Also, I thought I'd mention my current picks for the side, though meta depended. these seem like auto-includes, though the meta will definitely define how many I actually include. Like I stated earlier, Ancient Grudge and Faerie Macabre seem solid, as they're very broad in their application.
With 2 Ancient Grudge, you're always seeing it via the yard, assuming hate doesn't disrupt you. Regardless, it helps beat Bant, Affinity, Stax, and forces opponents to pop Relic, Crypt, and Spellbomb.. Pretty good in my opinion. If you have thoughts about quantity or effectiveness, please share.
Onto Faerie Macabre, as many have previously stated, Re-animator also got the Looting boost, and there's obviously more than one dredge player at big tourneys. Macabre has great application in these match-ups, also helps against Life of the Loam decks as a plus. Not to mention, Macabre answers our opponents favorite piece of hate, Surgical Extraction. I'm thinking a play-set of Macabre is a fair prediction.
If Leyline is a problem, which I assume it will be with Dredge's recent performances, I'm going to play a few Chain of Vapor, if not a play-set. Chain is the best answer to Leyline, aside from Nature's Claim. But, unlike Nature's Claim, Chain works fine with Cephalid being your only land and also has a broad range of application, such as telling Re-animator to f-themselves. Hmmm perhaps that's all.. Maybe Nature's Claim deserves a second look, as it can permanently answer otherwise recurring nuisances.. Like Sun and Moon, Leyline, and Cage, which were all over the place at Charlotte. Also answers Elephant Grass, Moat, Ensnaring Bridge, and other related hate.
Lastly, Firestorm seems to be an auto-include. While it's application is limited as far as anti-hate is concerned, it does answer Ooze, which is way to popular nowadays. Also answers a handful of other annoying creatures, such as Jotun Grunt and Gaddock teeg.. And of course, Firestorm beats Affinity, Goblins, Bant, mirror-match, and other annoying match-ups. I currently have Firestorm at 4 but could definitely live with 3, as I'm also playing Elesh.
Their articles are crap. That being said, starcitygames has the best articles written about Legacy that I found.Originally Posted by Matt
If you like learning about Legacy, you will generally learn more in these forums than in any starcitygames article.
I've been fooling around with faithless and led and I do admit the package is insanely powerful. However there's that age old problem of slots. I find that when I play the led faithless package md, I have to cut my 9th to 11th rainbow lands and my 13th dredger. Against combo and blind aggro this was fine as broken starts solve all problems.
But once you stop goldfishing and play against wastelands/force it starts to get inconsistent. Also when you mulligan, your 6 card and 5 card hands are truly terrible as without the extra rainbows and dredgers, your chances of drawing both deteriorates alot. I still believe LEDs are extremely powerful but probably not a maindeck choice. I'm playing the ledless list for max consistency.
I cut all my tribes for 4 md faithless looting, no md dread returns, 13 dredgers, 15 lands, 4 of everything else. I play the following board:
4 LEDs (I board these in replacing putrid imps against combo or decks like burn)
4 Nature's claim
2 Ancient Grudge
4 Firestorm (against Aggro and control, replaces 2 faithless and 2 putrid imps)
1 Dread Return (insurance against surgical extraction, having another weapon is always good)
I generally play the led or firestorm package after board depending on the matchup. Anyone else think led should be a sideboard card to prevent screwing up consistency?
Playing LED in the side is a critical mistake. Not only are you asking for a complete blowout with a potentially enormous amount of grave-hate coming your way, but I fail to see how it can be any better post-board when its obviously a card that is meant to explode in game one.
If you're concerned about running into faster combo, play LED main. It is too good with Looting.
joemauer,
I mostly see "hasty generalizations" here, such as "their articles are crap", which is the very thing I'm looking to avoid.. I just want accurate/unbiased info, which is impossible, but I'm trying my hardest to find it. For the record, both Prosak and Feldman have placed in prestigious competitions while piloting dredge. That alone gives me faith in their articles, compared to a forum where anyone and their mom can post.. That being said, there's a few people here that attempt to make sense, and I also appreciate/value their feedback.
-Matthew
The bold part is a hasty generalization.
joemauer,
Please stop trolling. I really, really hate trolls, and you're doing an astonishing job of being one..
But what do you cut? I don't want to cut my rainbow lands nor my dredgers. Has anyone played without pimps? If you are going all out with led and faithless, you should be dredging into plenty of Ichorid food. Or is pimp a sacred uncuttable cow?
Putrid Imp is definitely not a sacred cow in Dredge. For reference, Bridge from Below is the only card that I've never seen in less than a full set, with Narcomoeba coming in as a close 2nd (as I've only seen one successful build running 3x of the card).
I believe that you're going to have to cut a few Gold Lands, as that's usually the main difference between the LED and LEDless lists. If you were to cut dredgers, keep in mind that 11 is as low as I would go; I believe that some have been successful with running 10 dredgers, but I personally wouldn't take the risk. Good luck with finding the balance for your build.
Kind Regards,
jares
You will need to phantasgorian for food if you don't use Pimp. You ichorids will always go hungry.
I am going to test out a more blue/red build that replaces Pimp and Ichorid with Bloodghast and Firestorm. Will keep ya'll posted.
@Matt: Making fun of you for using "a hasty generalization" while complaining about "hasty generalization" makes you mad?
I'm gonna run just 2 pimps, 10 rainbows and 12 dredgers. That's probably what I'm most comfortable with IMO. I guess I'll run the 11th rainbow and darkblast in the board. Are dreturn targets that effective honestly? I never seem to hit dr+ target and have 3 creatures to sack until I've flipped over half my deck or more. And if that's the case, I'm usually winning. I'd rather board in cards like firestorm that are great to draw and have a huge effect on the board.
Joemauer,
lol You being flat wrong and laughing about it makes happy, actually. I was simply making the point that they have really achieved something with dredge, giving their opinions on the subject some merit, regardless if they're actually experts or not. I even acknowledged that all articles/forums are inherently bias, sequentially making them inaccurate. But, first place @ a SCG Open is more than phenomenal, and if you think otherwise, I'd love to know what you've achieved with dredge that makes you're logic so correct.
-Matthew
I absolutely agree with you. I believe that Deck Optimization should be based on Sound Reasoning and Rigorous Testing, as well as an understanding of the math the governs a deck's tendencies (I find Hypergeometric Probability to be very helpful). To clarify, the point about "winning" was mentioned because of the following train of thought:
- Putrid Imp was stated to be "trash" (kindly see some of the previous comments).
- Phantasmagorian was stated to be "better" than Putrid Imp.
- To help progress the discussion, a head-to-head comparison of the two cards was provided, considering all the points that have been noted at that point.
- It was stated that all of the successful Dredge decks after the banning of Mental Misstep used Putrid Imp, and none of those decks used Phantasmagorian.
- I suggested that, because none of the arguments are conclusive, it would be hasty to say at this point that "Putrid Imp is trash" and "Phantasmagorian is better".
- Because none of the points presented seem to have been conclusive for either side of the argument, I conceded that, at the end of the day, we are all entitled to voice-out our opinion and discuss our arguments. The only unquestionable way to prove our arguments, though, is to WIN - amidst all the excuses one can think of to brush-off its importance (may it be luck, circumstance, personal philosophy, etc.), WINNING will show that our efforts to improve were wisely considered, and it is the reason for why we are all Optimizing our decks. If others would prefer Theory-Crafting and Philosophizing over Winning, then I'll respect that too.
I understand that all this is done in an effort to improve the Dredge Archetype, and I'm all for that. This is exactly why I keep suggesting that we should base our statements on SOUND ARGUMENTS and SOLID RESULTS (including testing), because baseless statements would only impede the progress of a discussion. I personally would like to explore the "Phantasmagorian Route" more, which is why I keep revisiting this idea. Unfortunately, it has been difficult for Final Fortune to keep an open mind and become as unbiased as possible, and this keeps him from understanding that I would like to help with his argument by refining the reasoning behind it - I'm not saying that the results will be favorable for Phantasmagorian after the refinement, but I'm sure that it'll be much more defensible.
Unfortunately, this is what we all have to go through as part of a forum/community. As my friend once told me regarding these forums, "you'll have to sift through the stones to find the gems". I'm trying my best to sift-out as many "stones" as possible.
Again, I appreciate that he's trying to think outside the box, and I'm all for that. We have to make sure, though, that we don't "throw stones into the box" while we're outside of it. I personally have been criticized for my opinion regarding certain topics (e.g. not playing DR in the main deck), and I've taken these critics seriously, even if these comments were not constructively stated. At the end of the day, though, I took the results of my testing/brainstorming, considered all the criticism thrown my way, and went on to see if I could prove one or the other by competing - and, again, WINNING showed that my considerations were headed towards the right direction.
Moving forward, I expect to continue improving on what I've learned so far. Things will certainly change, as we will always have room for improvement. What matters, though, is that we base our improvements on sound arguments and solid results.
Kind Regards,
jares
I find this list to be very interesting, as I ran almost exactly the same main deck, with the only difference being that LEDs were used instead of Tarnished Citadels. It becomes even more interesting given that the Tarnished Citadels were placed in the sideboard, making a projection of our post-board deck very much alike.
It might even be worth noting that this list shows the stark contrast between LED and LEDless Dredge - the presence of more/less Gold Lands.
I'm also glad to see someone else placing well with a list that does not have Dread Return in the main - and this list takes that idea further by not running DR at all!
Would you happen to have Webel's list available?
Kind Regards,
jares
I think dread returns are not necessary in led dredge because you can overwhelm your opponent with the deck's improved quickness. Without LEDs and faithless, 1/2 dread returns should be played because your critical turn is roughly a turn slower, I see dr as sort of a reach card which gives the deck the final push over your opponent's board. If you are playing LEDs and faithless, you are already quick enough to race aggro or tribal with zombies and Ichorid, so I think the dr + target slots could be better used to improve consistency.
That's why I still think that 10 gold lands are still needed to cast pimps and faithless reliably. I also think 12 dredgers are healthy to keep the deck consistent. I plan to play the German list with -1 Ichorid, -1 pimp, + 2 rainbow lands.
I don't believe that "having LED or not" is the most meaningful consideration for running DR (or not), as the DR package, including its plethora of targets, has quite a few more intricacies than just speeding-up the fundamental turn of the deck. I do agree, though, that using the DR slots (including targets) for cards that you would want to see in your opening hand does improve the consistency of the deck based on the probabilities (as I've also verified these numbers during testing) - although taking out those slots might not always be the right thing.
I'd like to note, though, that having DR and its complimentary targets has always been much more fun for me than just winning via the usual beat-down.
Kind Regards,
jares
I find it funny, it's the exact same list I posted before,nobody was like great list :DI find this list to be very interesting, as I ran almost exactly the same main deck, with the only difference being that LEDs were used instead of Tarnished Citadels. It becomes even more interesting given that the Tarnished Citadels were placed in the sideboard, making a projection of our post-board deck very much alike.
It might even be worth noting that this list shows the stark contrast between LED and LEDless Dredge - the presence of more/less Gold Lands.
I'm also glad to see someone else placing well with a list that does not have Dread Return in the main - and this list takes that idea further by not running DR at all!
Would you happen to have Webel's list available?
Kind Regards,
jares
Webels and Heckers vintage lists can be found here:www.magicclubmol.be
@Matt Sorry but Vandalize is right. Feldman school of dredging is nonsense,as is yourr point that they won prestigous tournaments with it...I hope you don't mean SCG.
Anybody can win one of these with a bit of luck. They way Prosak played he did not deserve this slot in top8 and if the judges would actually do their job he would have never made top8. Advice: if you face Prosak at the next scg, call a judge for wrong gy order and wrong way of triggering Narcomoeba.
This man is a truthspeaker! You deserve a beer - if you see me in Ghent, you may present yourself to me as The Speaker of Truths and I will buy you a beer of choice
DON'T cut the Pimp!
This man is a truthspeaker! You deserve a beer - if you see me in Ghent, you may present yourself to me as The Speaker of Truths and I will buy you a beer of choice
Exactly my thoughts.
I've cut the Ichorid for the 9th gold land and I'm thinking about cutting either the 4th Thug or the 4th PImp for the 10th gold land.
I feel that we should make use of the advantage Faithless Looting provides for LED Dredge. We can play more good cards (4 additional Careful Studies) and don't have to play bad cards any more (Deep Analysis). And I feel that if we have the option to play more lands (undoubtedly the weakest point about LED Dredge before Lootings), we should do it.
Then I'd rather cut Cephalid Coliseums(when not running Sun Titan).
This man is a truthspeaker! You deserve a beer - if you see me in Ghent, you may present yourself to me as The Speaker of Truths and I will buy you a beer of choice
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
