| |
| Author |
Message |
Rate this article!
| 5 (Best) |
| [ 4 ] 80% |
| |
| 4 |
| [ 0 ] 0% |
| |
| 3 |
| [ 1 ] 20% |
| |
| 2 |
| [ 0 ] 0% |
| |
| 1 (Worst) |
| [ 0 ] 0% |
| |
Total Votes : 5 |
|
| The First |
![]() Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:02 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 07 Oct 2005
Posts: 195
Location: Anderlecht, Belgium
|
La_Sin_Grail wrote: Turn four? No. I have signet.
Correction: you have 2 signets. What are the odds to get AND a signet AND 3 land cards AND 1 Gelectrode AND 1 Unnatural Speed in your hand at turn 3? The signet preferable before turn three.
Very unlikely IMO. The signet alone is a 35% chance to draw it before turn 3. If you use 4 signets, you’d have a good chance of getting one (70% w/o mulligan).
Quote:
As for burning creatures and still planning to win the game, my idea is that I can pump dragonauts every time I burn a creature, or ping an extra time. When they play 1-2 toughness creatures and I can burn 2-3 plus get the bonus of ping and/or pump, I can stall out. Also, I tend to have card drawing that lets trading one for one be in my favor.
My point is that my WWr runs 10-12 removal cards and 26 creature spells. Good luck for your Dragos to survive (which they didn’t during playtest against my WWr btw) and that you need all blast cards against my creatures.
Sure you have Lava Spike but Lightning Helix annuls it’s effect (and you’ll get 2-for-1’ed more or less because your Spike doesn’t have any effect and I kill a creature with it).
Quote:
I’m not sure why the words in response took out dragonauts from ping deck... if you mean they kill it in response, then I’m not seeing how it matters when they kill it. If they’re going to, you either counter it or take it.
Because YOU burn in response to moldervine cloack and to equipping a Jitte. Mostly, that’s not during your turn so no pump for the Dragonauts. That’s also why I took my dragonauts out of my ping deck. The moment you start playing cards in response to the opponent (and thus during his turn), the dragonauts become less effective.
And stop saying that you’ll counter because you don’t even run counterspells MD. If they take out your Gelectrode or Dragos, there’s actually nothing you can do about it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| La_Sin_Grail |
![]() Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 4:05 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 806
Location: Maryland
|
Erm... I’m sorry if I offended you. You’re really getting agressive here.
" Correction: you have two signets" Ok... did I say I had four? Where? I’d like to fix that. Oh... I didn’t.
As for Wwr, there is no one decklist. There are some staples, like lightning helix, isamaru, jitte, and flyers, but there isn’t one list. The build I tested is very creature heavy. I’m not sure how many times I should say this or how. There were a lot of creatures. The goal of the deck was to make a lot of creatures attack for a lot of damage. The focus was on attacking not burning.
I agree that helix is better than spike. My point is, so? Of course helix is better it costs more and it’s two colors. That’s a terrible comparison if I’ve ever seen one. If you compare it to hammer, thats a little close at least, but stop picking on spike. Helix is the best card in Wwr. I accept that and choose to win anyway.
Yes, I’d agree not pumping dragonauts with a spell isn’t a good thing. However, I get a two for one on their cloak. I consider a two for one worth not getting two extra power temporarily.
So you’re telling me to not run dragonauts, but to run more creatures. This is a complete contradiction... which issue should I address? Ok, how about both.
1) I have draw spells. this means that because I run ten creatures to ~6 removal, I will have one at pretty much all times (unless they topdeck four helixes in which case no deck would win. Good thing thats highly unlikely).
2) Dragonaut not gaining +2/0 once so I can pull a two for one isn’t exactly going to make me want to take it out. I’m happy to give up two damage for stopping a bomb and gaining card advantage in one easy step.
3) Running more creatures tended to not work too well for me. Running izzet guildmage didn’t work out because there is no synergy with gelectrode or dragonauts. It’s not play a copy of the spell, so I don’t get the effect again. Running more mizzets gave me legend rule problems.
I would agree that a burn deck has the upper hand in this matchup, and I never said that I did. I said I can beat creature heavy Wwr, and that is very accurate. Have you ever seen how much for it is to ping, electrolyze, and ping out two savannah lions, a suntail hawk and a lantern kami? That was my favorite moment with this deck. It’s absolutely priceless. And it cleared their whole board except a jitte without creatures. No counters on the jitte meant I got to kill the creature before they could ever swing with jitte. I dominated the games like that against Wwr creature. Poor them.
Burn wins because of it targets creatures, granted. Also, you need to remember that no deck has all good matchups. That very same burnish Wwr deck will get killed mercilessly by Ghazi Glare and Domain. Simply put- there are tradeoffs everywhere. I never expected to beat the entire field, just enough of it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| The First |
![]() Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:05 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 07 Oct 2005
Posts: 195
Location: Anderlecht, Belgium
|
Hi,
I’m not aggressive (or at least, I didn’t mean to be). I’m also not saying that you don’t have signets. I’m just pointing out that you only have 2 signets and that the chances of getting them in time against any aggro deck in order to cast a third turn Speed + Gelectrode are slim.
My WWr is also creature heavy. I run 26 creatures in the deck (you could argue that it isn’t THAT creature heavy but "average" I guess). I run Helix and Devouring Light as removal + 4 Anthems aside from my creature base. I don’t even use Jitte in it. I tested against your deck 10 times or so and it isn’t by far a good match-up as you stated. But, indeed, your version might be a better match-up for your deck if it has less removal and/or no anthems.
I’m not comparing Helix to Spike. I’m just saying that even though your deck could control the board at some point during a game, it lacked a good finisher. Something (a creature) that can’t be killed by a Helix for instance. If you have something that can only be destroyed by a devouring light, it’s survival chances are a lot better against WWr. I, personnally, find a Keiga or Meloku better finishers than the Dragos even though the dragos can get huge power values, my threaths are more stable and they allow me to react to a deck instead of tapping out during my turn.
I’m just trying to help you improve your deck. I’m sorry if I offended you.
~ The First |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| La_Sin_Grail |
![]() Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:54 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 806
Location: Maryland
|
inresponse wrote: even a turn 3 ping to a savannah lions is a little late, or to a bird. Besides, in Return for that late ping, you lose a card that you don’t have to lose. If you don’t mind losing a card to kill a creature, just play another burn spell and kill the creature turn 2. Glacial ray and guerilla tactics are far better options than using up 4 mana to kill one creature .
True, I would agree that four mana is more efficient than two. The problem is, I need to get gelectrode/dragonauts down ASAP. If I can play signet turn two instead of burn, I will. I’d rather be able to get more mana on turn four than not have one, because the outcome is the same, only yours saves one turn of swing and mine leaves one extra mana. I personally prefer the mana, because it allows electrolyze and hammer the next turn, along with three ping damage- a board clear completely and a chance to draw a card. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| inresponse |
![]() Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 1:34 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Oct 2005
Posts: 162
Location:
|
| I think you either need a new testing gauntlet, new partners, or to tune the deck more, because no matter what I do I cannot get a winning record versus any deck in standard. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| La_Sin_Grail |
![]() Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:36 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 806
Location: Maryland
|
| I’m shocked... what exactly are the lists you’ve been using? I must admit, I don’t try more than one deck of each archtype- I played a more creature heavy Wwr, and the domain was very signet/annex/dreamleashy. I would love to have a list you’d consider better so that I can analyze the matchups and tweak the deck accordingly. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| inresponse |
![]() Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:00 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Oct 2005
Posts: 162
Location:
|
| for B/W I used Olivier Ruel’s list from PT Honanlulu, I used Antoine Ruel’s Owling Mine list, Roxodon Heirarch by the Beach House, and Craig Jones Zoo, Flores’ Izzetron and Red Deck Wins. I think maybe the lists you are using are outdated. R/w white weenie is no longer played, it’s place taken by zoo and gruul as the agro decks of choice. Emminent Domain didn’t die off, but it morphed into an urzatron deck, although not the one I tested against. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| La_Sin_Grail |
![]() Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 4:17 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 806
Location: Maryland
|
| Erm... I wrote this before the PTQ Honolulu decks were out, so I used the prior power decks in standard. I guess you could call that outdated, but it wasn’t when I wrote it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| inresponse |
![]() Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 12:32 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Oct 2005
Posts: 162
Location:
|
| when I first tested I used my b/w list from last month, an urzatron much like osyp’s, the same red deck wins list, and an almost identical zoo list, all with the same results. It doesn’t matter the metagame around it, this deck just can’t perform. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| La_Sin_Grail |
![]() Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 4:11 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 806
Location: Maryland
|
I would be curious to see a game play out and how you play the deck. I’ve found that some people have a better feel for the deck than others.
By the way, identical to what? I will say again the I didn’t use the Honolulu decklists because they weren’t out yet.
EDIT: Please refrain from absolutes. I would guarantee that this deck vs a sixty island deck would win. There’s a meta. Also, this is a deck very dependant on how you play it. Perhaps you aren’t protecting the creatures the most you can? Perhaps you’re playing the spells out of order, or misplacing burn? There’s a number of things you can do that even with the best intentions make this deck falter and fall. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
All times are UTC - 4
|
|
Forum index » Magic: The Gathering » MTG Strategy Article Contest
