"win more" is becoming a cliche here. It looks like two cards are going to split the thread in aggro/combo, like they made in Team America into aggro/control.
Archon is nice against sneak show, so does FKZ finisher, with the bonus of don't letting them time to answer by bouncing the target later.
I think that if sneak show start winning too much, people will be siding against it (like happened with Burn), and they'll Mulligan into Echoing Truth every time, so I'm already thinking about another options beyond Archon to fight Sneak Attack. So far, Archon is giving too much happiness against it.
I must ask why pimp is still played main in LED dredge? (not LEDless this is obvious)
Ive read through this whole thread and have been testing as well and it seems that LED dredge can keep the speed, consistancy AND the combo by putting permanent outlets to the board.
i.e. quadlaser minus pimps plus 2 DR + target and 13th land. This seems good to me for several reasons but mostly due to lack of hate G1 but also because it ups the chances of winning G1 with full sets of everything including ichorids, plus the combo element. Games 2-3 the pimps and even tribe come in if needed after spot removal has been boarded out for hate to give better control of dredges. Am I missing something here? I did notice a few people discussing/testing this build but discussion seemed to have died off.
Nah, it surely won't be like that. The composition of the majority of the deck rarely differs too much from player to player - it's only the play style (preference) and focus (embellishments) that outlines the variations. This, in fact, is one of the things that I love about Dredge - it can adjust from being a combo deck to an aggro deck in the middle of the game, and vice versa.Originally Posted by Calado
Cheers,
jares
Well, you hit the point exactly. I'm playing only 2 PImps main plus 1 Pimp and 3 Tribes side, for exactly the same arguments.
I also added lands in those slots. My biggest critique concerning the quad list has always been the 12 lands. I started from that list, removed the 3rd Ichorid and some PImps, and added two lands and a DR. And that's where I'm still at.
The reason most people don't want to cut PImp from the main board is probably that they know they need it occasionally (for example against artifect based hate), so they just keep them in the main. Putting them in the board seems like a waste of space at first sight.
My reasons for 4 PImps main are:
-I play 4 Ichorids, not having to remove Dredgers is good
- relevant Body
-4 more discard outlets
- useful post-sideboard
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
Izor- good to know im finally getting on a target with something. Ive been looking at keeping 1-2 main just for ichorid food and board space. It feels like even these are bad reasons though.
HokusSchmokus- I forgot about pimps body being relevant sometimes. Regarding ichorid food how many dredgers do you play?
@ forum- Im looking at 13 total black creatures including griselbrand as the DR target. I wanted the full set of ichorids just to make sure I always see them but I dont mind feeding them to themselves if necessary. Is this poor planning to anticipate possibly feeding ichorids with themselves and/or with griselbrand if the need arises?
Another thought: the pimpless build seems to have plenty of discard outlets, maybe even a surplus with pimps. So for those playing DR + target main why doesnt anyone replace pimps with 2 nether shadows main? I like this idea in theory because shadows can feed ichorids if necessary and better facilitate DR, plus DR main acts like therapies 5-6-7 for bridge. Seems to have more synergy than permanent discard outlets, strictly speaking of G1 that is.
Edit- I may get kidney punched for this but would 1-2 nether shadows main mean narcomoeba could be a 3-of? I know it sucks to have 2 in the opener but they power the whole deck. Could shadow be functional overlap making us more resilient to hate and less prone to bad openers?
12.4x every Dredger.
Regarding your other Idea, Shadows require Phantasmagorian to properly set up imo. Also, you can just cast Moebas most of the time.
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
I also agree that Putrid Imp could be treated as the flex slot in the quadlazer list. I don't agree, though, that it should be replaced by non-enablers (e.g. DR + Target). While Putrid Imp is one of the few cards that are able to accomplish three functions in the deck (Discard Outlet, Ichorid fodder, Warm Body for Sacrifice Effects and even for attacking), I find that one of the most important benefits of using it is the redundancy that it provides for our other Discard Outlets that also serve as Draw Effects when possible (Careful Study, Faithless Looting). With PImp in tow, we increase our chances of being able to use CS and FL as Draw Effects rather than as Discard Outlets for our Dredgers. Of course, if it's absolutely necessary to have access to [2x] DR + [1x] Target, then PImp would probably be the best card to cut (at the expense of decreased redundancy). For the quadlazer list, I would probably do it this way though:
- [-2] Putrid Imp
- [-1] Ichorid
- [+2] Dread Return
- [+1] DR Target (preferably a black creature, just in case it might be relevant; e.g. Griselbrand)
Replacing a PImp for a Gold Land would probably be fine, given that access to these lands is still the main dependency of Dredge.
Kind Regards,
jares
The consideration that you would sometimes need to feed Ichorids to each other is worth taking note of when constructing the deck. I don't remember if the "safe" number of Black Creatures has been agreed upon, but 14 of those would probably be good enough, depending on how often you would expect to need to get Ichorids into play.
It has been suggested (by Final Fortune, I believe) that we might actually be running more "threats" (e.g. Ichorid, Dread Return) than we actually need. The evidence that has been looked-into does actually support this theory to a certain degree (judging from the variance of the number of Ichorids + Dread Returns being used by builds that have had notable success), though I believe that the best way to find out is to test it for ourselves. As of the moment, there isn't a consensus on the optimal number of "threats" that should be included in the main deck.
To answer your question more definitively, I would say that it's more important for us to have a greater degree of redundancy for our enablers (Draw, Discard, Dredge) than to have increased threat density (at least in the main deck, for Game 1). After all, Dredge loses when it fails to Dredge, not when it fails to DR (which, I assume, is the main reason for why you're considering Nether Shadow in the main deck).
I hope that helps.
Kind Regards,
jares
Awesome responses thanks for taking the time to elaborate. I will consider everything you guys have said. Also that is why I was considering the shadows but now im taking another perspective.
I've liked Putrid Imp since it's your best card vs Tormod's Crypt, it beats down, sacrifices to Therapy and DR, and is black for Ichorid. That said, I think the next version I'm going to try with be without it, more Breakthroughs, and Griselbrand/FKZ.
RUG mostly.
Against MUD, I mentally checked out of the game after a good start from him and a bad one from me. Rather than play out the game, I conceded instead, assuming I was dead when I wasn't. Kind of convoluted, but I probably would have won.
From my article:
"+ 2 Nether Shadow, 1 Tarnished Citadel, 1 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite, 1 Dread Return
- 2 Breakthrough, 2 Cabal Therapy, 1 Golgari Thug
Delver of Secrets is basically the only card that matters. You can block Tarmogoyf and Nimble Mongoose all day long. It's even at the point where I'm considering boarding in Firestorm. You can use it to kill Delver, plus it's an uncounterable discard outlet. If they are siding in Scavenging Ooze, then it's even better.
Most people say to side out Lion's Eye Diamonds, but I don't think that's correct. If they have no pressure you probably draw and discard, but if they have a Delver or some such you really need to explode. In a lot of the games I've played, I've cast a turn 1 discard outlet, it's gotten Dazed, Pierced, or Forced, and then I'd get Wastelanded. Hopefully on the next turn I can do the same thing, but that's not very fast.
LED allows you to play multiple spells they want to counter in a single turn. Also, if they sandbag Tormod's Crypt, you can potentially explode with a flashbacked Looting or Cephalid Coliseum. At that point, you should be able to establish a board presence with Zombies and Therapy their hand away.
Putrid Imp is solid against Tormod's Crypt, but you can board one or more out if they have Surgicals.
As always, sideboarding isn't set in stone, and you should do whatever feels right."
In the last round of SCG Columbus, I sided in two Firestorms and there were pretty good, so I might keep doing that. It killed a Delver which gave me a ton of turns and was a fine discard outlet.
I guess this is my problem with pimp, i.e. breakthrough/study/looting/coliseum and griselbrand are all so much more powerful. That being said im just a returning player so I cant speak with much authority.I've liked Putrid Imp since it's your best card vs Tormod's Crypt, it beats down, sacrifices to Therapy and DR, and is black for Ichorid. That said, I think the next version I'm going to try with be without it, more Breakthroughs, and Griselbrand/FKZ.
I certainly agree. You can even add LED to the list of cards that are "so much more powerful". The thing about Putrid Imp, though, is that it was never meant to be "powerful". While all the cards that we mentioned serve as the "star players" in the deck, I like to think of Putrid Imp as the "glue guy", the role player that rarely gets the credit for doing the little things and never complains about the dirty work. As I've expressed quite a few times in the past, my appreciation of the card stems from the fact that it's able to facilitate several of the deck's functions, while at the same time increasing the deck's resilience and reliability.
While Putrid Imp will never be a piece that will be absolutely necessary for Dredge, but you'll be hard-pressed to look for an alternative for something that makes the other cards in the deck much better.
Cheers,
jares
I think that grislebrand really pushes this deck to the next level. imo u dont even need FKZ with him, u dredge almost your entire deck most likely hitting three or four therapies as well as a few narcos and a ton of bridges. At this point you can look at FKZ as win more, you rape your opponents hand leaving you with insane board position. Heres the list Ive been testing for about a month now, with great results.
4 gemstone mine
4 city of brass
3 cephalid coliseum(i know i know)
2 tarnished citadel
4 golgari thug
4 golgari grave troll
4 stinkweed imp
4 narcomoeba
3 ichorid
2 grislebrand
4 lions eye diamond
4 bridge from below
4 careful study
4 faithless looting
4 breakthrough
4 cabal therapy
2 dread returns
The sideboard is obviously meta dependent heres mine as of today.
4 natures claim
2 chain of vapor
4 unmask
2 ashen ghoul
1 ancient grudge
1 angel of despair
1 ichorid
Putrid Imp just isnt necessary in led dredge, if you still play him I suggest u test my list and see how it goes.
Team Hammafist-We don't take kindly to those who don't take kindly."Got any trade boogas?"
That's just as true for Griselbrand (or any other DR target for that matter, at least in the main deck), but we play it anyway.
Cheers,
jares
Jares has a point, but I have to say double griselbrand is seriously cool.
To add to that, I do agree that Griselbrand, by itself, should be sufficient - in other words, while FKZ does provide avenues of attack that the deck would otherwise be unable to take without it, I don't find its inclusion alongside Griselbrand to be absolutely necessary.
Kind Regards,
jares
While grislebrand may not be absolutely necessary for dredge in genereal I see it as follows. He gives the deck a reliable way to simply outrace any other combo deck (be it belcher, doomsday, tes or any other storm variant). He also gives you the ability to just outrace serious threats(like 3sphere, bloodmoon, a reanimated iona, scavenging ooze, even random jank like ensnaring bridge or tabernacle). With my list the number of times Ive cabal therapied opponents out of the game as early as turn one is just retarded. Being able to reliably answer any piece of hate(with leyline and surgical two exceptions, and when on the play obviously) is simply invaluable for any dredge deck.
He does alot more than any other return target could even think of. He also makes the burn match nearly unloseable. Not to mention 7/7 lifelink flier can race just about anything you come across.
Its been so good Ive been tryin to find room for 1DR and 1 Grislebrand in my sideboard but im still debating that in my head.
Im seriously telling every dredge player to at least find the room for 2 DR and 2 Grislebrand and do some testing with it.
Last edited by HammafistRoob; 06-06-2012 at 12:54 PM. Reason: specifications added
Team Hammafist-We don't take kindly to those who don't take kindly."Got any trade boogas?"
I have never lost to burn or zoo with LED dredge, you know the full 2 out of 3. These are by far the easiest matchups for me. Am I the only that feels this way?
I agree with all the other strengths you listed about him. I would run one in my maindeck if I owned one. I am a little apprehensive to run out and buy this card as a Yawgmoth's Bargain effect in Legacy might not be around after June 20th.
While burn is an easy matchup most of the time it can become a serious headache if your forced to mulligan to less than 6. They have multiple ways to deal with bridge and they have a decent clock to boot.
While burn may be an easy matchup it doesnt mean that you autowin. With grislebrand though this is as close to an autowin matchup you can hope for.
(this is NOT an arguement to run grislebrand, its meerly an added bonus of running him)
Im about 100% sure grislebrand wont become grislebanned until a certain archetype exploits him well enough. He hasnt shown enough results to be banned in two weeks. My advice is to buy them now before they become 30/40 dollar cards. After wizards makes their money on a card is when they ban it, they wait for the price to skyrocket first.
Team Hammafist-We don't take kindly to those who don't take kindly."Got any trade boogas?"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
