You can easily play and flip akoma by turn 2 and win on turn 4 with her in this deck. Often you hit the 6 mana () required to flip her (without acceleration) by turn 7 or 8 (the games she is in there for are the long ones). The problem is she's not very reliably flipped since games are typically short and thus she often will only be a 2/2 (not 95% of the you draw her, more like 50% as you should never run more than 2) and this makes for fun tricks with bluffing . A plus is she doesn't clog your hand (pitches to mox, raiders, and can be dropped for
) and prevent hellbent, and she is a fantastic finisher as a pumpable flyer with trample. I don't personally run her, but some of the negatives that have been brought up are off base.
Even those born to battle could only lay their blades at Akroma's feet.
"No rest. No mercy. No matter what."
Clark Kant, you're seriously understimating the usefulness of being able to pitch to Chrome Mox. Already, there are many games where I don't have a Mox imprint when I need one, and sometimes I have to throw hands back because of it.
I agree with you that Akroma isn't good, but you get to spread the nine mana over two turns, which helps. She's also nuts with Seething Song.
Originally Posted by Skeggi
"Casual sex, NO Touching/Licking/Sucking/Groping/Fondling/Riding/Tickling/Binding/Quitters/Italians. Play Fast, Be Polite, Have Fun."
Sure as hell sounds like fun.
I could see Akroma maybe in the board or something against a specific matchup or two. But not maindeck in a deck that has a lot of better options.
Practically every card in the deck is nuts with Seeting Song. Wheter be it Arc Slogger, Rakdos Pit Dragon, or being able to play multiple threats on the same turn.
Also the quote shouldn't read, she's nuts with Seeting Song. It should read, she's pratically only playable with seeting song.
Yes, but it's eating up two full turns to play it. Using up two turns to play one creature, using 6 mana (3 of it RRR) and usually a Seeting SOng in the process as well is just not worth the mana cost.
That all I am saying, and I am glad that you agree.
But that's confusing as you seem to be saying that eventhough it's not good, it pitches to Chrome Mox so that makes it playable.
Thats a big reason used to justify another bad card imho, Mountain Yeti. 4 mana for a 3/3 critter that is occasionally unblockable isn't worth it either esp since StP has two dozen better targets than Mountain Yeti.
By that logic, any bad red card is playable because it pitches to Chrome Mox.
And really, yes pitching to Chrome Mox is useful. But it's not that hard to find something to pitch to Chrome Mox. 2/3rds of the cards we play are red. Personally, I've only very rarely had any trouble having something to pitch.
It's not a bad card in dragon stompy in general. In your specific build and your specific meta it may very well be a bad card to play, but not everyone has the same build, play style and environment. It is a perfectly logical and powerful choice for some people and to make a sweeping generalization that it's bad because you never found success with it doesn't make it bad. It has been tested and found to be successful by quality dragon stompy players. As a warning to anyone thinking of using Akroma, there is a certain skill required in using this card to its full effect. The same goes for sulfur elemental, if you don't use it properly it will suck. That's why many players opt for Taurean Mauler/Juggernaut, it's not very hard to use.
Even those born to battle could only lay their blades at Akroma's feet.
"No rest. No mercy. No matter what."
I'm not saying Akroma is playable and Juggernaut isn't simply because Akroma pitches to Mox. I'm just saying not to discount the importance of running lots of red cards as there have been many games where I'd have had to pitch my only threat to have a functional Chrome Mox.
I'll concede the point about Seething Song. I had to end that post quicker than I would have liked to.
Honestly, I'd sooner run Mountain Yeti than Juggernaut not only for Mox imprint, but because despite what you say, sometimes the creature they really want dead is Mountain Yeti. On Wednesday, one of my opponents would have loved to StP or O-Ring my Yeti, but he couldn't. All his creatures were white, so Yeti was hitting him for three damage per turn while the rest of my creatures caused a stalemate. Yeti went the distance with only four damage from non-Yeti sources.
Red players see Yeti and freak. I had a Goblin player (incorrectly, and he eventually realized it too) kill my Yeti instead of my Arc-Slogger that was already kicking his butt.
Yeti can be a house in the correct metagame, but so can Mauler, Sulfur, and even Akroma. I'm not sure the same can be said for Juggernaut.
"Casual sex, NO Touching/Licking/Sucking/Groping/Fondling/Riding/Tickling/Binding/Quitters/Italians. Play Fast, Be Polite, Have Fun."
Sure as hell sounds like fun.
Jugs is quite good against any slow controllish decks. To them it comes out turn 2 and reads, stop me in 4 turns or die.
Lol, how exactly does Akroma require so much playskill. It requires no more playskill to use properly than Rakdos Pit Dragon, Arc Slogger, Jitte, or Gathan Riders.
If anything, it requires less playskill than most of those cards as typically you have no alternative to playing him as a straight up morph guy anyway.
A deck playing all white creatures!?
I"ll concede the point that Yeti is better against white weenie. It's just not a deck that shows up much in legacy. It's possibly better against goblins to some degree (though goblins usually doesn't care to block anyways). But I honestly think Sulfur is superior to Yeti 9 times out of 10. I would much rather surprise block their piledriver than play a 3/3 unblockable.
Clark, have you actually shuffled up RAkroma or are you assuming that you have to have at least 8 mana on the board for her to be good? RAkroma is fine, and probably the best creature in the swing slot against a field of control decks. I have flipped her many, many times against decks on 4 mana and swung in for the win because of it.
Juggernaut is bad. You wanna know why? He doesn't help fix any of the decks problems, at all. Its already explosive, and though I'm sure a turn 2 Juggs is pretty good, that play still loses to all the things that beat DS. Here is what this deck loses to:
- Countering threats
- Removing threats
- Board sweeping
And wins on the back of disruption.
RAkroma answers 1 and 2, and is resistant to many forms of 3 (deed and EE). Sulfur Elemental answers 1, and can sometimes disrupt the opponents gameplan. Mauler is pseudo-disruption himself, and makes playing the cards that we lose to more dangerous.
Juggernaut does none of these things, while also not pitching to mox. If you want to gimp yourself with it, go ahead, but the other 3 cards listed are straight up better.
Oh, one final note on RAkroma. Everyone seems to be hating on her, but you have to look at the list in which she was introduced. I was running 5 Moon effects main and 4 equipment, meaning that she was more dangerous morphed than she is in most lists, and I often had more mana than people do now. People not running any equipment or only 2 Jitte should probably shy away from Sulfur Elemental and RAkroma with good reason; most of the time they will suck.
Red Wizard needs food badly!
So is Red Akroma. She comes out of your hand for
What a concept! Who ever heard of such a thing? No one would ever do that in Legacy!
Your probably right about Sulfur Elemental. I'd argue that while Sulfur is better in more situations, it won't steal games like Mauler and Yeti do from time to time. I've never won a game with Sulfur that I wouldn't have won if the card was Taurean Mauler or Yeti. Yeti is a fine choice in a high white and red metagame. That's what he is. He isn't the second coming, he's just a solid metagame choice.
"Casual sex, NO Touching/Licking/Sucking/Groping/Fondling/Riding/Tickling/Binding/Quitters/Italians. Play Fast, Be Polite, Have Fun."
Sure as hell sounds like fun.
Apparently you don't know how to use Akroma properly... maybe that's why you don't like her, you don't have the specific knowledge required to use her to full effect. I'm not saying your a bad player I'm just saying your play style might not be conducive to the proper way to use this certain card to full effect. Everybody plays differently and prefers a different style of play, thats why there are so many different types of decks. And no juggernaut doesn't have a place in dragon/moon stompy. Not Red, costs, and doesn't have a good ability.
Note on #5: I realize Akroma has 3 red, but it can get out of your hand at1. No, there isn't a better 5-drop than Arc-Slogger.
2. No, we can't fit another 5-drop in the deck unless it can get out of your hand and do something cool for
3. No, there isn't a better 4-drop than Rakdos Pit Dragon.
4. No, we can't fit another 4-drop in the deck unless it can get out of your hand and do something cool for
5. No, we can't ever fit anything with three red mana symbols in the deck.
6. No, we can't ever fit anything besides Arc-Slogger or Rakdos Pit Dragon with two red mana symbols in the deck.
7. Taurean Mauler is probably the best choice for the last slot. Sulfur Elemental is acceptable in certain metagames. Akroma is arguably playable still.
8. As far as I can see from reviewing the spoilers, Eventide blows for us.
EDIT: The comment about Akroma above is in reference to the fact that she will not prevent you from reaching hellbent or imprinting on an early mox, unlike a card with a higher cost to play and/or is not red.
I agree that Akroma doesn't belong in very many builds, but disagree that she is always bad and is worse than Juggernaut. In the cases where you want to play Akroma, Juggernaut is a terrible replacement. In the cases where Akroma is bad I think there are much better choices than Juggernaut, but If you are playing a very aggro build you may have room for some Juggernauts, but in most builds a red card that costs
Last edited by DrtyDozen13; 07-20-2008 at 12:34 AM.
Even those born to battle could only lay their blades at Akroma's feet.
"No rest. No mercy. No matter what."
Akroma is the one, beside of Sulfur Elemental, as an option to replace main deck Tauren Mauler and/or Equipment slot. .End of discussion!!
And nothing will replace them until new card with fit casting cost be printed. .
n my baby says,"papa papa, u don't payat upkeep. ."
"Tidal forces of the blood moon wrench and buckle the land, drawing monoliths of stone and soil toward the flaming orb"
Before tackling the other questions, let's start off with Juggernaut. He's not good enough.
Artifact creatures are bad unless they're ungodly strong, and Juggernaut isn't ungodly strong enough. Most creatures in this format have enough power to block him and take him down, and Juggernaut has to swing into them.
Well, you say, big deal, so what? Why would I not want to swing with Juggernaut, you ask? And you would.
Here's the problem. If you have an opening hand with a Rakdos Pit Dragon, an Arc-Slogger, and a Taurean Mauler, and a Chrome Mox, you get to pick which threat you don't need out of that. If your opponent's just dropped a Goblin Lackey and you're on the draw, for example, you're going to decide that Dragon's not nearly as good as the Weirding-Proof Mauler, followed hopefully by the Slogger for the single-handed win a turn or two later. Against some decks you might want the Mauler and the Dragon for speed.
Against some you might want the Dragon and the Slogger for power.
If you have an opening hand with a Pit Dragon, a Slogger, and a Juggernaut, you might lose the ability to get the Dragon and the Slogger out of the arrangement.
The Juggernaut forces you to pick him, over much better threats, because in order to make your hand functional, you're going to have to imprint something on that Chrome Mox. And you're not always going to have a spare crappy red card to throw on it in a deck with absolutely no draw whatsoever. Especially when you're adding nonred cards.
We ignored this for Razormane Masticore a long time ago because, well, Razormane Masticore won games singlehandedly. And we didn't know better. But it didn't mean the problem didn't still exist. Slogger was almost as good in a vacuum, and much much better when Hellbent became a central theme of the deck. Therefore anything that's not ridiculously powerful isn't going to make it without being able to be pitched to Chrome Mox (Or even Pyrokinesis, for that matter.)
Glad you brought this point up.
Yes, you're absolutely right, Pyrokinesis is a terrible topdeck. That's why there aren't a lot of matchups where you board it in. You bring it in against Goblins, some variants of Survival or Sui Black, and any combo deck that packs a creature. In these, the power of the card outweighs the drawbacks.
The points that are always hit on in Kinesis-Versus-Clasm discussions are as follows:
1. Pyroclasm is better against Empty the Warrens.
2. Pyroclasm can kill your own shit.
3. Pyrokinesis can facilitate achieving Hellbent faster.
4. Pyrokinesis can fuck your Hellbent up.
5. Both cards are incredibly good against Goblins.
What swings this very close balance in favor of Pyrokinesis is that Pyrokinesis is just more powerful than Pyroclasm. There is virtually no measure of the power of a card that can get rid of multiple permanents for zero mana. Especially with more and more creature-based combo decks emerging where instant free removal is ungodly strong.
So no, I don't think 2-3 are enough. In fact, there is absolutely no way I would ever run a primarily red-based deck in Legacy without four Pyrokinesis in my list of seventy-five, be it Goblins, Dragon Stompy, or whatever. (Burn might be the exception, but I'd never run Burn, so there you go.)
My board looks like this:
4 Pithing Needle (Never ever ever ever ever run less.)
4 Pyrokinesis (Without question.)
2-4 Tormod's Crypt (You want them for Ichorid and Loam)
2-4 Trinisphere (Obviously, you want these for Storm Combo)
0-2 Umezawa's Jitte (Depends on how many you maindeck versus how many you want access to. I usually keep either a 3/0 or 2/1 configuration unless I expect other decks with Jitte such as mirror matches, where I go to four.)
Fair enough. You make some good points and defend them well.
I will continue to test Juggs, but will opt to run Sulfur for tourneys and will be on the look out for anything that is both beefy and red and mana efficient in the future.
Should we run mauler, sulfur elemental, or both in the main deck. I believe Mauler would definitely be a better choice in the early game. Sulfur and Mauler doesn't really do anything in late game so I believe that Mauler has the advantage.
"Someday, someone will best me. But it won't be today and it won't be you.
I think the general opinion seems to be swinging in favor of Mauler being better than Sulfur. But it's a tough call, because flashing in Sulfur can enable some powerful plays.
Anyways, if it helps, at the moment I'm playing
4 Mauler
2 Juggernaut (replaced with Sulfur for tourneys)
2 Blood Moon
But that's just for my meta personally where people do play mono colored decks possibly with a light splash, so 6 Moon effects MD and 2 in the board seem to be ideal.
What is shattering spree for? If it's for affinity, the deck already loses to moon/magus. I don't think its a good card for the mirror match up as well. I may be missing the big picture.
I'm wondering what's Dragon Stompy's bad MU? Also why do we need Crypt for? Do we have a hard time against Threshold? or it's for combo?
"Someday, someone will best me. But it won't be today and it won't be you.
Why would Affi lose to Moon? They'll only have 8 dead cards (Thoughtcast + Disciple), the rest requires colorless.
Besides, the lands would still be artifact, so it wouldn't even fuck up the affinity mechanic.
But yeah, I don't get the Sprees either. I'd run Trinispheres in that slot.
experience with my geddon stax list taught me that chalice @ 2 and trinisphere hit affinity hard, so yah trinisphere is prob a better card in the board over shattering spree.
Shatteringspree is a decent card imo; it gets through your own chalice for one and can occasionally be a huge sideboarded card versus certain matchups. Not a great card, but better than a lot of other choices.
Affinity in no way loses to blood moon, especially now that most people are playing springleaf drum (and the always useful chromatic stars) over aethervial, allowing them full access to spells (not to mention 5 color sideboards!) and creatures. I think winning or losing depends upon the affinity player drawing a cranial plating: if they grab one, the odds of them grinding you out are pretty strong, as it also increases their chances to combo out. It's probably a matchup that increases taurean mauler's value vis-a-vis sulfur elemental, for sure.
Are a lot of players putting trinisphere sideboard? I would put it in main deck. If they run trinispheres in sideboard, what do they put in its place?
What do we do for the mirror?
"Someday, someone will best me. But it won't be today and it won't be you.
In my opinion, UGR Threshold and Aggro Loam is the worst match up, also Mono Blue Control take the 2nd place. .
Crypt is there to prevent something like Loam / Ichorid. .
We placed trinisphere mainboard in the past and find some reasons to move it, there is :
- Trinisphere isn't red, more red card is mainboard, more stable it is. .
- Trinisphere only amazing in the 1st or 2nd turn, it's terrible top deck anyway. .
- Trinisphere only incredibly strong versus combo deck or heavy blue meta, otherwise, it's mediocre. .
Mirror, hmm. .I don't know. .
n my baby says,"papa papa, u don't pay
"Tidal forces of the blood moon wrench and buckle the land, drawing monoliths of stone and soil toward the flaming orb"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
