About the number of lands, I played 18 lands and 2 moxen in last tournament and lost the semi for I was mana screwed in both games. now I run 19 lands and one mox. I donnot know if I should play 20 lands, but 21 is too much for me
Team Blood, Beijing.
Currently play: Sneaky Show/ Lands
18 to 21 seams to be what the highest finishers have leaning more on the higher number. I think we are going to have to do so testing. Its the only way to get a more precise answer me thinks.
Edit: Who likes the 9 SOL lands idea?
It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
Originally Posted by Spam
I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
I'd only consider the 9th sol if I was going that reliant on turn 1 moon plan. I personally would like a petal or mox over it in 90% of the situations I'd think of though.
I still don't understand why everyone likes Chrome Mox so much. Say you draw an opening hand of Moon, Sol, Mountain, Fetch, Mox, Welder, and painter. If that welder is the only one in your deck, are you willing to get rid of it for the whole game if it means a T1 moon? I think that if we want to run mox there should be more than just singleton silver bullets in the deck because Im not willing to part with a spell in that manor. That being said you want a T1 moon with a mox thats 4 cards from your hand. With a SSG its only 3. I mean if you could play it then weld it away and get your card back that would be great and i would play some but thats not the case. So can someone explain to me their reasoning bend even a single mox?
I don't think you can look at the chrome mox from that point of view alone. Yes, you have to imprint potent cards, but as the general meta us right now, I'm willing to go byebye on the singleton welder, jaya Ballard or manic vandal for that potentially devastating moon effect, that locks your OP out of the game :) that may very well change in a matter of weeks or months, as the meta shifts :)
But if you're running Chrome Mox for the sole reason of powering out a T1 Moon, isn't Lotus Petal superior in that case? You don't have to go down an additional card, and you only need the acceleration that one time to power out a Moon.
Find me on Twitter: @beanaman
Sure, but Chrome Mox does get rid of chaff in hand as much as it sucks up a card to power another one out. One Mox has been good to me along side a Petal. Both doing their jobs nicely.
The way I look at it also I'll pitch an important card to mox for a turn 1 blood moon, and then after that I'm also 1 Mana ahead of them for hopefully the rest of the game, which in turn help me finish the game that much faster. Petal does the same but you don't get that permanent extra 1R.
I dislike mox mostly due to having 4x Ensnaring Bridge sided. So while the card might help game one, there is nothing to say I will have the opportunity to make use of it game two.
For me, I run Petal and normally, if I don't need it right away, try and play the game as if it's not on the table. Save it for the right moment to crack it.
Did some testing with a mate tonight. Death and taxes alongside burn where two decks that I could not crack. They are both terrible matches. Any advice on DnT?
Sent from my mobile, forgive spelling and grammatical errors.
It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
I play Martyr of Ashes in the SB. Saved me a few times.
If anything mox seems even better with bridges, it empties more of your hand and allows you to drop it faster on the table.
If the advantage to Chrome Mox is that you get to pitch chaff to it, wouldn't faithless looting generally be better if that is the effect you want? You can even pitch extra lands to looting, which you can't do with Mox. It helps filter throughout the game, which can be critical. If you're running petal instead of mox, you still get the acceleration without having to throw away another card, and can potentially turn that same chaff into something else later with Looting.
I can see the argument for having another permanent red source, although that really doesn't seem relevant all that often (I could be wrong - don't have a ton of experience here). We don't need a ton of land in general and SDT and/or Looting seem like they can find them easily if you need one anyway. Mox is a little better with Ensnaring Bridge though - that part makes sense to me.
Find me on Twitter: @beanaman
I personally run 19 lands 1 mox and 1 Petal as my Mana source. With Looting, the only time i'd consider the card is when I'm going for a welder heavy kit, otherwise I consider it to not be worth it and their are just better cards if you're not catering towards welders.
I played it twice last tournament, same player, drew the first round and gave him the scoop because mise, and then later in the semis I beat him 2-1.
Blood Moon isn't bad, because it shuts off their utility lands and neuters Mangara. Ratchet Bomb/Martyr of Ash are great. Their dorks can't handle these sweepers too well, and you'll need to get a Ratchet bomb off at two otherwise their True Believer will shut you down. Revoker on Vial is also a solid play, and especially good locking up their equipment. An active Jitte on either side will usually swing the game because both decks are running nothing but dorks, so one connection from a Jitte often means a 2 for 1.
I sideboarded in Ensnaring Bridge x 4, the second Jaya, the Martyr and the Bombs for Magus x 3 (dies to STP), the lone Mox, a Blast, and 2 Welders (one left MD). Their only path to victory is through combat Damage, so sitting behind a bridge while you build up your combo + protection is the way to win. You can set up for the long game by drawing out their hand and then sweeping the board wtih Martyr or Bomb, then assemble your combo or Jaya+PS is a good game, too. Unless they have a super speedy draw and have answers to everything, iPainter has the tools to take over the long game. I'd never mulligan a turn one Moon, nor a naked turn two combo. Let them have it. This match is winnable, thanks largely to Ensnaring Bridge. You gotta know what they're doing to hate you out, think allllll their bears and Aven Mindscensor. Mom can be negated by your sweepers.
I think that my opponent knew what he was doing, it's not exactly a deck you can pick up and Top 4 even an LSG wtih. He made some bad plays but so did I, and over all I think that I would rather be iPainter in that given matchup than DnT.
Regarding burn. It sucks. It's a horrendous matchup, and if the burn player has any idea what they're doing you're probably not going to have a good time. Bridges don't save you because they have more than 20 points of burn in the deck, and all that burn is removal for PS in response to a Grindstone activation. You can nut draw some wins, and either their bad keeps, bad draws, or over all incompetence will also give you wins. Otherwise, it's pretty trivial for Burn. Any other red deck is a bad matchup, Goblins falls in the same catagory, and I wouldn't want to face Stompy either. Spellskite pulls good weight, and Bridges can slow them down. It's not bad to mulligan aggressively into a fast combo. Think of them as a combo deck that reaches critical mass over a few turns, just like this deck. Play to speed as a strength and you have a better shot at winning.
Honestly, iPainter has such good game right now that it's not a bad idea to run a sideboard dedicated to its horrendous matchups; namely other Red decks, Reanimator/SnT/Storm decks, and Zoo decks.
I'm nervous that the cats outta the bag now.
Naaah, there could be a little flare up in the iPainter hate, but I don't think the general meta will adapt to our deck.. The scarcity of Recruiters - even with the JR version - is still a "barrier" for people, wanting to prepare their SB's for us. :) My opinion at least :)
Just be prepared for people you regularly meet to hate you for playing moon effects... I felt it tonight at one at the weekly legacy tourney in CPH :D
Luckily that doesn't happen out out LGS much. We are all trying to tune our decks for the bigger events and are not looking to make adjustment based on a small LGS sample size. That creates bad deck building and inbred testing results. Hence I many times have dead SB cards going into a weekly that I refuse to change because they are the "right" cards to have.
Furthermore, if people start tuning their sideboards to beat Moon decks, they'll likely flop when they have to face meta opponents, and thusly wind up in the loser bracket. When iPainter runs good it's only losing to the red decks in the room, therefore people just might hate themselves out of contention. I say let the cat out of the bag.
Would it viable, having some apostle's blessing in the board, when facing R decks?
Why isn't Spellskite better?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote