[Deck] Dredge

I personally expect to be running something like 3x Chain of Vapor and 3x Nature's Claim in the SB (I'll still need to find room to fit those in though). I guess that Hollywood summarized it well by saying that Chain of Vapor is the more versatile choice, while Nature's Claim, Oxidize, and Ingot Chewer are the more definitive choices - which is why I expect to find myself trying to strike a balance between the two. At the end of the day, it would likely boil down to what I expect the meta to be (which is really what the SB is for :tongue:).

Cheers,
jares

Ingot Chewer is definitely good and very synergistic with Thug in the event we need to bring him back.

Has anyone here tested a LEDless build post DKA? I'll probably post one as soon as I find the time to finalize my testing. Any input before then would be appreciated :smile:

Kind Regards,
jares

This may end up being terrible, but I figured I would suggest it anyway and see where the discussion went...

What about something like Steel Sabotage for hating on the Cage? I realize that Chain is probably much more versatile for the effect, but it seems easier to cast off of our lands than an Oxidize or even Claim. Also, I'm sure there are a non-zero number of times (though not many) where it could straight up counter the Cage in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Davran

This may end up being terrible, but I figured I would suggest it anyway and see where the discussion went...

What about something like Steel Sabotage for hating on the Cage? I realize that Chain is probably much more versatile for the effect, but it seems easier to cast off of our lands than an Oxidize or even Claim. Also, I'm sure there are a non-zero number of times (though not many) where it could straight up counter the Cage in the first place.

---

I get where you're going with this, but the problem with what you're suggesting is that Steel Sabotage isn't too good at either being definitive nor versatile as an answer to Grafdigger's Cage (kindly refer to some of the discussions above regarding the other SB choices against Cage). Chain of Vapor is the more versatile choice, and Ingot Chewer is the superior definitive option because of its interaction with Bridge from Below.

Any other thoughts on this?

Kind Regards,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

Has anyone here tested a LEDless build post DKA? I'll probably post one as soon as I find the time to finalize my testing. Any input before then would be appreciated :smile:

Kind Regards,
jares

---

I have.

The only decision you'll have to make is how many Tireless Tribes you want to cut for Faithless Lootings. That's it. There are no other slots in the maindeck that could be changed for Faithless Lootings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Izor

I have.

The only decision you'll have to make is how many Tireless Tribes you want to cut for Faithless Lootings. That's it. There are no other slots in the maindeck that could be changed for Faithless Lootings.

---

Thanks for the input. It's helpful to know that someone else has the same idea as I had when I first saw Faithless Looting. What worries me, though, is that the construction of the deck using that logic (swapping Faithless Looting for some number of Tireless Tribe) doesn't seem like it has many advantages when compared to the LED lists. In other words, it seems to me that, while the LED and LEDless lists were pretty much in equal footing before DKA, the addition of Faithless Looting has benefited LED lists so much more than the LEDless ones, and this may eventually push the LED version to outclass the LEDless version. It might just be the recent popularity of LED lists that's causing me to see things this way, though, so I'll just have to wait and see how things develop when DKA becomes legal.

While I agree that the LEDless lists going around are already pretty tight, I'm trying my best to think outside the box and configure/test a LEDless list that will be able to capitalize on the benefits of why we want to go LEDless in the first place.

Any additional help on this would be appreciated.

Kind Regards,
jares

LEDless should become pretty homogenized post-DKA. Isn't...

14 land
12 dredgers
4 Narco
4 Ichorid
4 PImp
4 Study
4 Looting
4 Breakthrough
4 Bridge
4 Therapy
2 Dread Return

...pretty much what you'll want?

Is anybody sticking with LEDless though? Seems like it hasn't been mentioned for a while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by igri_is_a_bk

LEDless should become pretty homogenized post-DKA. Isn't...

14 land
12 dredgers
4 Narco
4 Ichorid
4 PImp
4 Study
4 Looting
4 Breakthrough
4 Bridge
4 Therapy
2 Dread Return

...pretty much what you'll want?

Is anybody sticking with LEDless though? Seems like it hasn't been mentioned for a while.

---

Yep, that's how a list could look like and that's exactly what I meant when I said the only thing you can really do is swap Tribes for Lootings (or play a mix). I personally like the 15th land over the 3rd Ichorid, but yeah.

LEDless will stay a powerful and viable deck after DKA for sure. Why would it not? The only thing that changed is the relative power level of LED vs LEDless lists. And how much stronger LED got and if that will make it the strictly better deck, we will see. I don't think that it will invalidate LEDless by any means.

People tend to associate LED with decks that have consistency issues. The irony here is that LED now makes this deck much more consistent with Faithless Looting. Incredible, really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by igri_is_a_bk

LEDless should become pretty homogenized post-DKA. Isn't...

14 land
12 dredgers
4 Narco
4 Ichorid
4 PImp
4 Study
4 Looting
4 Breakthrough
4 Bridge
4 Therapy
2 Dread Return

...pretty much what you'll want?

Is anybody sticking with LEDless though? Seems like it hasn't been mentioned for a while.

---

I guess that that's pretty much my main concern - I'm trying to explore the reasons for why anyone should (or shouldn't) stick to playing LEDless builds. So far, going with LED has been a pretty strong argument.

Kind Regards,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hollywood

People tend to associate LED with decks that have consistency issues. The irony here is that LED now makes this deck much more consistent with Faithless Looting. Incredible, really.

---

I've mentioned a few pages back that as soon as LED gets to address those consistency issues, then the reasons for why people should play LEDless would dwindle... I agree that LEDless would still be a very strong deck per se, but justifying going LEDless seems to have become much more difficult. It would be helpful if we could collectively objectify why we should or shouldn't play LED - it might be too early for this, but a little foresight would still be beneficial.

Kind Regards,
jares

I totally pumped right now.
You are to blame, Hollywood!
I am going to play in the monthly Legacy tournament in Iserlohn on Sunday (well, if University allows it) and I was thinking of playing LED Dredge to get a feel for it again.
Most likely I will end up playing my DR-less quadlaser list but if not, I think a list based off Hollywood's is the way to go.
Althoug I will cut Paradises for Citadels and I think Zealot for Darkblast if I end up playing with targets.
Maybe I squeeze in a DR in my original list though. I'm kind of excited on how it turns out:)

You should definitely reconsider Dread Return for LED dredge. I was playing two Sun Titan, but I'm switching one for FKZ to open up turn one wins. They are in for good in my list.

It's funny you mention the inconsistency issue, Hollywood, because I was just thinking about that same thing. I was looking over each card in the list and checking how many ways I can cast it with the minimum coming in at ten. That's pretty much the same consistency as LEDless.

Faithless Looting = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel + 4 LED = 14
Breakthrough = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel + 4 Coliseum = 14
PImp = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel = 10
Therapy = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel = 10
Coliseum = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel + 3 Coliseum + 4 LED = 17

That is really awesome compared to the older lists. I'm definitely playing LED with 10 rainbow lands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by igri_is_a_bk

You should definitely reconsider Dread Return for LED dredge. I was playing two Sun Titan, but I'm switching one for FKZ to open up turn one wins. They are in for good in my list.

It's funny you mention the inconsistency issue, Hollywood, because I was just thinking about that same thing. I was looking over each card in the list and checking how many ways I can cast it with the minimum coming in at ten. That's pretty much the same consistency as LEDless.

Faithless Looting = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel + 4 LED = 14
Breakthrough = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel + 4 Coliseum = 14
PImp = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel = 10
Therapy = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel = 10
Coliseum = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel + 3 Coliseum + 4 LED = 17

That is really awesome compared to the older lists. I'm definitely playing LED with 10 rainbow lands.

---

May I suggest the following revisions that might help fine-tune the numbers:

• Faithless Looting (hard-cast) = 4 City + 4 Mine + 2 Citadel = 10
• Faithless Looting (Flashback) = 4 LED + (some quantity for getting three lands in play) = greater than 4 (likely to be less than 5; maybe someone here can do the math for this).

I'm not sure of how that affects the consistency overall, but it seems that the major difference here is the capability to activate Cephalid Coliseum - all other LEDless list I've seen has only had a maximum of 15 ways to activate it.

Kind Regards,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HokusSchmokus

I totally pumped right now.
You are to blame, Hollywood!
I am going to play in the monthly Legacy tournament in Iserlohn on Sunday (well, if University allows it) and I was thinking of playing LED Dredge to get a feel for it again.
Most likely I will end up playing my DR-less quadlaser list but if not, I think a list based off Hollywood's is the way to go.
Althoug I will cut Paradises for Citadels and I think Zealot for Darkblast if I end up playing with targets.
Maybe I squeeze in a DR in my original list though. I'm kind of excited on how it turns out:)

---

The only reason I cut Tarnished Citadel from my list for Undiscovered Paradise is the damage issue. If you start the game off with a relatively slower hand - and it is possible - you really want to offset the amount of damage coming at you which it can and in a hurry. Three life can be very precious, especially in a format where the reigning "champion" is now...a Burn deck.

You only really need one mana at a time to cast one of any of those cards, and you're not even playing a full set anyhow. Thirteen-fourteen lands seems about right, and with LED in the mix there should be no trouble enabling broken turn one plays. Hell, you don't even need a land now that we have Looting; you could even just drop LED, dump your hand, and go to work if you absolutely have to. That's what I was getting at with the consistency thing: you're not really needing to mulligan as aggressively because now LED fixes things with Faithless Looting in spite of having no lands.

Still, though, open-handing a land is very important.

Having two undiscovered paradise in hand suck because you have trouble getting both in play.

Have two tarnished citadel in hand suck because you might kill yourself before your opponent does.

Has anyone considered one of each?

Not really, because LED doesn't care at all if you have a second land in your hand or not. And if you have only one anyway, Paradise is miles better. Tarnished only shines if you have more lands and a slow hand, or sometimes after sideboarding.

I'll probably end up playing with no targets main or side.
I don't have much money to spare right now, and just buying Sun Titan for the last week or so of looting-less magic seems like a waste.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joemauer

Having two undiscovered paradise in hand suck because you have trouble getting both in play.

Have two tarnished citadel in hand suck because you might kill yourself before your opponent does.

Has anyone considered one of each?

---

I'd much rather value the circumstances surrounding one of each as opposed to two. You're only (at most) running two of each, so in in the remote chance you open with all of either of these, Undiscovered Paradise is clearly a better choice. Taking an obscene amount of damage is definitely not a good thing, and I think limiting that damage will help in the long-run.

Also take into consideration an opponent running Price of Progress and getting one off on us. Not only is the loss of life going to hurt us, but now you're looking at four more from the Price player - in addition to other damage spells. Paradise not only doesn't deal you damage, but it also goes back into your hand and avoids damage from Price.

The only reason I'm bringing this up is because I'm sure we'll see a surge in Burn decks in the coming weeks. I think the win at D.C. legitimized it as a contender in the format right now, and although Looting will help us tremendously, I think we want to take every advantage where we can get it.

Again realistically, you're only going to probably be casting one or two spells using land the entire game (maybe three), so Paradise isn't really going to be an inhibitor in that respect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hollywood

I'd much rather value the circumstances surrounding one of each as opposed to two. You're only (at most) running two of each, so in in the remote chance you open with all of either of these, Undiscovered Paradise is clearly a better choice. Taking an obscene amount of damage is definitely not a good thing, and I think limiting that damage will help in the long-run.

Also take into consideration an opponent running Price of Progress and getting one off on us. Not only is the loss of life going to hurt us, but now you're looking at four more from the Price player - in addition to other damage spells. Paradise not only doesn't deal you damage, but it also goes back into your hand and avoids damage from Price.

The only reason I'm bringing this up is because I'm sure we'll see a surge in Burn decks in the coming weeks. I think the win at D.C. legitimized it as a contender in the format right now, and although Looting will help us tremendously, I think we want to take every advantage where we can get it.

Again realistically, you're only going to probably be casting one or two spells using land the entire game (maybe three), so Paradise isn't really going to be an inhibitor in that respect.

---

The only scenario that I can think of where the supposed drawback of Undiscovered Paradise could cause some awkward timing issues is if you're planning to play and activate Cephalid Coliseum on the succeeding turn. Otherwise, saving up on self-inflicted damage sounds like a more sensible choice.

As a corner case, it might also be worth noting that Tarnished Citadel will be the more reliable option in the games where we're forced to hard-cast our otherwise free creatures because of the effects of GY hate (it's a good thing that it's also able to create colorless mana without dealing pain).

Cheers,
jares

YAY for friends lending me the cards I need for Hollywood's list! 61 cards with FKZ, Sun Titan, 3 Thugs, 3 Ichorid, 1 Blast.Everything else also as Hollywoods posted.
I find 4 Ichorids too many if you run only 11 Ichorid pitchable cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HokusSchmokus

I find 4 Ichorids too many if you run only 11 Ichorid pitchable cards.

---

This is actually like saying you prefer to run 3 FoW when you have only 15 blue cards... Ichorid is pitchable for Ichorid, so using 4 is good for versions with few pitchables.

Also, don't run 61 cards in Dredge. I advocate for 61 cards in some decks, but in dredge you lose too much. First of all, you really want to open a GGT as often as you can. Then, you want to be dredging into Narcomoebas and Bridges as often as you can, too. The right call in dredge is 60 cards, GGT is just to good for us

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gui

This is actually like saying you prefer to run 3 FoW when you have only 15 blue cards... Ichorid is pitchable for Ichorid, so using 4 is good for versions with few pitchables.

Also, don't run 61 cards in Dredge. I advocate for 61 cards in some decks, but in dredge you lose too much. First of all, you really want to open a GGT as often as you can. Then, you want to be dredging into Narcomoebas and Bridges as often as you can, too. The right call in dredge is 60 cards, GGT is just to good for us

---

I use 61 because I wanna have fun on Sunday, I don't really care about the outcome. Prices would be nice tho:P

Actually I disagree. If I pitch Ichorid for Ichorid I practically run 3. I rather run another Thug in its place, as it is pitchable AND makes LED comboturns better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HokusSchmokus

YAY for friends lending me the cards I need for Hollywood's list! 61 cards with FKZ, Sun Titan, 3 Thugs, 3 Ichorid, 1 Blast.Everything else also as Hollywoods posted.
I find 4 Ichorids too many if you run only 11 Ichorid pitchable cards.

---

How many black creatures are you running?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hollywood

How many black creatures are you running?

---

4 PImps, 3 Thugs, 4 Stinkweed Imp (3 Ichorid)

Here's something that I mentioned a few pages back regarding Dredge and going up to 61 cards in the MD:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

I find that Dredge is one of the few decks that won't really have a major issue with going with 61 cards in the MD because of the rate at which the deck goes through its... errr... deck. The argument really is just based on statistics, and unfortunately, I hate to say that "being Dredge" doesn't keep the statistics of your opening hand from being affected by the numbers. It's worth noting, though, that Dredge is also one of the few decks that doesn't mind a mulligan whenever necessary. It's a good thing that you compensated by increasing the number of Dredgers, though, so I guess that that can help make up for the slight change in probabilities.

---

In summary, the numbers game is a bit more (or maybe even a lot more; I haven't done the precise math for it) favorable for Dredge when compared to other decks that go up to 61 cards. Of course, Dredge with 60 cards will most certainly have better numbers than Dredge with 61, but the main consideration should be this:

• "Will the deck benefit more with having the 61st card rather than maintain the consistency of having just 60?"

I believe that the answer to this question is very situational, and it might be impossible to determine this without a specific metagame to consider.

Kind Regards,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gui

This is actually like saying you prefer to run 3 FoW when you have only 15 blue cards... Ichorid is pitchable for Ichorid, so using 4 is good for versions with few pitchables.

---

I think that the consideration for the number of Black Creatures to support Ichorid is very different from the number of Blue Cards to support Force of Will, simply because of the rate at which Dredge is able to make these Black Creatures available. Blue is also able to provide a very dependable (the most dependable of all the colors) rate of going through its deck because of the color's natural propensity for card drawing and searching, but this rate pales in comparison to even the weakest Dredger that's being used - Golgari Thug (given that Darkblast isn't an auto-include for all deck variations).

Having said that, I haven't really given much thought for the optimal and minimal number of Black Creatures to support Ichorid. I believe I currently have 15 creatures, including the Ichorid themselves (I'm running 4x Ichorid in the MD), and this number seems to be sufficient for now.

Any additional input on this would be appreciated.

Kind Regards,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HokusSchmokus

YAY for friends lending me the cards I need for Hollywood's list! 61 cards with FKZ, Sun Titan, 3 Thugs, 3 Ichorid, 1 Blast.Everything else also as Hollywoods posted.
I find 4 Ichorids too many if you run only 11 Ichorid pitchable cards.

---

Personally, the way I decide on the number of Ichorid that I'll be using (in the MD and after SB) is based on how often I want to be using Ichorid to bring me closer to winning. That is, if I'm going with the combo-esque route via FKZ, then I wouldn't be needing Ichorid too often, so 3x (and sometimes even 2x in corner cases) will be sufficient. Otherwise, if I'm planning to win via the Beat-down route, then I'll surely be running 4x Ichorid to ensure that I can attack with him and create Zombies as often as possible. The number of Black Creatures in the deck never did make me think twice, as I've always run 11-12, and have never had any issues - but that might just be me :tongue:

Kind Regards,
jares

You very rarely need/want more than 3 ichorids in LED dredge.

Gui brings up a good point. Troll is unquestionably our best dredge guy. Why you want to lessen your chances of having him in your opening hand by running a 61st card?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joemauer

You very rarely need/want more than 3 ichorids in LED dredge.

Gui brings up a good point. Troll is unquestionably our best dredge guy. Why you want to lessen your chances of having him in your opening hand by running a 61st card?

---

I believe that the question above can be answered by another question :tongue: (below):

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

Here's something that I mentioned a few pages back regarding Dredge and going up to 61 cards in the MD:

In summary, the numbers game is a bit more (or maybe even a lot more; I haven't done the precise math for it) favorable for Dredge when compared to other decks that go up to 61 cards. Of course, Dredge with 60 cards will most certainly have better numbers than Dredge with 61, but the main consideration should be this:

• "Will the deck benefit more with having the 61st card rather than maintain the consistency of having just 60?"

I believe that the answer to this question is very situational, and it might be impossible to determine this without a specific metagame to consider.

Kind Regards,
jares

---

Cheers,
jares

So, as long as nobody has some real numbers and/or real life results, the debate about 60 or 61 cards is going nowhere. Just test and then post your numbers. Otherwise we will keep going in a cirkel.

Grtz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

I think that the consideration for the number of Black Creatures to support Ichorid is very different from the number of Blue Cards to support Force of Will, simply because of the rate at which Dredge is able to make these Black Creatures available. Blue is also able to provide a very dependable (the most dependable of all the colors) rate of going through its deck because of the color's natural propensity for card drawing and searching, but this rate pales in comparison to even the weakest Dredger that's being used - Golgari Thug (given that Darkblast isn't an auto-include for all deck variations).

Having said that, I haven't really given much thought for the optimal and minimal number of Black Creatures to support Ichorid. I believe I currently have 15 creatures, including the Ichorid themselves (I'm running 4x Ichorid in the MD), and this number seems to be sufficient for now.

Any additional input on this would be appreciated.

Kind Regards,
jares

---

I don't think I made myself clear with my comparison, so in other words:

Running 3 Ichorid because you don't have enough black creatures is nonsense, because you can pitch Ichorid for Ichorid, so adding the 4th Ichorid actually helps the other 3, not the opposite. If you couldn't do that, then I'd say using 3 made some sense, but since you can, this is not a good reason not to run 4.


Now, the thing on 60 vs 61 cards, the reason why I won't be running 61 cards in dredge again is because I strongly believe we need the best dredgers in the opening hand to operate. GGT, GT and SWI. I run 4 of each when I don't have discard outlet, and relax a bit, running 3 Thug, when I have (because mulligan is possible). Still, opening a GGT has the highest win % in my tests, so I won't reduce this chance by even a bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darklingske

So, as long as nobody has some real numbers and/or real life results, the debate about 60 or 61 cards is going nowhere. Just test and then post your numbers. Otherwise we will keep going in a cirkel.

Grtz

---

Hi Darklingske,

I'm not sure why you'd think otherwise, but I personally don't think that we're going in circles here, as the statement below (one that I've already mentioned a few times) is very clear to me:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

I find that Dredge is one of the few decks that won't really have a major issue with going with 61 cards in the MD because of the rate at which the deck goes through its... errr... deck. The argument really is just based on statistics, and unfortunately, I hate to say that "being Dredge" doesn't keep the statistics of your opening hand from being affected by the numbers. It's worth noting, though, that Dredge is also one of the few decks that doesn't mind a mulligan whenever necessary. It's a good thing that you compensated by increasing the number of Dredgers, though, so I guess that that can help make up for the slight change in probabilities.

I'll also probably be considering going to 61 cards, given that we'll be getting more options very soon...

Kind Regards,
jares

---

I've also tried to add to that by stating the following:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

Here's something that I mentioned a few pages back regarding Dredge and going up to 61 cards in the MD:

In summary, the numbers game is a bit more (or maybe even a lot more; I haven't done the precise math for it) favorable for Dredge when compared to other decks that go up to 61 cards. Of course, Dredge with 60 cards will most certainly have better numbers than Dredge with 61, but the main consideration should be this:

• "Will the deck benefit more with having the 61st card rather than maintain the consistency of having just 60?"

I believe that the answer to this question is very situational, and it might be impossible to determine this without a specific metagame to consider.

Kind Regards,
jares

---

Now, because the above statement is apparently not sufficient, and because you've mentioned that we would be needing the actual numbers to conclude this argument, I've taken the liberty of going though just that.

The probability of drawing n cards (in this case, the Golgari Grave-Troll was mentioned a few times) in a deck with a total number equal to Y (in this discussion, either 60 or 61) after drawing Z cards (7 in the opening hand), given that the card has X copies in the deck (assumed to be 4 for the GGT), is defined by the following function:

• H(n) = C(X, n) * C(Y - X, Z - n) / C(Y, Z)
  
  • Where C(A, B) is defined as the following:
    
    • C(A, B) = A! / (B! * (A-B)!)

To make the long story short, here are the results for H(1):

• Probability of drawing one or more GGT (or any 4-of) in the opening hand for a 60-card deck:
  
  • 0.399499625744666 = %39.95
• Probability of drawing one or more GGT (or any 4-of) in the opening hand for a 61-card deck:
  
  • 0.393986835423633 = %39.40

As previously stated, the numbers are expected to be better for the 60-card decks when compared to the 61-card decks. It might be worth considering, though, that a difference of %0.55 (less than %1!), would be negligible if it would mean that the 61st card to be included in the MD would improve your expected metagame match-ups, or simply improve the options of the deck in general (given that Dredge is really designed to go through its deck at a much higher rate than any other deck).

Do let me know if there might be anything that was missed, or if the functions and values that were used above are erroneous to what we're trying to determine.

I hope that that puts the nail on the coffin :tongue:

Kind Regards,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gui

I don't think I made myself clear with my comparison, so in other words:

Running 3 Ichorid because you don't have enough black creatures is nonsense, because you can pitch Ichorid for Ichorid, so adding the 4th Ichorid actually helps the other 3, not the opposite. If you couldn't do that, then I'd say using 3 made some sense, but since you can, this is not a good reason not to run 4.


Now, the thing on 60 vs 61 cards, the reason why I won't be running 61 cards in dredge again is because I strongly believe we need the best dredgers in the opening hand to operate. GGT, GT and SWI. I run 4 of each when I don't have discard outlet, and relax a bit, running 3 Thug, when I have (because mulligan is possible). Still, opening a GGT has the highest win % in my tests, so I won't reduce this chance by even a bit.

---

I like your logic regarding the Ichorids. I guess that the point of HokusSchmokus is that going with 3 instead of 4 lessens the number of cards that are dependent on Black Creatures by %25. I don't want to do the numbers for that (doing the numbers for the 60 vs 61 issue was already irritating enough), but it seems to me that what we have to determine here is the number of Black Creatures that we want/need to have to support X Ichorid/s on a certain frequency of getting them into play. We may also have to consider that the availability of these Black Creatures is increased by the deck's propensity for increasing the rate of getting cards into the playing field.

In my opinion (and experience), 25% of the deck (15) is sufficient for running 4 Ichorids. I'm unsure of whether 4x Ichorids can be supported by just 11 Black Creatures (as in the build by HokusSchmokus) - 3x sounds safer and more conservative.

Kind Regards,
jares

@Jares

I'm aware of the math, I'm aware it's negligible, although it's a subjective matter to say 0,55% is negligible and 2% is not, and I defend the 61st card in decks that don't really have an obvious best card, or in which there are too many matchup-dependant cards like creature removal, but in dredge, I don't think there's anything more important than hitting the best dredger in the opening hand.

If you are trying to increase a matchup with dredge, the very fist thing we should be aiming for is hitting the dredgers. But that's all I got, if you still think it's worth using a DR target and drawing it sometimes, instead of a GGT or a SWI, I am positive you will aquire the same result as the 60 cards deck most of the time if you are a good player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jares

In my opinion (and experience), 25% of the deck (15) is sufficient for running 4 Ichorids. I'm unsure of whether 4x Ichorids can be supported by just 11 Black Creatures (as in the build by HokusSchmokus) - 3x sounds safer and more conservative.

Kind Regards,
jares

---

Ichorids can eat themselves if nothing else. That's not the reason to run 3 or 4.

Why not run 20 land in your deck? Because that would be too many lands.

LED dredge is more so a combo deck than LEDless dredge. LED dredge tries its hardest to win in one turn. The ichorids are a plan 'B'. Four ichorids are too many for a back up plan.

If you need a 4th ichorid, save it for the SB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gui

@Jares

I'm aware of the math, I'm aware it's negligible, although it's a subjective matter to say 0,55% is negligible and 2% is not, and I defend the 61st card in decks that don't really have an obvious best card, or in which there are too many matchup-dependant cards like creature removal, but in dredge, I don't think there's anything more important than hitting the best dredger in the opening hand.

If you are trying to increase a matchup with dredge, the very fist thing we should be aiming for is hitting the dredgers. But that's all I got, if you still think it's worth using a DR target and drawing it sometimes, instead of a GGT or a SWI, I am positive you will aquire the same result as the 60 cards deck most of the time if you are a good player.

---

Hi Gui,

I think that it's safe to say that Dredge wins by Dredging. :cool:

Having said that, would you increase the number of dredgers you have by adding another dredger as the 61st card? (This isn't a rhetorical question; I'm actually asking you about what you think :tongue:).

I believe that, at the end of the day, everyone will have their opinion on whether or not %0.55 is negligible. The question that we have to ask ourselves when going up to 61 cards, though, is this:

• Will I have a better chance of winning if I had this 61st card?

That question might be too difficult to answer with just numbers, which is why I have been suggesting that having this be a meta-call is the most sensible conclusion that we can agree on - at least for now.

I've run out of ideas (and equations) regarding this topic, and I've repeated my self repeatedly :laugh:. For anything else, please refer to what has already been stated :smile:.

Cheers,
jares

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joemauer

Ichorids can eat themselves if nothing else. That's not the reason to run 3 or 4.

Why not run 20 land in your deck? Because that would be too many lands.

LED dredge is more so a combo deck than LEDless dredge. LED dredge tries its hardest to win in one turn. The ichorids are a plan 'B'. Four ichorids are too many for a back up plan.

If you need a 4th ichorid, save it for the SB.

---

Agreed. This is exactly what I meant by "the frequency at which we would want to get Ichorids in play".

A corner case that I've experience has even caused me to go with as low as 2 Ichorids (after SB), as I was going all-in with the combo-esque finish (there wasn't time left in the round :laugh:).

Cheers,
jares

Indeed the question is if that extra card wins you games. For me yes it does.
My 61st card is darkblast. And yes it has won me many games. Against merfolk's cursecatcher, junk decks with a surprise jailer, BOB etc...
Ive also had an extra dread return or careful study in the 61st slot and it had the desired effect. I always try to avoid using the 61st slot but i often end up putting a darkblast in it. And to be honest, i have never had difficulties with bad draws or losing because i didnt hit a dredger. And that little singleton has helped me out of some situations