Good ol' decree of annihilation, eh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shanghi Knights
Printable View
Good ol' decree of annihilation, eh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shanghi Knights
Against Landstill, Blood Moon is already huge. There's no need to rage at their manabase. Blood Moon shuts down their draw engine-enabler, and their main win-con. Also, Sulfur Elemental helps a lot, shutting down Elspeths and Decrees. With both Moon and Sulfur, they need to find Nevinyrral's Disk soon, otherwise it's gg. Ah, and they can only win with that mono Eternal Dragon. Unluckily, it's not always like that, because we play against living beings, not puppets, and they can answer our plays. That's why Landstill is not that good of a matchup for us. The cool thing is that Sulfur has Split Second, meaning basically when you sneak it into play it's an instant speed, one-sided Wrath of God sticked to a 3/2 body. For :2::r:. I just can't conceive this deck without SE. It trades with Rhox War Monk, Loxodon Hierarch, Jotun Grunt, gets rid of those immortal-persisting Kitchen Finks, shuts down Elspeth, and if you're lucky enough to have 2 of them on the battlefield (re-ugh...) your opponent can't cast Sculler, Meddling Mage, Gaddock, Qasali Pridemage, and Silver Knight. And it gets rid of the fearsome Burrenton Forge-Tender if we're on the draw. Amazing. I will never regret those 2€ I payed for a 4x-set.
While I do agree that right now Sulfur Elemental might have passed Taurean again, the problem with this is that most of these cards aren't really run, or shouldn't be. Going in order:Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Devil
Rhox War Monk: Is terrible, and once people figure it out, they'll stop running it.
Loxodon Hierarch: Nobody runs it. I think I was the last.
Jotun Grunt: Is terrible and rarely run.
Kitchen Finks: Shows up in very little not named Survival.
Elspeth, Knight-Errant: Your best argument. Sulfur Elemental owns Elspeth.
As for all the others except Sculler and Silver Knight (Nobody runs those either), your odds of getting 2 down in a deck with no draw are astronomically low, and if you only have one down, said threat beats you down for three instead of two. Unless, of course, you trade the Sulfur for it, in which case you won't get two down by virtue of the first one being dead.
Actually I run both Mauler and Sulfur as 3-ofs. The main reason I run Sulfur is because my meta is very unpredictable. There are always Merfolk/Zoo/Goblins, but sometimes I see Bant/Landstill/Zoo, and a few rock decks. Sulfur helps against some of them, plus, has Split Second. The thing it kills random x/2s was just to force someway his usufulness: I don't rely on that, mainly because there's no cantrip or draw engine to help out finding a second copy of SE; also, I run 3x, lessening the % of drawing 2 of them. I find it to be nice sometimes, as it gives this deck tricks it couldn't normally have. I already said that I had 2 cards in hand, a RPD and a morphed Gathan, my opponent attacked, and I insta-played the Sulfur + dumped my cards to block ALL of his creatures and kill him the next turn. This barely happens, but it can. Now, assuming I'm a terrible player, I just wanted to point out the fact that Sulfur deserves a chance. I like him, that's why I was trying to praise him even talking about corner-cases. From an apathyc point of view, Sulfur is good as it is a threat which can only be dealt with when it's on the table (except for those lucky Cbalance flips), and helps improving the Landstill matchup. I know you're right, because taste somehow interferes with brainstorming. Sulfur is a fine card. That said, I sometimes acknowledge his superiority.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
the reason i am thinking of raging on lands is once i get a goblin assault up and running with a strong creature, i'm thinking why do i want there to be any mana on the board for someone to use cop red and disk on me. this is particular in the match ups that just don't drop creatures to fight but rather wipe the board with damnation or even wrath very soon after you get your main attack force set up.
true its not the best plan but since the deck packs chrome mox and red pitch monkey it can easily recover from a land wipe.
I don't assume you're a terrible player at all. If anything, it's skilled players that tend to favor Sulfur Elemental. He's tricksy. Mauler sits there and gets big without any brain power. Sulfur Elemental is a sneaky little puma. I have more fun with the deck, personally, when it's packing Sulfur Elementals. And I believe that in cases where cards are very close in power, going with the one that stimulates your brain is probably the better call, as you'll generally play the deck better as long as you don't cross over into trying to do something so cool that you hurt your board position.Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Devil
Sulfur Elemental's three biggest selling points, IMHO, are as follows, in order.
1. It's an instant speed blocker, making it psuedo-removal.
2. It can't be countered.
3. It bites people who play Elspeth and Decree of Justice in the cock.
In exchange, it has to compete with Mauler's current selling points, in order.
1. It's an incredibly efficient drop in the first two turns, easily capable of reaching remove-or-die status.
(Massive Gap)
2. It protects your Slogger / RPD / Raiders from Goblins' Warren Weirdings.
3. It grows off Lord of Atlantis.
So given your metagame, a split might be the right call, though I'm highly curious how you're fitting six of them in there.
I've always enjoyed playing sulfur elemental in this deck, but I also enjoy playing taurean mauler. I don't own any maulers, though, so I've been running sulfur elemental every time I've played the deck lately, and it always seems to be fine to me.
I used to run 4 Taurean Maulers, and didn't have any problem with that. I read somewhere on this thread 3 is the right number, as it can sometimes be a terrible topdeck. Then, I decided trying to cut a Mauler. I had a single slot available. I used to run 4x Sloggers, for obvious reasons. I tried cutting a Slogger, to fit in 2x Sulfur Elemental. The more I played them, the more I wished I had more SE in my deck. I finally cut another Slogger, going down to 2. That's because I noticed in many many games I won due to Gathan Raiders/RPD/Moon, and had that 4/5 stuck in my hand. Also, I lost the decisive match in a tournament, simply because I topdecked Arc-Slogger, and didn't have enough mana. I don't rely on it anymore. I found it to be much more of a late game card, giving reach to deal the final points of damage. I never ever wanted to go T1 Song-Slogger. I'd rather play Chalice or a Moon, to ensure victory. Also, I run only 2x Jitte. I really hate the "Legendary" clause. As it's for Arc-Slogger, I run 2, because I don't rely on them. I play them essentially to improve the aggro matchup. Creatures are getting bigger, and Jitte essentially needs to charge for 3 turns to kill a creature. I use it mainly for the +4/+4 thingie. To kill a Goyf, I have to connect my attack 3 times. I'd rather deal 12 extra damage. Also, I'd like to have a well-rounded all-purpose build. I just want to say, at the end of each of my eventual losses, "If only I drew that card...". I just don't want to give up things. That's why my build looks kinda insane, and since it is pure madness running 2xs and 1xs in a deck like this, now you can understand why I call myself a bad player. I don't want to be moved by the flow, I act just like salmons do. It's a helluva terrible paragon, but that's how I reason. There are things which I like, and others that I dislike. Also, I'd rather lose with my own build than win with someone else's. BTW, my insane experiment is as follows:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
This is my abomination. The only thing I have to blame on is when bad luck forces you to mull over and over. But bad luck doesn't exist. We're used to point our fingers at it, but the real fact is that sometimes we aren't able to succesfully finish something, and can't just accept it. That said, I'm pretty happy with my deck. Also, I have to thank you all because you're contributing to improve this awesome deck, and helped me with my ideas. Unfortunately, my "help" is almost worthless. I hope my posts can somehow help someone.Quote:
4x Ancient Tomb
4x City of Traitors
10x Mountain
4x Gathan Raiders
4x Rakdos Pit-Dragon
4x Magus of the Instant Victory
4x SSG
3x Taurean Mauler
3x Sulfur Elemental
2x Arc-Slogger (for the reasons I listed)
1x Ingot Chewer (I wanted another drop 5, but wanted to occasionally throw it away with a cheap investment, if needed. I don't play 2+ because, as said on the first pages, it would be the recipe for disaster. I don't want to explain that further. That's because if a well-known and good player packs a 1x is tech, and if a terrible player like me does the same, it's a bad choice. Don't blame my choices, blame me for being what I am. I still need to improve myself as a MTG-player)
4x Book of Etiquette a.k.a. Chalice (it is good education to avoid the other person lays the table, offer him a good drink)
4x Seething Song
4x Chrome Mox
3x Blood Moon of Instant Victory
2x Umezawa's Jitte
MEAN MEN'S BENCH
3x Pyrokinesis of the f****n' terrible topdeck (that's why I run 3)
3x Trinisphere (they say one shouldn't maindeck more than 3 because it sucks in multiples and it's a terrible topdeck, but I think those thing apply even if you board them in)
2x Pithing Needle (James Mink played 1x @Chicago - it doesn't mean the card choice was optimal, just to say someone was more insane than me)
2x Flametongue Kavu (additional removal which avoids Needle and can't be Counterbalanced with FoW looks good - plus, it kills immediately the turn it comes into play, without additional mana - thx Taco for the suggestion on page number-I-don't-remember)
2x Sword of Light and Shadow and of the insults they say you when you board it against Landstill/Stax/Rock
1x Sulfur Elemental (usually when I don't see mainboard artifacts I switch the md Chewer with this - also useful against Landstill)
1x Ingot Chewer (secret tech against Ichorid/Faerie Stompy/Dreadstill)
1x -meta slot- (now it is filled with 1x Gaea's Blessing - Spring Tide, Elfball w/ Brain Freeze and both mono :r: and U/R Imperial Painter are in my meta. If the meta changes, it can be the third Jitte, the fourth Moon/Pyro/Trini, or an additional Slogger)
@Taco or anyone else - am I that far from a standard DS build? Also, has anyone tried the Sulfur+Mauler split or am I alone in the dark?
pardon me i see SSG abbreviation several times in this thread. But I'm drawing a blank as to which card it stands for.
Simian Spirit Guide.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Fix it
I'm going to bang my head against the deck now, some how that should of been obvious to me. Yet i couldn't make that connection.
@ Tacosnape, with all due respect, Jotun Grunt is not rarely run. Anything playing white will have them; if not main deck then in the sideboard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
While I don't agree that Threshold is the best deck in the Legacy format right now, the experts and the statistics beg to differ. Between Goblins and U/G, U/G/R/, U/G/B Threshold, that made up almost half the metagame at Gen Con and Worlds last year.
Grunt is five star against threshold and they played a huge part in Chris Bergeson's Boros Decks Wins making it to the finals of GenCon. Any pro player who played a white based deck at Worlds last year in the Legacy format had at least three (3) of them main decked or boarded.
Okay, nothing about that post is true. Nothing. Let's shore up the Jotun Grunt discussion right now, because people are using it as a means of boosting Sulfur Elemental. This is not an argument against Sulfur Elemental. It's merely destroying a false pretense for hyping it.
1. White decks don't pack Jotun Grunt. Nothing currently runs Jotun Grunt. Relic of Progenitus exists. Not only is Relic better than Grunt, Relic also KILLS Grunt. Plus, most good players have realized by now that Jotun Grunt is terrible.
2. Grunt isn't good against Threshold. Countertop lists only have Tarmogoyf affected. It affects all of Tempo Thresh's threats, and it's -still- garbage against them because it won't go the distance and their threat will regrow.
3. Not once, ever, in the entire history of legacy, has Jotun Grunt been a correct choice for any maindeck or sideboard. Ever. Period. I don't care if you're Gabriel Nassif or the lord Jesus Christ reborn. If you EVER ran Jotun Grunt in Legacy, you made a deck construction mistake. This includes me, as I've played Grunt as much as most people. I thought it was one of the best things ever when it came out. But there has ALWAYS been a better choice. People just haven't always found it.
Therefore, despite all of Sulfur Elemental's other awesome qualities, arguing that Sulfur Elemental is good against it is only a valid argument if you're playing in a metagame where you know for a fact, by knowing specific people with specific decks that run Grunt, that you have a good chance of encountering it on any given day.
Tacosnape, you could not be anymore factually incorrect. Even if your opinion is to be respected, which is hard for me to do right now when you contradict yourself. What you have advanced is contrary to the stone cold facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
If nothing in my previous post were true like you claim, "nothing" then witness for example the following:
Chris Bergeson
Gen Con 2008 - Top 8 - 2nd Place
Main Deck
60 cards
2 Bloodstained Mire
2 Flooded Strand
4 Mountain
2 Plains
4 Plateau
3 Windswept Heath
3 Wooded Foothills
20 lands
4 Goblin Legionnaire
3 Grim Lavamancer
3 Isamaru, Hound of Konda
3 Jötun Grunt [emphasis added]
4 Savannah Lions
17 creatures
John Sittner
2007 Worlds, Legacy (6-0 round robin record)
Main Deck
60 cards
4 Flooded Strand
4 Polluted Delta
4 Tropical Island
4 Tundra
1 Wasteland
17 lands
2 Mystic Enforcer
4 Nimble Mongoose
4 Tarmogoyf
10 creatures
4 Brainstorm
3 Counterbalance
4 Daze
4 Force of Will
4 Ponder
4 Predict
3 Sensei's Divining Top
3 Spell Snare
4 Swords to Plowshares
33 other spells
Sideboard
2 Blue Elemental Blast
1 Hydroblast
2 Jotun Grunt [emphasis added]
2 Krosan Grip
3 Pithing Needle
3 Tormod's Crypt
2 Umezawa's Jitte
15 sideboard cards
So please explain to me how that was wrong? Please explain to me how that is not a proven fact? The fact is, it is trite to say that the only person that is dead wrong by providing information that is false and inaccurate is yourself Tacosnape. You erroneously claim that (according to you) people don't use Grunt and never have and further that he has NEVER been a correct choice for ANY main deck or sideboard. Well I disagree with you and apparently so does at least two other pro players that made it far in the two most competitive Legacy tournaments out there with grunts maindeck and sideboard respectively.
There is really no point arguing this matter any further as this is an issue of fact; not a matter of opinion. Grunt was playable in Legacy, was used by pro players in both the main deck and sideboard and you are ostensibly wrong in that regard. Moreover, it is a palpable and overriding fact that one of the primary reasons why Bergeson did so well at Gen Con and made the top 8 was because the meta had so much Threshold and the Grunts were studs and tech in those match ups as he articulated in his pre-finals match up interview with Blake Patrow (who had a deck with no graveyard effects).
In any event, your comment "Not once, ever, in the entire history of legacy, has Jotun Grunt been a correct choice for any main deck or sideboard" has no merit and clearly solidifies you as an amateur player (not that there is anything wrong with that) just don't pretend you know what you are talking about, or ever knew what you were talking about for that matter.
So two random guys included some jotun grunts a year or more ago, that makes the card legacy playable? And one of them was from a gencon top eight? Taco never said people didn't ever play grunt, just that it was a mistake if they did. And both those lists are extremely outdated and nobody would choose to play them if they had a choice.
Death and Taxes wants to talk to you, Grunt-haters...
On topic: Sulfur Elemental is a beast against Death and Taxes (Mangara, Flickerwisp) and White Weenie (Mother of Runes, Soltari Priest, Weathered Wayfarer). So if theese decks are in your meta (low chances that happen), Sulfur is a good choice.
Talking about Sulfur Elemental, I just wanted to list some of the white creatures it is possible to see around. I know Jotun is built-in card disadvantage, that's why I don't play it in my Angel Stompy build. It's just like Extirpate. It's not so good, but people still run it. I see it in some Zoo lists, Mexican Weenies, and even UGW Fish decks (recurring it with ninja), which are all played in my meta. That's why I play Sulfur. Also, I wanted to build, talking about abstract things, an all-purpose deck, meaning I wanted to have tricks and answers which could help me if there were things like a universal meta. I know a "general meta" doesn't exist, that's why I tailored my sideboard to fight the decks I can actually encounter. MD is just a 60-cards stack which I want to play at its best, meaning I don't want to leave anything uncovered. Sulfur is good on its own. If it kills random Grunts or Loxodon Hierarchs it's just a +10 points to its score. I don't run Sulfur Elemental because it kills Grunts. I run it because I like to pawn Elspeth and Burrenton Forge-Tender. Period. Generally speaking, I also saw Jans Jager, or someone whose name's like that, top8ing with Nourishing Lich in 2006. It doesn't mean it is a good deck, or its card choice were optimal. I mean, I run Ingot Chewer, and I still win. I'm not a good player, but if I win it isn't because of Chewer. 2 people top8ing with Jotun Grunt doesn't say anything. It's good to know it is (or at least it was) still played, but it's not the reason I play Sulfur, or it should be played. If you want to talk about that 4/4, open a [SCD] thread. We're talking about Dragon Stompy. If you like a card, explain why. I've already done that.
P.S. I didn't mean to generate that kind of flame XD XD
P.P.S. Taco got my point. I don't mean the others are wrong, I'm just saying he did understand me. When Coldsnap was originally released, I used to play Jotun Grunt, too. It was because there were no alternatives. Now there are. I mean, he's still playable, but it's not so good as it was in 2006. It's far easier to face Tarmogay =)
If anything's an exception, it might be Death and Taxes, due to the weird tricks the deck can pull off. It's still probably a terrible idea though.
Also, the Bergeson list is crap, and the John Sittner deck was an early-era Countertop list that while pretty solid, had absolutely no business packing two Grunts in the sideboard. It got there because it was Countertop and at the time, nothing was as prepared to deal with Countertop as it was now.
In simpler terms, I could put Jotun Grunt IN DRAGON STOMPY's sideboard, and if I randomly go 6-0 in a large tournament on the back of Blood Moons and Chalices and ridiculous broken openings, I still can't claim Jotun Grunt was a good card.
I do agree with Firemind that Sulfur Elemental is a monster against the cards/decks he listed.
[QUOTE nobody would choose to play them if they had a choice.[/QUOTE]
Is that so? Well both these top pro players had choices and they both freely and voluntarily chose to play grunt. Moreover, they aren't just "two random players". They are players that represent the two best records at GenCon and the Worlds in the Legacy format respectively. So how did they make a mistake when they both posted flawless 6-0 records with their alleged bad calls with the Grunts being a pivotal tech decision for Bergeson?
Wow, now this is amusing. Here we have an amateur player (at best) telling a pro player he had no business using a pivotal metagame call (at the time) in his sideboard at the World championships. Could you be any more egotistical? Could you be anymore wrong?
What I find most perplexing is the self contradiction on grunt against tempo U/R/G and B/G/U threshold. Grunts are tech against those decks. They are the only reason why Bergeson made the top 8. He beat 4 threshold decks in the round robin and praised them on being keys to all his victories over various threshold decks at Gencon. Now, I am not an advocate for cutting silver knights for grunts but he did and he owned threshold for it. His deck was fast and brought heavy and efficient beats to the table. Yet Taco's conjectured statement was as follows:
“They are garbage against them because it won't go the distance and their threat will regrow.”
There threats will never regrow in time with a 4 beater going nuts on their little tiny Goyfs and 1/1 Mongooses. Plus with all the burn he was packing they will never recover and regrow in time and he proved me right in this regard. Four games in a row against four different top threshold players grunts went all the way in Boros deck wins so please, don't patronize me.
As far as how it relates to dragon stompy, well the issue pertaining to flametongue kavu in this deck came up and what creatures it can take out. Taco erroneously mentioned it was useless because a lot of the 4 good, 4 toughness creatures were not playable anymore. He was wrong in large measure. In any event, the fact remains whether you agree or not a lot of those creatures are still played in competitive tournaments whether they are for all the right or wrong reasons. Therefore if you want to play Kavu in this deck it is not a terrible choice; especially in the right meta, especially in the sideboard.
for decks running grunt i usually find powder keg to be more efficient. Anything it doesn't hit can usually be dealt with by our creatures, if not lets hope were in hellbent. though sulfur can deal with grunt, i would just board him out if the opposing deck wasn't majority of problematic white creatures.
should bloodfire kavu be given a chance in maguses spot the tibal match ups? anyone tried him before? (my thinking is stuff like goblins will kill magus so i kinda think hes a dead card in such match ups, as well as merfolk all magus stops is maybe waste and mutavault.)
I would just ignore Jotun Grunt. Seriously. Dragon Stompy puts very few cards in the yard and given all the ways we have to reduce the number of spells an opponent plays, Grunt isn't going to stick around long. If you happen to have Sulfur for it, awesome. If not, oh well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shanghi Knights
Somehow I didn't actually know this card existed.Quote:
should bloodfire kavu be given a chance in maguses spot the tibal match ups? anyone tried him before? (my thinking is stuff like goblins will kill magus so i kinda think hes a dead card in such match ups, as well as merfolk all magus stops is maybe waste and mutavault.)
I think I'd rather have Kinesis or Clasm against Goblins or Elves, and against Merfolk I'd rather have something that can handle 8-12 Lords, like Keg (or as mentioned later in this same post, FTK.)
And they made mistakes. Including Grunt was a mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoughtseizer
Everybody who plays this game makes mistakes, either in deck construction, mulliganing, playing, etc. Pro Players do this a lot less than most of us, especially in playing/mulliganing, but not all Pro Players are masters of deck design in unfamiliar formats (Some, like Nassif, Sadin, etc, definitely are, but not all.)
Because I'm right and the pro player, like you, was/is wrong.Quote:
Wow, now this is amusing. Here we have an amateur player (at best) telling a pro player he had no business using a pivotal metagame call (at the time) in his sideboard at the World championships.
Yes. See the above post and the below post for proof.Quote:
Could you be any more egotistical?
Yes. In fact, it's impossible for me to be any less so.Quote:
Could you be anymore wrong?
I don't recall ever using the word "useless" for FTK (I might have, if so, I withdraw it.) In my very first version of this deck I ran 4. Until Tarmogoyf I still liked it in sideboard. I don't like FTK main because against creatureless decks he blows either himself or your own threats up, and I don't like sideboarding him because if I want to sideboard creature hate I want to generally board in something that's going to blow up the big guys or blow up multiple small guys.Quote:
As far as how it relates to dragon stompy, well the issue pertaining to flametongue kavu in this deck came up and what creatures it can take out. Taco erroneously mentioned it was useless because a lot of the 4 good, 4 toughness creatures were not playable anymore. He was wrong in large measure. In any event, the fact remains whether you agree or not a lot of those creatures are still played in competitive tournaments whether they are for all the right or wrong reasons. Therefore if you want to play Kavu in this deck it is not a terrible choice; especially in the right meta, especially in the sideboard.
Nowadays, yeah, FTK has a trillion targets. He also has a lot of places where he's useless. But I don't think he's necessarily a bad board choice depending on your metagame. He's been made better by the rise of Merfolk, for one. FTK is great against Merfolk.
As it pertains to Grunt, Sulfur Elemental and FTK both are good against Jotun Grunt. Whatever. This is 2009. People don't run Jotun Grunt. People have figured out it's bad by now.
even if you didn't know it existed, gotta admit its sorta better than aether flash against ichorid. but still aether flash being an enchantment makes it a hard card to dismiss altogether.
Taco, it is trite to say that you lack no confidence (gross understatement) or demurral. Go down with the ship, way to go!
First and foremost I want to point out that I never have, never will and never in the blue hell advocated even the slim notion of including grunt in dragon stompy. My issue with grunt was two fold. Firstly, that he can still be considered "playable" in some decks in the present legacy format; and secondly, he is still played in the competitive legacy metagame and has been since he was printed in coldsnap.
Now this will be my last reply on this particular issue because it seems this issue is getting very jejune. So with that being said I wish to clarify the following:
Although I concur with much of what you stated above when applied to other issues other then the one at bar, how can you consider him playing grunt being a mistake even when it is clear and concise that because of that card and that one card alone he made the finals (top 2 finish); and at the second largest and second most prestigious legacy event of the year? He cut silver knights to slot in grunts knowing there would be an abundance of goblin! Talk about having balls but it turned out to be a wise metagame decision nevertheless. He ended up losing once (in the finals) to a deck he didn't expect to see in the finals which was a counter sliver deck that also took out John Juilfs Dragon Stompy one round earlier in the top 4 semi finals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
I think it is clear that you are missing the point. The fact of the matter is that in hindsight, in retrospect, if he could travel back in a time machine and rebuild and play his deck, he would leave the grunts in. He clearly and unequivocally stated that they were his first star card and "they helped get me to the finals and past all the threshold" (which with goblins made up more then half of the metagame). What does the foregoing mean in a nutshell? He did not make a mistake and would change nothing; end of story.
It is interesting to note that if you had grunt out and were playing kavu he would probably be able to take out goyf now wouldn't he? But seriously, just for the record, my board for Dragon Stompy consists of three tormod's crypt's for yard hate. I recently cut one because fatal graveyard effects aren't overwhelming in my metagame presently. Although, it would be interesting to see if Relic could be as or more efficient then crypt in Dragon Stompy's board?
For a moment, I thought you were talking about Grunt... I got you though ;). the Kavu is nice but, the fact of the matter is that an answer for a deck like Solitaire (it's an example but I'll run with the idea) is more important than dredge since we already slow them down and have hate for them in the board (Keg, Crypt, ... ). People in my meta have started playing Solitaire and I was never happier to audible away from DS as I was this last Saturday. 3 Solitaire decks showed up randomly oddly enough all had different win conditions ?:| I was thinking of ways to deal with the deck and Everlasting Torment came up. I thought wither was a great idea for the decks that are running Goblin Assault in the Mauler slot. also makes confinement not single handedly beat us. I know it's not something that's normal but the rest of the decks are changing and better (it's been a while since T1 Moon was an end all). Maybe it's time to rely on somethign new.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shanghi Knights
Also I agree with the lack of Sloggers. He's been a little underwhelming and T1 Slogger has also not really blown my socks off in a while. Maybe something that costs a little less (like 3!) should take it's place. Then we can also cut song, since 1st turn dragon isn't as good as it might seem. Just storming some idea's. *Fight*
Cut song? Common! I mean yeah, everybody would rather have a better card in its place. Indeed, it is tempting to replace but it is the glue that holds this deck together. Song x4 is a staple card in this deck and is not really open to negotiation. Slogger is needed and if you want to, go down to 2 or 3 but don't cut him all together. How can you go wrong with a turn one Slogger? really? The only way that powerhouse play is going to happen (consistently) is with both Slogger and Song.
Sloggers and Songs should always be four ofs, you can side them out against control but never take them from the maindeck.
I'm just saying that a T1 Slogger hasn't been as threatenening as it used to be. It seems like most decks just deal with it and we look at them like a kid who just got punked for his/her candy. I've been happier with second turn more than 1st.
I think it is almost always correct to lay a chalice at one or a trinishere on turn one before your slogger however, if you start cutting sloggers and songs it won't happen on turn two as often.
It won't happen on turn two at all! Slogger does not have to come out super early to be efficient and effective. Other then Magus he he the best creature in the deck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fons
I run 3 Maulers and 3 Sloggers along side 2 Jittes and I have been happy with those numbers so far though sometimes having those two extra beaters would have been nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoughtseizer
Slogger is my least favorite creature in the deck but you know what my opinion doesn't matter! The deck needs them and wins with them. He has pulled out a couple wins for me.
Do you really think that Mauler is a tier 1 card/ creature for this deck?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wereodile
BTW: You are so lucky where you live right now. Ottawa and Kingston are the only places in Ontario that consistently have weekly good turn outs and sanctioned legacy tournaments right now? Toronto is all about standard, draft and extended right now. Where do you play legacy, 4-Colour 8-Bit Comics & Games? If so, what is the metagame like there? Are you finding dragon stompy viable up there?
Hand:Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoughtseizer
Mountain
City of Traitors
SSG
Slogger
Chalice
S. Song
Moon
Turn one: City, SSG, S. Song, Chalice, Moon. Other option: City, SSG, Song into Slogger.
That's on Turn one with a hand that happens. It's not extremely uncommon to be able to pump out a threat on turn 1, and especially not turn 2.
Pce,
--DC
Was making reference to my statement about cutting slogger for other options.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Cynic87
Are we assuming this is game one and you're on the play? Because if it is, I wouldn't play either of those as my opening play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Cynic87
I'd lead with Mountain, SSG, Chal-1. This frees you up for either a turn two City/Song/Slogger and turn three Moon, or a turn two Moon if you deem it necessary to fire out the Moon right then.
The Chalice-1 will raise your chances of being able to maximize everything in your hand, plus you get to make your decision based on the next card you draw. For example, if your opponent dropped a Tropical Island and you topdeck a Gathan Raiders, you might want to go ahead and drop your moon, since you're now any mana source away from dropping the raiders and pitching the Slogger to flip it. If you see a mountain or forest, though, you may want that Slogger down quicker.
I agree on the turn 1 play, but if my opponent dropped a Tropical Island (indicating a lack of fetches, and hopefully of basics too) and I drew Raiders, I would never walk my only Moon effect into Daze. The two options, IMO, are going for the throat with Song -> Moon and hoping they don't have a FoW (or that they are left with a weak hand which you have time to beat), or baiting with Raiders which allows for solid follow-ups regardless of their hand but gives them the time to drop Standstill (the really scary card in this situation).
Well, this gets highly speculative, as I think the next play depends completely on what you draw and what you think your opponent is holding based on the fact that he lead with Tropical Island-go. (You definitely lead with the moon if you topdeck another SSG or Moon effect, for example).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihil Credo
I admit I didn't really think about it when I made the post, as I was just tossing it out as a random dual to illustrate the point, but upon thinking about it? I'm not so sure I wouldn't press with the Moon anyway here, though. If it gets Dazed, they're going to spend their next turn making land drop #1 again and passing, and then I'm going to drop down Song/Slogger next turn followed by Raiders/morph, and I'm willing to bet I win far more than I lose here. Even if they answer both with a Tarmogoyf, Slogger/Raiders is the favorite.
How are people that play this deck regularly in a relatively competitive metagame finding this decks over all consistency in totality?
And is it just me or is it a trite fact that this deck destroys Zoo? (Even without powder keg)
What about Flowstone Wyvern or Ogre Shaman instead of Arc-Slogger?
Flowstone Wyvern gets there in the air (which is a similar capacity to Arc-Slogger--clear the ground).
Ogre Shaman clears the ground/provides reach, and helps keep hellbent.
given chalice is main board i dunno why we would ever have a problem with zoo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoughtseizer
Consistancy i find to be a bit annoying, yet i love going hellbent dragon so i keep playing it. I just can't get a break between the landstill players and the quinn players at my local tournament. I lock them down they get out like houdini.
Often though i find the deck stalls out a lot. very often i hit them hard with a lock or big creature and then get hit by a land draw for more than 1 turn and no reinforcements come down the pipes. This is why i advocate mutated builds for instance the addition of browbeat or barbarian bully, or even duallands with burning wish answer board. i claim i advocate but i'm not a very good advocater.
the thought occured to me perhaps since my meta is heavy white shenanigan i should invest into sword of light and shadow over running fire and ice, getting a creature back is far more effective possibly than the surprise top deck. Honestly if this deck had card draw i think its racing capabilities with the stuff it struggles against would be the breaking of the deck. such as a card for one red and 2 thats a creature and allows you to draw cards if it deals damage to a player. maybe throw in a "unless" clause on top of that.
Anyone experimented with seize the day in there dragon stompy deck?
@Thoughtseizer - Consistency in this deck is bad. I've tried everything possible to fix this, but barring wizards allowing more than 4 of a nonbasic in a deck, or major cards getting functional reprints, it will not get better. Honestly, though, inconsistency is what keeps this deck in check from being too good.
@heroicraptor - Those do not do what Arc-Slogger does. Arc-Slogger swings big, pings 4-5 times, and has a big ass. Flowstone Wyvern is smaller unless you open it up to more removal, while Ogre Shaman is smaller all the time, costs more to ping, and doesn't work if you already have hellbent (which you hopefully will). I might try Ogre Shaman, but I wouldn't play more than 1 as a 3/1 split.
@Shanghi - Yes, I tried Seize the Day, but it only ended up helping when I was going to win anyway. A better card to try is Threaten, which can help swing games if they get a huge Goyf or something just in time.