by catmint
The 2nd ooze is not a dedicated graveyard slot for me. So far i did not test it enough but it partly provides control/wincon which I missed in past rug testing sessions...
Would never consider cutting progenitus just too strong in certain matchups.
Man you have been reading and posting in the Theros thread. You already knew this was everyones view of the card there. Did you expect a hail mary thank god your hear welcome? If so you should have read the last two pages of that thread better.Quote:
Originally Posted by catmint
Comparing to Progenitus makes all the sense in the word. They cost the same. One is an affordable GSZ target that you need to get online that turn to be a true answer to any issue you fetched it for, the other wins the game. After activating the new Hydra's ability you more or less end up spending the same. Also the new one has issues with removal that Progenitus does not. If your issue is Delver decks that is something worth noting.
I am a red player at heart. I want to see some spot removal in my elves but this ain't it. There are much better targets for your fetches, cards that push the combos and force the win. I do understand that sometimes you end up against decks that will flip delvers and cause issues, thats why I run two Jitte in my side. Might not be able to fetch it with a Green sun, but the deck is a drawing machine. You find it fast enough and it too wins games. Something this card I do not think does.
Last, flying creatures in a spell heavy deck getting you down? Thar say's "I can block em and hurt em."
I would advise you not to make your card evaluations based on the first 2 pages in a spoiler thread. :laugh: The community is often soo wrong (deathrite as a recent and drastic example) or just blind to some aspects because of "group thinkers" and "bla bla guys". My description of the evaluation was as outlined primarily for 1 specific slot for 1 specific matchup and I wanted to discuss it with competent elves players. Even if an idea does not make the cut it is worth more evaluating it properly than just repeating some generic comments other players made who are either incompetent or did not give it much thought (refering to the bad quality of posts in the theros thread).Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
A 5/5 on the ground means something for a start. The extra mana can be spent on the next turn to bring down a delver and take control with a 7/7. Apparently our plans against RUG have been different since I am really not a fan of Natural Order in this matchup, but I am open to try it out. Anyway that is not the point why I don't want to compare it with Natural Order. If you play Natural Order and can resolve if for a beast that will win your RUG matchup - fine. My idea of this slot was to provide extra utility for GSZ (or even better naturally drawing it) that we did not have before and could be useful for specific (but fairly common) scenarios. So even though GSZ/NO "cost the same" here, they are still 2 different cards. :tongue: If the slot was about a NO target then we can compare it to that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Think about it: Glimpse and NO are the primary business spell - GSZ doing everything to setup and more but so far besides of combo-like GSZ for Hoof/regal force, Ooze was the "top end" of GSZ targets. I like the idea of GSZ for x=4 (really easy) in scenarios where my "real business" spells have been discarded/countered/not drawn. Decks using abrupt decay and lightning bolt will often have big trouble with this new hydra since it trumps all their guys and kills annoying stuff like delver, confidants, baleful strix,.. Having such an improvement on my "game winning" threat density for the price of 1 slot seems very interesting to me.
Well, is there really an existing GSZ for x=4 target with this utility/power level? Not that I am aware of. Some spiders with cmc >= 5 deal with flyers but their bodies are less impressive and they can't grow or kill ground creatures. Statements like "rather using GSZ to push the combo to win" or "that is why you run jitte" are not valid imo. There are situations where you are far away from setting up the combo or don't have jitte, so an additional angle of attack improves your overall strengths.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Bringing Ruric is a funny irony. Check out the communities and even elves players early evaluation on that card. Let's think for ourselves and out of the box, shall we? :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
I did say last 2 pages not first two.
A 5/5 is useful, I agree, a 5/5 with damage is good too I will also agree. A 5/5 that cost so much to do its chosen task is not so useful. Its a one use, one effect monster than is rather slow at what it does. It fills a hole that Jitte more or less decimates everything else at. Also saying Jitte is a valid point. Jitte is a bend the other guy over and break him card. I have won on the back of two creatures and a Jitte while Pox was trying its hardest to clear my field. Well sometimes you just have to have the right tool for the job. Jitte is cheaper on mana to use too, a point I would argue is it's strongest draw because if you're low on mana, chances are you have very few creatures on the table and very few options to play a card like this new one.
Also on those times where you are far away from setting up your combo, thats normally because someone has burn spells and is picking off your mana elves. Tell me how useful this guy is in a game where you can not make large amounts of mana. Thats really the crest of it. You want him to fight against what happens to be decks with directed damage and you want large amounts of mana open to you so you can do so. I would argue that if you happen to have the mana needed to do so you would be more than able to GSZ into something like Hoof, or you just not going to be that liberal on your mana supplies.