It does stops bridge from below, so Flame Kin Zealot probably won't be very good if they reanimate it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loxodon Baileyarch
Printable View
It does stops bridge from below, so Flame Kin Zealot probably won't be very good if they reanimate it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loxodon Baileyarch
Did not think that one through.. haha:laugh:
Yeah, I was feeling nostalgiac for charge, and after playing with it again I still feel like it's a viable card, though not as more than a three of, and I still kinda don't want it as more than a two of. It's kind of like the singleton jitte; you don't ever need it, but having it is a nice perk despite not wanting to topdeck it when it's dead.
I'm not going to pretend like samurai is the ultimate anti dredge card, because clearly it is not. The night before the tournament I had slept over at my girlfriend's place so I didn't have all my cards with me. I saw two people playing dredge and had a set of samurais at hand so I just threw them on the sb. While they don't completely neuter dredge the way other more powerful hate cards do, they also have some advantages over those cards. One, they help give you a clock, which is very important since it gives them less time to draw an answer. They can still dredge and get narcomoebas to dread return with, but samurai still places numerous restrictions on how they have to play; they can't get zombies, and their ichorids only come back once, which is nice. I don't have a problem with double W since I run the deck as a primary rw deck with a g splash compared to how some do rg with a w splash. I usually want two sources of w available anyway since i want to be able to path and helix in the same turn, whereas one G source is fine since I'm usually only casting one G requiring creature per turn.
The other thing is that even when none of the cards are the perfect hate cards, having 11 cards to board in in a matchup can be pretty savage tech.
Also, Samurai was good against stax too since he couldn't recur wastelands or factories and his armageddons went from being one sided to actually being fair. That was great. Finally, being an effective 3/3 creature was good for any matchups where I needed another beater or where I needed to side out dead PTEs (Not that I played that matchup today, but you never know when tendrils will show up).
Quote:
Originally Posted by hungryLIKEALION
I just noticed your list is only 59 cards. Whats missing?
oh yeah, didn't notice that. It was a third figure of destiny was the 60th card. Sorry bout that.Quote:
Originally Posted by kkoie
Really? Thats interesting. How frequently have you been able to find the open mana to pump a figure? I've put together a list that I've been messing around w/ and I went with only two figures because I didn't want to get stuck in a scenario where I might have more than 1 figure and not enough mana to pump into each of them.
Currently my list includes 2 maindeck Teegs. Since the ANT MU sucks a lot is it worth devoting some sideboard slots to it, or should I just take a loss and load the SB with cards to affect MU's I have a chance of winning?
What MU's are worth sidebording against in an unknown meta?
Is Fallout worth slots for random aggro, or should I just stick with Jitte to win?
Is Shusher good enough against CB, or do you need K-Grips?
To me, Fogure is a tool you use to avoid overextending. Since he alone makes for a pretty good threat, you can just keep using your mana on him instead of playing out extra dudes and getting blown out by deed/wrath/explosives. Plus he's a great topdeck in the mid/late game since he turns into an 8/8 flyer.
i srsly doubt that he makes it an 8/8 very often... what is your mana base that you come close to haveing 6 R/W lands at a time?
My mana base is above. You're right that he doesn't make it there too often, but I did get there one game in my last tournament to swing for the win over an army of opposing creatures that would have been lethal the following turn. The fact that he's capable of becoming such a huge threat is what makes him important, even if he isn't capable of it every game. But when the game stalls out, he can be the perfect topdeck.
Also, another cool trick with him; If you have him at a 2/2 and three lands in play, you can swing him into your opponent's RWM or 3/4 goyf without any fear, since it's very unlikely they'll block him. It's like a free shock every turn.
You still have to take care of that RWM though. ;p
If you're aiming it at your opponent, then yes it is very inefficient. On the other hand, if you aim it at their creatures to remove blockers, then attack through with your large beaters... well the numbers can look quite a bit better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valtrix
The part about the combo I don't care for is relying on grove of the burnwillows. Wasteland shuts down your combo in a hurry and makes punishing fire quite inefficient (unless your opponent is casting lighting helix I suppose).
We call this grim lavamancer.Quote:
Originally Posted by nateo
I'm not really disagreeing with you, just saying that you can't really evaluate the combo purely on the strength of it being aimed at the opponent's head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valtrix
So in other words, the only decks you would want the combo for would be decks running small creatures like Goblins, Merfolk, and maybe the mirror. Goblins and Merfolk are already really good matchups, and probably don't need the combo to make them any better. Plus, both decks run Wasteland anyways, which would mitigate the effectiveness of the combo. For the mirror, the combo might be good. I'm not sure it's the best option though; it doesn't seem worth the number of slots that it would take up.Quote:
Originally Posted by nateo
Yeah it's horrible in legacy, people need to realize this is a DIFFERENT format than extended.
Extended Zoo has to deal with like, fucking Ghost Quarter. OH NO!!!
They don't know the fury Wasteland holds.
In other news. I've given Zoo a break for a little bit. I'll be back when i get tired of countering my opponent's deck with one Enchantment.
I wish Ranger of Eos was viable in Zoo :frown:
Finally! Something we agree on. I love that card. I don't know if anyones played "star" multiplayer, but its 5 person, and you win when you kill the two people across from you. I've been playing Ranger of Eos with success there, because running out of gas is the only thing that stops Zoo from winning. Two Wild Nacatls goes a long way in that respect. Not that Zoo is really a multiplayer deck, but Ranger fits there for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loxodon Baileyarch
He is just insane card advantage. Possible SB card, if Zoo consistently hit 4 mana..Quote:
Originally Posted by troopatroop
Just another reason Extended shouldn't be compared to Legacy.
Exactly man, its as different as legacy and standard. also multiplayer is a completely different format, so I think in a 4+ person environment, ranger would be pretty solid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loxodon Baileyarch
Although I have never tested it, ranger (on paper) seems like it wouldn't be very competitive, although it would most likely get through countertop, the dudes he tutors for probably would not, and you're left with a 3/2 that dies to opposing goyf/factory/anything.
I am not sure if it has been said already, but Martin Juza 6-0'ed the draft portion of Pro Tour: Austin, which means he was able to draw the last three rounds into Top Eight. He effectively dodged the best Extended decks on Day Two because he did so well on Day One and during the first draft of Day Two. The format for the Pro Tour was five rounds Extended followed by three rounds Draft for Day One. Day Two started with three rounds Draft, followed by five rounds Extended.Quote:
Originally Posted by mackaber