I don't mind sharing how I side boarded as I said before I sided badly I just tended to remove the thought seize and rely on cabal to disrupt their hand. I mulliganed aggressively and rarely started with a full seven. I'm always looking for some tips. Definitely going to be sticking with the deck as I really like its interactions.
I found sequencing things to be very important. Eg, against the shard less deck in game one, after they Lilliana'd forcing me sac strix I only had 3 lands and was able to tap death rite for mana sac it to flashback therapy to remove the two FoW in their hand before casting Aluren and comboing.
Goblins
Out 4x Thought Seize
In. 2x Abrupt Decay, 1x Static Caster, 1x Plague Bearer
Shareless Agent
Out 3x Thought Seize
In 2x Abrupt Decay, 1x Scavenging Ooze
Game 2 I cabal therapy and hit 2 Agents flashed it back took the two meddling Mage.
Elves
Out 4x Thoughtsieze
In. 2x Abrupt Decay, 1x Static caster, 1x plague bearer
MUD
Out. 4x Thoughtsieze
In. 2x Abrupt Decay, 1x Null Rod, 1x Magus of the moon
Miracles
Out. 1x Eternal Witness, 4x thought seize, 1x Baleful
In. 1x Ashiok, 1x pithing needle, 1x Nihil Spell Bomb, 1x Null Rod, 2x Abrupt Decay
4 color Delver
Out. 4x thought seize, 1x Aluren
In. 2x abrupt decay, 1x static caster, 1x magus of the moon, 1x Scavenging Ooze
Omni tell
Didn't sideboard
Shard less Agent
Out 2x thought sieze
In. 2 abrupt decay
I am very glad that you had fun and success with Aluren! You mentioned discussing Sideboards; I have made a generalized guide for every major matchup should you so desire it. I will not say that it is perfect, but it at least can explain the gameplan. Boarding out Seize against non-combo decks is incredibly common, especially when you plan on forcing the game into topdecks or when you board in more ways to deal with their permanents. I have moved a Decay main, and probably will be looking for another if possible.
As far as the layers of interaction, Cabal Therapy is one of the hardest cards to play properly in the format. It allows some of the coolest plays and deepest of thoughts to singlehandedly take a game. I'm so glad to hear that other people are enjoying Aluren!
Definitely like to discuss side boarding and game plans as I think Aluren is such a fun deck to play. Actually your list and tournament report yoshipwnz and the discussion in this thread was what encouraged me to try it at a proper competitive event again. Previously I had tried running a Living Wish version which felt too slow and I was always hesitant of removing more dream stalkers. But removing the extra stalkers made a really big difference, as being able to play some better cards made it much more consistent. I did have the alchemist in the board as a hedge but it never came in. I was also expecting to run into quite a few D&T decks which are popular in the meta, which was the reason for the sage main board, but ended up not playing a single one.
I have been bringing in abrupt decay a lot in game 2s in general. I've also been toying with the idea of squeezing space for it in the main deck but am hesitant to cut the existing cards.
I found 2 abrupt decays quite useful in the main board. It is a real squeeze to fit them in though. But I've never been unhappy to draw it and always had a target for it, but my meta generally has a lot of D&T and Mavrick.
I plan on testing -1Thoughtseize +1 Abrupt Decay main. Bringing the total number main to 2. There isn't nearly as many combo decks present as I had anticipated.
I'm normally more active over on MTGS, but I wanted to chime in.
I've been piloting Aluren fairly consistently for the last year or so. I noticed that the direction my list took with tuning has been pretty different from the most common one in this thread.
Key notes:
1. I think the "fair" game-plan is much more reliable than it would appear at first glance. Despite gunning the combo in game1s, in most match-ups I board down the number of Alurens for games 2 and 3 -- In my experience, the easiest ways to lose postboard are betting on the combo too hard or getting your hand clogged with 4CMC enchantments. Boarding down into a shardless BUG-like 2-for-1 gameplan works very well despite the relative size of our creatures.
2. I don't really like the Thoughtseize plan. We're tempo-negative as it is, and I didn't like going even further negative. Force of Will has played much better for me, and it gives us a strong diversification of interaction that pulls the opponent in many directions (FoW makes them want to hold back, Therapy makes them want to play forward, DRS cuts off graveyard-stocking, Abrupt Decay addresses anything that hits the board)
3. Hinted by the above, I think Abrupt Decay belongs in the maindeck. I started off with zero in the main and then realized I boarded them in for nearly all matches. I'm currently up to 3 and they have been very good for me.
4. I really have liked Coiling Oracle as the primary cantrip dork. It's much better in verses controlling and combo strategies, and hitting a land with it makes you more explosive where you expect to be playing from behind.
5. I think that it's important to have more red sources than just the taiga, especially if any SB slots are based on it.
6. Edric, Spymaster of Trest has been testing extremely well in my maindeck flex spot.
7. I have liked Dream Stalker far too much to trim one. This is for a number of reasons. First, I want to be able to combo even if I pitch one to FoW. Second, I've found the 5 toughness to be very important in a wide range of match-ups -- be it blocking goyf, thalia, batterskull, or whatever. Lastly, regardless of whether you expect opponents to be competent in practice, I don't think it's right to shift your deck to beat poor players instead of good players -- it will get you through the early rounds, sure, but it hurts you too much in large tournaments.
Anyway, here's my current list:
4 Deathrite Shaman
3 Coiling Oracle
2 Baleful Strix
2 Shardless Agent
4 Imperial Recruiter
2 Dream Stalker
1 Cavern Harpy
1 Parasitic Strix
1 Eternal Witness
1 Edric, Spymaster of Trest
4 Aluren
4 Brainstorm
4 Cabal Therapy
3 Abrupt Decay
3 Force of Will
4 Misty Rainforest
3 Polluted Delta
3 Verdant Catacombs
2 Tropical Island
2 Underground Sea
1 Volcanic Island
1 Taiga
1 Bayou
2 Forest
1 Island
1 Swamp
Sideboard
1 Null Rod
1 Tsabo's Web
1 Izzet Staticaster
1 Force of Will
1 Fire Imp
1 Scavenging Ooze
1 Faerie Macabre
1 Abrupt Decay
1 Reclamation Sage
1 Bloodbraid Elf
1 Pernicious Deed
1 Plaguebearer
1 Engineered Plague
1 Minister of Pain
1 Carpet of Flowers
My thoughts on Legacy:Originally Posted by Ellomdian
This cannot be overstated. I'm sure he's a nice guy in person, but screw Zac Hill and his concept of 'Fun-ness' and Game Design with a rusty spoon.
Hi there, thank you for posting your thoughts.
Some comments
1. Totally agree, cutting some of the combo postboard is standard bread-and-butter :)
2. Force of Will requires blue sources, and we don't run nearly enough of them. This 'forces' you to play more blue cards (refer to 6. and 7.) which may not necessarily be optimal. Thus Thoughtseize is the lesser of 2 evils.
3. In the current meta I wholeheartedly agree with abrupt decay, the question is how many of these we want in the maindeck. I'm starting to experiment because I realize I've been boarding in AD a lot in G2s recently.
4. Perhaps you might like to consider more baleful strix over coiling oracle. The free land doesn't happen that often (and even if it does its not game breaking), but the upsides of baleful strix are real and relevant.
5. We already have DRS, so that helps us fix mana as well. I'm not sure the 2nd red source is needed but I haven't had trouble so far getting access to red. I saw that you have a fire imp in your sideboard (which I don't use), so maybe that's something that influences your decision.
6. Feels like a bad topdeck to me and a win-more card, but you might have chosen it because of point 2. Perhaps you can share more about it. I definitely feel there are better cards that can be run in its place though.
7. Its good that it works for you (perhaps your meta is full of bskull), but I think let's face it, dream stalker is a bad card. We only use it because its part of the combo, everything else is just saying "since we're using it, here are some other things that are good about it" to help us sleep better at night. If it wasn't part of the combo, I wouldn't be touching it with a 10 foot pole. I don't think I understand the part about shifting the deck to beat poor players. The thing is that the chances of the 2nd dream stalker being relevant don't come up very much for me (regardless of opponent skill). If you eschew force of will for thoughtseize (in 2.) you'll have so much discard that you can pretty much check "coast is clear" before doing what you need to do.
:)
I've not really felt forced to add cards for FoW. While it contributes to the value of some cards, it is not (and should never be) the principle factor of any other card's inclusion in the deck. I will admit though that some cards gain more than others from its inclusion -- Edric, as mentioned below, is able to really go into overdrive when its card advantage is also able to fuel a counterwall.2. Force of Will requires blue sources, and we don't run nearly enough of them. This 'forces' you to play more blue cards (refer to 6. and 7.) which may not necessarily be optimal. Thus Thoughtseize is the lesser of 2 evils.
Lastly, I have found it to be rather relevant that discard leaves you vulnerable to topdecks, and FoW leaves you vulnerable to sandbaging, but the combination of FoW and therapy pushes the opponent into a pretty awkward spot.
I highly recommend it. Pernicious deed has also been spectacular for me.3. In the current meta I wholeheartedly agree with abrupt decay, the question is how many of these we want in the maindeck. I'm starting to experiment because I realize I've been boarding in AD a lot in G2s recently.
Lastly, I have found BBE to be a pretty solid card for any match-up where they can threaten planeswalkers -- being able to snipe JTMS and Liliana while generating additional value/threats has been superb.
I've definitely considered it. If my local meta were heavier on Delver, my 3/2 split would be flipped from where it is now. -- Note that I've found Oracle to be better verses combo, miracles, Lands, and D&T.4. Perhaps you might like to consider more baleful strix over coiling oracle. The free land doesn't happen that often (and even if it does its not game breaking), but the upsides of baleful strix are real and relevant.
I need to fix Staticaster, Fire Imp, and BBE postboard. But I also want to be able to cast value Recruiters in the midgame if so be it. Letting me fix red through wasteland and letting me fix red off any fetchland is pretty important (it also lets me fix it off blue -- a more generally useful colour of mana).5. We already have DRS, so that helps us fix mana as well. I'm not sure the 2nd red source is needed but I haven't had trouble so far getting access to red. I saw that you have a fire imp in your sideboard (which I don't use), so maybe that's something that influences your decision.
How do you feel against Delver and DRS without Fire Imp? It's been fairly crucial for me in dealing with those things.
My meta is fairly combo-heavy. If I don't have the combo, it's very good to have a tutor target that just closes the game out on its own anyway. By drawing me into either Aluren to kill them, FoW to beat their topdecks, or Therapy to shred their hand, Edric poses the greatest threat you can represent with a single tutor.6. Feels like a bad topdeck to me and a win-more card, but you might have chosen it because of point 2. Perhaps you can share more about it. I definitely feel there are better cards that can be run in its place though.
Verses control or midrange strategies it also can represent a sudden influx of cards if you find a window to resolve it. And if all it does is draw 2 cards and then eat removal, is that so bad?
Agreed that the card would not be worth running in any other deck. In this one however, we run it for the primary purpose of the combo and with the secondary use of a whole bunch of fair aspects. The second one makes us (effectively) removal-proof -- and you had in the past mentioned that a key component of cutting the second one for you was that even if opponents have the removal, most won't understand how or when to use it. This was the point my "tuning for poorer opponents" comment was directed towards.7. Its good that it works for you (perhaps your meta is full of bskull), but I think let's face it, dream stalker is a bad card. We only use it because its part of the combo, everything else is just saying "since we're using it, here are some other things that are good about it" to help us sleep better at night. If it wasn't part of the combo, I wouldn't be touching it with a 10 foot pole. I don't think I understand the part about shifting the deck to beat poor players. The thing is that the chances of the 2nd dream stalker being relevant don't come up very much for me (regardless of opponent skill). If you eschew force of will for thoughtseize (in 2.) you'll have so much discard that you can pretty much check "coast is clear" before doing what you need to do.
Also, I guess I've found recurring something like E. Wit, Fire Imp, and the like to be very good in the midgame. It also gives me more options once Aluren hits play. I've definitely not found it to be bad, despite its embarrassing face value.
My thoughts on Legacy:This cannot be overstated. I'm sure he's a nice guy in person, but screw Zac Hill and his concept of 'Fun-ness' and Game Design with a rusty spoon.
Hello. I played a list similar to yours a couple of years ago, and here are some of the reasons why I chose to move on from certain card choices.
Force vs Thoughtseize: I became increasingly concerned with the quantity of blue cards required for Force of Will (even now you only currently run 18) and I found myself pitching Force to Force almost every time. It also causes problems because the very often we win not through the combo, but by just having an overwhelming board presence due to the very grindy nature of our creatures, especially when we naturally draw a portion of the combo. Force of Will hinders this plan by fundamentally putting us behind in terms of card advantage. This is not inherently bad as it can be argued that we have enough card advantage to compensate for it, but it is something to keep in mind. Being able to stop random topdecks and t1 kills certainly can be relevant, but I found it to still be disappointing. What Thoughtseize allows is: in conjunction with Cabal Therapy, you can very easily destroy their entire hand; Proactive interaction rather than reactive. It can also be cascaded into allowing for a t2 Shardless Agent to likely be a piece of interaction, but it will also make cascades worse as the game goes on, so it is a tradeoff. Costing life is a big deal against some decks, but not particularly against the decks that we want either Force or Thoughtseize, so it isn't too big of a deal. The fact that it costs mana is obviously relevant, but for the previous reasons, as well as the fact that we only play 8 1 drops besides it (casting Brainstorm on turn 1 is not a winning proposition) I believe that it takes the edge over Force.
Coiling Oracle vs Baleful Strix: The only three ways in which these cards are different is the mana cost, the potential to ramp, and flying/deathtouch. As for the mana cost, as your mana base shows, you favour Green vs Black, and your mana base is likely stronger than mine. This is primarily due to the presence of Thoughtseize, but this choice is also a factor. Coiling Oracle is exclusively better when: 1) It hits a land, which without help will happen approximately 33% of the time; 2) You were able to hit a land drop on the turn that you play it (if you weren't, then you just play the land off of the Strix), which I suppose a realistic estimate to be approximately 90% of the time. Otherwise, the Strix is strictly better. That is the general philosophy of which one is better, but I would also liek to point out the big reasons why I play Strix over Oracle: 1) If Oracle hits a non-land it is a pretty bad card, comparable in many matchups to cycling a Renewed Faith; 2) Strix serves as a removal spell for Goyfs, Flickerwisps, Delvers, etc. This is incredibly relevant from what I have found, and it buys great amounts of time or trades for another creature, something that I have never seen a Coiling Oracle do; 3) Evasion is incredibly relevant when grinding out the game, as some 1/1's and some 2/2's on the ground get trumped entirely by a Goyf, sometimes even an opponent's Shardless Agent, or Batterskull. If we approach most matchups with the philosophy that we have a better late game than them significantly (as is the case vs almost every creature deck, perhaps not Shardless BUG) then logically we should work on not dying, and I have found that consistently being able to defend yourself from creatures to be more relevant than the potential ramp (again, it only hits and is relevant 30% of the time).
As for the red sources for the Recrutier, it is entirely possible that you want more than 1 land. It is a choice that I made because we have 4 Deathrites to cast them, as well as the 1 land that I have found to be enough. Our mana base has always been Aluren's biggest weakpoint, and I found that by playing with 2 red sources, it often ended up in a situation where I couldn't play a card due to having 2 naturally drawn red sources, or even 1 naturally drawn red source hindering playing Brainstorm + Strix or what have you. I would like to mention the fact that you cut fetchlands in your mana base, a decision that I am wholly against. Being able to cnsistenyl select the mana that you have is critical to this deck, as well as the shuffle effects that it provides and the food for Deathrite Shaman. As for the sidebaord remark, the red cards taht I board in tend to outright win the game if they resolve and are allowed to be in play, so only having 1 shot at them isn't the end of the world. This is ignoring Deathrite and them not having Wasteland.
I have not actually tested Edric; he seems like he has a huge amount of potential and I will probably give him a shot, I am just always concerned with overloading the 3 drop slot. You solved this by cutting Shardless Agents, a decision that I cannot believe is correct. This card is fantastic and will always have value. It is one of the cards that I have been most pleased with in this deck due to it being able to cycle for insane value or finding disruption. I am hesitant in regard to Edric as he requires you to have a board presence, which admittedly you usually do, but if you don't then he is so bad, so I am not sure that he is an inclusion, but I will test him out.
The Dream Stalker issue. I do not know if I misspoke or if you misinterpretted, but I assure you that other's playskill is not why I run 1. It is something to jokingly claim, but it is often relevant, so it is not something to disconsider. The resasons that I run 1 are as follows: 1) Drawing this guy sucks. We all know it, sure he can be okay or even great at times, but the cost of putting him in play is huge, to the point where he is effectively a 4 drop. He is the card that I put back with Brainstorm the most often, and it is not very close (land 5 and 6 sometimes beat him out); 2) The matchups where having a 2nd one matters. The only realistic pieces of removal that stop the combo are Swords to Plowshares and Abrupt Decay. There are others, but these are really the only ones that you should be thinking about, since they are by far the most commonly played ones. The decks that play these are the decks that will lose to Aluren just being in play, regardless of combo. I'm thinking Miracles, Stoneblade, Shardless, Delver, D&T, Jund, etc. These are not the decks that you HAVE to kill them when you put it in play, such as Reanimator, Storm, Sneak and Show, etc. Since the only decks with interaction that can completely stop the combo with 1 Stalker are also the ones that we do not have to combo, I have found it to be an incredibly safe cut. This is especially true because even if they stop the combo, we still have a Cavern Harpy with an Aluren in play, which effectively wins the game a huge portion of the time. Obviously you expect your opponent to play optimally until they demonstrate a reason for you to think otherwise.
Abrupt Decays main: I think that they have earned themselves slots; they are incredibly strong, but finding the slots can be hard. I am currently on 2 main with the other 2 in the board, and I have been happy with this configuration. The reason that I actually didn't have any main at teh SCG was because they were not necessary at all; I wanted to beat OMni-Tell, Miracles, and Delver with Young Pyromancer and Angler, none of which Decay is particularly strong against.
As for the Fire Imp issue, I do not think that your plan for 1 drop creatures should be a 3 mana creature, even if he is tutorable. You should not expect to be able to hold 3 mana vs a Delver deck unless you are able to only find basics, no lands get stifled, and they do not have Daze. I have found the only times that I lose to Delver are the times where I cannot cast all of the spells in my hand, so relying on 3 mana is not where we want to be I think. I have been toying with Disfigure (and Ghastly Demise, but that doesn't hit Deathrite) and if I were to dedicate another slot to Delver that would likely be the card that I bring to the table.
this guy top8s a SCGIQ with Aluren
http://sales.starcitygames.com//deck...p?DeckID=94594
Yer boy Martin Goldman Kirst undefeated going into day 2 of gp seatac
Way to represent Martin! Take it down! Still undefeated will likely be on camera later (hopefully). I would love to see his deck tech.
This is my buddy Paul, he scooped for cash but could of easily beat miracles and taken first place.. He's been playing and tuning that list for a year if not longer.
Unfortunately he didn't make day 2 at the GP, lost to burn r1 and painter(easily one of the worst match ups) r3.
Team FireBrothers
Would Paul be willing to come down here and share his thoughts on his run.
take a bow Martin Goldman-Kirst, for top8ing seatac with Aluren
http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/c...sts-2015-11-08
His comboing through AD was thing of beauty to annoy his opponent. :D
good that he gives the deck a spot in the limelight. Hopefully he'll show up and write a report.
And I just decided to pick up that 4th recruiter I lacked.
Now this guy adds those ad's
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
PTT (Formerly of MTT) - We make Champion
I got this deck put together a few months ago because I thought it would be a lot of fun and I was already getting the Recruiters for Painter... In any event I started to read this entire thread from the beginning ~2 months ago and got caught with stuff, so I'm only about half-way through. Swoop I find it somewhat amusing that you just picked up your 4th Recruiter when you were extremely against it from the first time it was mentioned on this thread...
I know that times have obviously changed as this was in 2010.
I've sort of toyed with taking out FoW in my version in favor of a combination of Abrupt Decay and additional hand disruption, and I like that what I was thinking of doing already has provided an excellent finish, so I don't feel ridiculous in my serious contemplation about doing it. I've tested this deck against my play group quite often over the past couple months and I am absolutely loving it. I like the inclusion of Reclamation Sage in the Main instead of the board and I like the idea of Carpet in the 75 as well, definitely something I'm going to be testing and see if it's to my liking.
Cockatrice: EMFry
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote