If you always open up with a Paradise that build might be worth a consideration, otherwise... :frown:
Printable View
If you always open up with a Paradise that build might be worth a consideration, otherwise... :frown:
If you keep having to cast Dread Return on Eternal Witness just to play a land to bring back Bloodghast, it seems to make significantly more sense just to cut the Eternal Witness and run a land in its place. Sure, sometimes you don't get to Dread Return it and make lots of zombie. On the other hand, you'll find you'll get there with an early Bloodghast beatdown more often, and mulligan less. They're functionally kind of similar.
You could also cut the 3rd Dread Return for Iona.
I'd definitely throw in a Dakmor Salvage if this is a problem. It doesn't dredge nearly as impressively as the rest of the Dredgers, but it's much simpler (and harder to disrupt) play than casting Dread Return for a Witness for a land.Quote:
Originally Posted by johanessen
I'm skeptical about the 0 Narcomoeba plan. I kind of like the 4 Bloodghast, 4 Ichorid plan, but I think I'd like it even better with 4 Narcomoeba as well.
I would never play with any less than 3 Narcomoebas!
You could cut 2 tribes as a start and then 2 other cards, maybe -1 study -1 breakthrough.
Just my opinion, Moeba is just too strong not to play!
What exactly do you think makes Moeba so strong? It's actually pretty weak outside of its' synergy with dredge. Doesn't moeba generally just get sacced to Dread Return or Cabal Therapy while making tokens off Bridge(s)? In which case, it would seem that Bloodghast a better sacrificial lamb due to it's ability to recur, be sacced again, make more tokens, etc.
My team has been talking about replacing narcomoebas with bloodghasts. Let us know how it works out for you.
Narco is so good, because it just comes into play off of all the different draw spells in the deck. You don't to remove a black creature for it, like ichorid, and you don't have to make a land drop, like bloodghast. I can't imagine playing the deck without him in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by umbowta
-Chris-
Narcomoeba flies. It's so good to attack without having to worry about trading off your Bridges with a Dark Confidant. I've also randomly beaten Moat with Narocomoebas, Putrid Imps and Stinkweed Imps.
/Argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by umbowta
That's not a definitive argument. Bloodghast has also sinergy with dredge, plus it's a recurrable creature, plus it's black so they feed unmask/ichorid, and come all together when you make a landdrop. You can get them, use for Therapy/DR and next turn you'll get em another time. Also, has more sinergy with Tireless Tribe/Pimp, while Narcomoeba has more sinergy with pure draw spells and effects -dredge-. Narcomoeba is better at beatdown when they have blockers, and has good sinergy with Thugs. Nothing more. And Both are hardcasteable.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBirdMan
I think Narcomoebas are better in the LED version, while the LEDLess version is better for recurreable beaters
Bloodghast has good synergy with dredge as well, but they don't do their job very well if they get removed to unmask and ichorid as you stated. I like that narco flies as well as coming into to play off just about everything you do in this deck. The deck becomes less consistent when you have to add more lands just to make bloodghast more consistent. Plus moeba can chump bigger creatures, which bloodghast can not do. All in all, they both have good synergy with the deck I just prefer to go the way of the narco, because I feel he does everything bloodghast does plus a little more.Quote:
Originally Posted by johanessen
-Chris-
I can't figure if people are trying to troll us with the Narcomoeba-less topic.
Anyway, it's a bad idea because it doesn't require you to put a land or to fold a black creature to play it. Play the deck a lot, versus a lot of match ups and you'll figure that Narcomoeba is one of the creatures that makes the strenght of dredge.
I've been facing so many times letal damage, the only card that could save me was a narcomoeba, so I could DR the flamekin zealot.
A lot of time you want that IONA to come down one turn faster, you also want versus combo and a lot of other deck to therapy as fast as possible. You can't cut narcomoeba because it gives a lot of speed to the deck and it's way more consistant then bloodghast.
@johanessen, I see what you are saying, and I agree recurrable beaters are more suited for LEDless dredge than LED dredge. However I feel that the synergy that Narcomoeba has with dredge is more efficient and consistent for these decks. Narcomoeba will always trigger and should come into play (provided no stifles or crypt effects).
With bloodghast you have to have a land. What happens when you are dredging turn 2 and have no more lands in hand. You would have to wait till next upkeep for Ichorid or stop dredging and hope to draw a land. If you had Narcomoeba you could therapy/dread return on that turn. I suppose this doesn't always happen, you could have played Undiscovered paradise turn 1 and had it bounce back. But this can be inconsistent and there will be times where you don't have the lands.
To me even the slightest percentage of consistency guarantee is huge in legacy. With the format turning very aggro based now with a lot of decks swinging for the win on turn 4 or storm combo winning turn 1-2, etc having to wait a turn or drawing a slow/sketchy hand can easily cost you the game or match.
And what`s your opinion when you draw opoening hands with one or some copies of moebas? Bloodghasts and Ichorids are also better there... I mean, nobody doubt it's a good creature but I think Bloodghast has some strenghts that ledless ichorid could benefit. has the people who defend moebas ever tried a list w/o them?
Narcomoeba doesn't come back from the grave like Ichorid or Bloodghast [edit]...unless you decide to DR it or Thug it back on top before dredging[/edit] You can't remove Narcomoeba to an Ichorid trigger. Narcomoeba as a sac outlet is basically a condom; you use it once and throw it away. It's far from useless but Ichorid and Bloodghast can be downright abusive.Quote:
Originally Posted by cwt1220
basically...this
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryTroll
I cast them, usually.Quote:
Originally Posted by johanessen
As well as Bloodghasts, I suppose.Quote:
Originally Posted by frogboy
I think at some point you have to start questioning almost every card in a deck. You can't just label something sacred for the sake of it. The fact is, Blooghast does fulfill the same general role as Narco, therefore its not unreasonable to test a list where it is a replacement.
Bloodghast > Narco:
-all copies are returned when you drop a land
-black creature for Ichorid/Unmask
-has conditional haste
-doesn't suck in your opening hand
Narco > Blooghast:
-CIP for free via dredging
-flies
-can block
-doesn't require a land
All that said, I think adding Bloodghast in addition to Narco & Ichorid only strengthens the amount of zombies/DR's you can cast. I'd previously dropped FKZ as often I couldn't alpha strike for lethal. But with another 4 creatures, I think FKZ will be back in my deck.
I won many games on the backs of fast Moebas, even flying across Moat or Goyf as Anusien stated. They are too good to be cut, imho. :really:
EDIT: Narco in opening hand sucks really close to how the BG sucks - you wanna mainly discard outlet, dredgers and draw stuff.
I would also like to side in also in favor of Narcomoeba, I do not have anything against bloodghast or anything. I think if I could fit in ghast in my list, I would. Aside from the usual function of the card, there's also a few games, rare but it happened, where I have thug in play, sac the thug for therapy, and use it's ability to put nacomoeba on top of the library.
Quite a nice synergy between the two should the occasion arise. But I could also see other's opinion about ghats being able to be ichorid food as well.