The Kazandu Blademaster comment looks interesting. It could be Serra Avenger 5/6. The only creature it does not beat up with a Jitte is Tarmogoyf, but it could still survive. Obviously the Blademaster would be more synergistic with four copies, but that may not be necessary. First Strike and Vigilance are two abilities that this deck has benefited from, but never on the same creature. The one MAJOR problem I can see with this creature is that he provides absolutely no utility. Much like Serra Avenger, all he would do is attack and block (he has no evasion, though). Maybe that is enough, but for most creatures, it is not.
The OP is current to what I'm playing. Jeff plays the same list minus some SB changes. He has -1 GP for the 4th BFT, and I think -1 Thorn of Amethyst for +1 Ethersworn Canonist. Jeff's list is much more well-tested, I'm just testing some cards, although so far they've been cool.
So I have some more games getting processed/being posted. It takes a while for Window's Movie Maker to compile the videos, and then it takes Youtube a while to process the videos. The first is being uploaded atm and then I'm compiling the others.
I'll tell you up front I'm not going to bother playtest Kazandu Blademaster. It's a 2/2 first strike with Vigilance, but Vigilance is only useful when you can also attack with impunity. I'd much rather have a land (card advantage) than vigilance.
Even if their abilities look similar, it doesn't do any tasks that Serra Avenger does. The vigilance on Serra Avenger is amazing because she can attack every turn and can't get blocked. That means she advances a stalled board position. With Kazandu, you can't advance against a stalled board position, so the vigilance is only marginally useful or perhaps never useful.
At any rate, Serra Avenger's abilities are extremely synergistic, but KB's are not.
I'm trying a 1-of Sword of Fire the Ice now, with introduction of Mystics. Been working fine so far, and it so good on Avenger. What do you think?
It works well in DnT, but UW Tempo is already tight for space. What did you drop for it?I'm trying a 1-of Sword of Fire the Ice now, with introduction of Mystics. Been working fine so far, and it so good on Avenger. What do you think?
SoLS is much, much better than SoFI, but I could definitely see using SoLS in UW Tempo now.Originally Posted by Tinefol
SoLS makes you immune to every removal spell in the game. It's only worse against the miniscule subset of decks that use red (and not red removal), don't have any W or B, AND have a lot of creatures with <3 toughness.
And even in those matchups, half the time you'd rather gain three life and get a blocker back than smoke a dude and draw a card. The only decks I think you'd rather have SoFI than SoLS against is Goblins and Elves. And possibly, POSSIBLY faeries. But even Merfolk you'd rather have the SoLS when the game is close.
I can't think of any other situations when you'd actually want SoFI over SoLS, and I can think of a ton of matchups where you want to blank Swords, Snuff Out, etc. or just gain life over dealing some damage. For some reason, people ride the delusion that SoFI is better and then automatically think that when they think of the Sword equipments. But SoFI it relies on your opponent having <2 toughness guys more than SoLS relies on you having guys in the graveyard, and on the protection front it isn't even close.
I'm still interested to discuss the possibilty of running Standstill. I still can't see the reason, why this card isn't included in the deck. Someone mind telling me? :)
From my point of view, it seems that it is a little overkill here, as you already have plenty of forms of card advantage generated by Wayfarer tricks, SFM, Fathom Seer, etc. Putting Standstill in the deck means you have to take something that increases the rate you kill your opponent out, and although it is nice to have a Standstill with a Vial under it to apply pressure, it isn't needed in this case. I watched some of the videos, the deck doesn't seem to skip a beat with CA to begin with.
@ Forbiddan, what would you cut for SoLaS?
Delver enthusiast and avid practitioner of blind flipsmanship.
Follow me on Twitter: @AllSunsDawn
SoFI is only good when Avenger and/or Mom are in play. Other than that, it doesn't swing a game to your favor on it's own. For example, if you equip SoFI onto something small like a Wayfarer or Seer and it dies in combat, SoFI doesn't pose as a future threat. But if it's a Jitte, it becomes a threat once another critter hits play, as the Jitte is already charged up.
Also, I there are plays where I attach a Jitte onto a Wayfarer or Seer over an Avenger, mainly because it's already charged (I attach Jitte onto Avenger main to to be left back as a blocker). I do this because Avenger is already going to do damage, and also as a possibility for my small critter to take another creature down in the red zone or at least do more damage compared to my Avenger (planning ahead and deciding how much damage you need to deal per turn is definitely worth the calculation).
But I assume you're playing the SoFI over the Knight of the White Orchid, so that's fine in my book, as long as SoFI isn't replacing Jittes. Although, I would love to run a better critter threat in the slot of KotWO, as KotWO seems like it could be replaced by something much, much better. Knight of the Holy Nimbus is a maybe, but Kira Great Glass-Spinner seems stunning (tech I stole from Merfolk)!
ICBE - We're totally the coolest Anti-Thesis ever.
"The Citrus-God just had a Citrus-Supernova... in your mouth."
The only problem is, you'll need to useto equip something with her in play. The play that you decide to equip something, that creature will be vulnerable for the rest of the turn. (Basically, you'll have to be opportunistic, but still, perhaps not an optimal situation?)
Delver enthusiast and avid practitioner of blind flipsmanship.
Follow me on Twitter: @AllSunsDawn
Right. I've cut one KotWO and playing 2 Mystics, 2 Jittes, 1 SoFI. I might try SoLS now. Of course I always fetch Jitte first, but If I already got one, Mystic still has a use and can get another piece of equipment. It certainly doesn't hurt.
What's wrong with:
You want to pay 1UU for a worse effect? Lol, Merfolk players should splash white and come steal OUR tech.
Yeah, that's the obvious cut. I haven't run into many situations where I lose with an active Jitte, though.
Incidentally, a couple more videos are up.
Merfolk players should. It's easier to Vial in Moms and eats removal so that their future Lords wouldn't get hit.
I wanted to try Kira because I couldn't find anything I would rather have over KotWO. I've thought about some awful possibilities besides KotHN like Diplomatic Escort and Eight-and-a-Half-Tails. None of which satisfied me.
Btw, what do you think of Preacher in that slot?
ICBE - We're totally the coolest Anti-Thesis ever.
"The Citrus-God just had a Citrus-Supernova... in your mouth."
The problem with preacher is that preacher costs 3 which is bad for vial and generally hard to reliably cast him. Usually you can very easily stay od 2 lands.
This is why we play Knight of the White Orchid.
I'm not cutting KOTWO for SOLS. You can almost never make use of two equipments in play, and jitte is better than SOLS, with the sole advantage of SOLS being that you can play it alongside a jitte, which I just asserted isn't actually useful.
So the question becomes something similar to if I would run 5 jittes. But it's actually even worse than that, since SOLS can't even be played as a jitte if I draw it as my single equipment in a game.
KOTWO is awesome. It rapes goblins, it lets us turn wasteland into a ridiculously one-sided tempo play, it wears jitte well, and besides goblins, there's also merfolk, elves, and the small creatures of zoo where a 2/2 first striker does something on its own besides attack or chump block.
I'm actually switching in and out for Aven Mimeomancer, which is just that good since I face lots of dephts and big fatties like dreadnought, plus makes all opponent's creatures just that easier to kill with jitte, is a 3/1 flying on its own and makes wayfarers, moms, seers a lot more powerful! On the other hand knight is simply that good, so the package looks like:
2 SFM (simply insane)
2 Jitte
1 KotWO/Aven Mimeomancer
Ps: props on the videos, though one opponent or two played horribly.. :)
How necessary do you guys feel the Spell Pierces are main deck? What I want to do is replace the two Pierces with 1 Ancestral Vision and 1 additional land. I know it's kind of splitting hairs over 17 or 18 lands in the deck, but I feel very uncomfortable only running 17. Sometimes you DO mulligan, and having to go to 5 because you didn't draw any land in 6 is bad times. No, one more land does not 'fix' this, and maybe I'm just giving into The Fear, but 18 feels good to me.
Which brings me to... IF you were to add an 18th land to the deck, what would it be? Fetch #8? Island #2?
Oh and circling back to the Ancestral Vision: I'm actually on board with you guys over one being the right number to run of a card. I know you're going to have a tough time convincing people that one KotWO is correct, but when you rarely if ever want to draw two of a card, one is fine. The whole toolbox argument is dumb, too; just because you can't tutor for a card doesn't mean you have to run 4 of it haha. For example, I run only one Enlightened Tutor in my Enchantress deck; I'm always happy to see it, but drawing two of them in a game would suck so bad. And so, I think one Ancestral Vision is correct in this deck. It's vroom vroom gas that doesn't cost 3 mana like Fathom Seer, and worst case it removes to Force. But two delayed draw spells in the same game would be not-so-fun, considering you could have drawn something else (like your 18th land!).
"If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him.
If he is in superior strength, evade him.
If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him.
Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant.
If he is taking his ease, give him no rest.
If his forces are united, separate them.
Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected."
-Sun Tzu
I have a question about videos. Why do you often search for mana lands (Tundra/Plains/Island) with Wayfarer, instead of searching for fetchland and then fetching? That certainly thins the deck, giving you more non-land topdecks over the time. Are you afraid of that 1 life loss?
I really don't like cutting pierce personally - especially if we're not replacing with two blue cards. This deck is already pretty blue light, and you need to make sure you can support FoW.
That being said, if I was to add an extra land, I'd put the 4th wasteland in.
Why are you thinking about Ancestral Vision? It really seems like we generally have enough draw in the deck with fathom seers and brainstorms.
The deck thinning aspect of the fetchlands is not as relevant as the life in most matchups, since the life loss divided by the deck thinning ability averages out to about 10 life per land cycled (and sometimes you "cycle" into another land). Usually that's not worth it, so if you're solely using it to deck thin, you're making a mistake against most decks.
You still want a fetchland if you can use any of its additional effects:
More cards in the graveyard, shuffle effect, or land count manipulation. You also want fetchland if you're not sure which land you want right now, and the life loss isn't critical.
Hmm, actually, I can redo the math.
Ok, so here's the equation: Average Life Cost Per Cycle = Cards in the deck / draws remaining in the undecided game. You can actually calculate this during a game.
So that should be like 40/5 or so for an average early to early-mid game situation with Wayfarer. The problem is differentiating between the undecided game and the decided game. Getting the cycle effect when you're locking the game out is not worth paying 5-10 life when the game is up for grabs. If your opponent's only out is going to be killing you, it's hard to justify paying so much life for such a small edge on card quality.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote