What I learned from splashign another color is that you have to drop 1 mutavault and go to 3 and add another fetchland with a blue source. Having 8 colorless sources is too much and you will not have enough to cast your LOA and coralhelm commander.Originally Posted by straca3
I played UB Folks like year with this manabase and its really ok, I wouldnt cut Mutavault EVER! Plus now when you dont have to care about MM, Vial is ussualy going to resolve, so we dont have to care about the double blue.
True, Problem is, I have had opening hands of 1 vial, 1 wasteland, 1 mutavault, silvergil, LOA, and cursecatcher.
do you keep this hand? Chances are no because you cannot drop 2 things on turn 2. But with one blue source, this hand is playable.
You could have had that hand with the monoblue version too. Mutavault is just too good to run only as a 3-of.
Fortunately, there are other options to solve dilemmas like these: Cut a spell for an extra coloured source, or just, you know, mulligan sometimes.
EDIT: Over the last few pages, people have debated wether to run 4 coralhelm commander OR 4 Reejerey. The answer is almost definitely run both. I see people wanting to run less than 20 actual merfolk, and honestly, that just seems far too loose, too. This is a tribal deck. You need a certain number of merfolk to make Silvergill Adept consistent, and you need a certain number of lords for them to be good.
I would keep this hand on play against unknown opponent. If he doesnt play blue, its nuts and if he does he has to have FoW and still you can rip Island and win the game.
@Penguin, correction: in order to keep Silvergill consistent, you need a Merfolk to reveal or an Aether Vial at 2. The fewer Reejerey you run, the more likely you can keep the Vial at 2 because you'll have fewer reasons to tick it to 3. Ultimately, I want to run Coralhelms, Reejereys, and Images, and they all have upsides and downsides. At this point, I'm kind of thinking three of each. For the purposes of Adept, I'll have 22 cards including Merfolk and Vials. For the purposes of Tribal strength, I'll have 25 cards including Images and Mutavaults.
Most people blindly suggest new cards for decks. True contributors also suggest what to remove. It's not about what's good, but rather what's better than the current selections.
Tournament Name: StarCityGames.com Legacy Open - Atlanta
Number of Players: 249
Position: 2
Merfolks
Phillip Lorren
Sideboard
1 Gut Shot
Maybe it's not doing that bad... ^^
http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/dec...7&iddeck=49414
Nihilobstat on Cockatrice. Let's play some Magic!!!
The point still stands and is valid. 1ofs are pretty bad esp without card draw, but I would say it has to do with the 3 dismembers for 4 creature removal or 7 with the submerges. Still seems like 2 shot -1 of the other one would be better
He may have it in there, but is there a report of how useful the card was. Hell, I can put beast from within without splashing green in my deck. And by chance I win, it doesn't mean i used it.
"Phillip Lorren · Snellville, Georgia
Thanks for the props, bud. Gut Shot was good for me all day, killing multiple lavamancers and drawing a force out of an opponent's hand in a tight race situation. I can only dream that my phrase "it's like a fifth mental misstep" will catch on."
That qoute is the first comment from Drew Levin's article: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/l...ur_Weapon.html
I personally am trying it as a 1 of md and potentially testing it as a 2 of md or some combo of 2 in the 75.
"Dredge isn't a deck, it's public masturbation with graveyard triggers."
I actually watched him (Phillip Lorren) play on scglive vs NO RUG with Lavamancer and he used Gutshot on it, the commentators were laughing their arses off.
Assuming you aren't running searches, the opportunity cost of running an additional card in the board is one slot, and the marginal benefit is the access to that one card. This is obviously affected if cards become better the more you draw, or become worse. In the end though, you're still giving up 1, 2, or 3 slots to have access to 1, 2, or 3 cards.
The case can be made that if a card is good enough to warrant one SB spot, it is good enough to warrant 2 or 3. This is the reason why SBs aren't all 1-ofs, and are mostly 2-4. A second (or third) relic or spell pierce gives more marginal benefit than the other choices. Still, however, there is nothing inherently inefficient or ineffective about running a singleton in your board. If 14 cards provide a clear advantage over all other choices, and the 15th choice (which happens to be a singleton) provides less benefit then the first 14 (yet more benefit than the other candidates) then the best course would be to run the 15th slot as a singleton. Taking out one of the first 14 cards (which all provided a greater benefit than the 15th) simply so you aren't running a singleton would not make sense.
double post
There is also the question of "drawing live". I played one llawan in my gpt sb just because I only had 14 cards i wanted and needed and didnt want to go through the trouble of finding adwarven pony to put there. I figured this card lets me draw live in one mu, in an otherwise already lost situation.
Other examples would be one damnation in UB fae in past extended, one md stifle in merfolk, or just randomly tossing a leyline of the void in your sb, just so there IS a chance you WILL open it against GY decks.
Besides, agaisnt competent opponents it is beneficiary to have slightly different cards with same funcion to make it harder to sufficiently play around them. I.e. I would take disrupt, spell pierce, miscalculation and cancel over 4 mana leaks in UW stoneblade mirror f.e.
I've never heard of the term "Drawing Live". Do you have a link to an article/post that coined the term?
Anyway, I agree with the idea that something useful, even if a totally random singleton, is better than not having that at all. I'm sure the Llawan would have helped more than Dwarven Pony, though I would have used a Bear Cub.
Most people blindly suggest new cards for decks. True contributors also suggest what to remove. It's not about what's good, but rather what's better than the current selections.
@previous guy: It would be the effective opposite of "drawing dead"; by logical extension. One would assume.
Additional bit:
How does everyone feel about Phantasmal image at 3? Is that too many?
Last edited by Sansian; 09-24-2011 at 04:31 PM. Reason: To prevent double post.
Drawing live normally refers to games that are in a bad position, but can be won (or at least not lost) by drawing an 'out' you have in your deck. It tends to refer to either answers (ie needing to deal with progenitus or something similar) or to 'oops i win cards' - in the example llawan empress against fish.
Yeah, I guess I've never heard of that term. Seems like there's yet another way to refer to mising, lucksacking, topdecking like a champ, etc. =)
Re: Images, I've been running 3 and know of people who run 4. Helps keep your vial at 2 when you remove Reejeries and Sovereigns.
Most people blindly suggest new cards for decks. True contributors also suggest what to remove. It's not about what's good, but rather what's better than the current selections.
I would never remove Reejeries, but ofc Sovereigns
is there a spot for Sower of Temptation? really good with keira
Proper capitalization is required. Use it. -zilla
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote