This is the version of the deck I would run right now. Unfortunately I have to wait on the bounties so I am using deadbridge in the board atm. My meta is mostly R/G aggy and Jund, very few control players. I will let you know my results from my next FNM.
The more I play the deck the more I realize the vaults need to be caverns. 1 vault isn't going to sway the game as much as a resolved thragtusk or demon, and it will def fix any mana issues we have. In the control match vault damage is easily replaced by a eot sphinx's and a flashed angel with no instant speed removal to block it makes me want to throw up.
Also vs jund I think the life gain they have makes vault attacks moot. The benefits of caverns outweigh those of the vault I think.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
NYC DARK KNIGHTS cred to perv 90210 for the incredible sig.
Looking back at the past couple of pages, it seems the focus of the thread is trying to find an effective answer/resilient threat to combat UW/UWR based control decks. A lot of it is becoming an ongoing debate of Lifebane Zombie vs Geralf's Messenger, which as everyone in the past couple of pages has extrapolated on their pros and cons. Some of us are even to the point now of considering splashing U just for Nephalia Drownyard. While that's smart and hitting from another angle/providing some inevitability that's hard to interact with, I'm of the opinion it's better to first explore all of our options within our colors before splashing. One of our deck's biggest, but subtle advantages over Jund is that we're far less susceptible to Burning Earth. I realize that just swapping a few Swamps for Hinterland Harbors wouldn't change the total color source count, (or dramatically weaken Mutilate TOO much on average) but again, let's explore our other options or re-evaluate some stuff we may have glossed over before.
I'd like to suggest a card that's way out there, and was mentioned way earlier in the thread; Rot Farm Skeleton. In the interest of keeping any discussion on our skelly friend here constructive, I think before we draw up a "list" of his "pros" and "cons" (or before anyone immediately says "dies to Pillar of Flame"), we should evaluate a lot of other subtle factors again. To get the absolute most out of this card, and properly evaluate the advantages of bringing him in; i.e what we're taking out for it, what version of control we're playing against, and the inherent synergies he has with the rest of the deck is all relevant.
I have a lot more thoughts on the bigger picture, how this card can be incorporated, and specifically, whether it's right for the changing meta is all worth discussing I think. More on that in another post due to time constraints and already risking turning this into a rambling wall. :>
Yo dawg Frites Player, we herd you liked getting 1 for 3'd by Angel of Serenity, so we put some Angels in your Angel (Avacyn) so you can get chained while you get exiled. ANGELCEPTION.
Looking back at the past couple of pages, it seems the focus of the thread is trying to find an effective answer/resilient threat to combat UW/UWR based control decks. A lot of it is becoming an ongoing debate of Lifebane Zombie vs Geralf's Messenger, which as everyone in the past couple of pages has extrapolated on their pros and cons. Some of us are even to the point now of considering splashing U just for Nephalia Drownyard. While that's smart and hitting from another angle/providing some inevitability that's hard to interact with, I'm of the opinion it's better to first explore all of our options within our colors before splashing. One of our deck's biggest, but subtle advantages over Jund is that we're far less susceptible to Burning Earth. I realize that just swapping a few Swamps for Hinterland Harbors wouldn't change the total color source count, (or dramatically weaken Mutilate TOO much on average) but again, let's explore our other options or re-evaluate some stuff we may have glossed over before.
I'd like to suggest a card that's way out there, and was mentioned way earlier in the thread; Rot Farm Skeleton. In the interest of keeping any discussion on our skelly friend here constructive, I think before we draw up a "list" of his "pros" and "cons" (or before anyone immediately says "dies to Pillar of Flame"), we should evaluate a lot of other subtle factors again. To get the absolute most out of this card, and properly evaluate the advantages of bringing him in; i.e what we're taking out for it, what version of control we're playing against, and the inherent synergies he has with the rest of the deck is all relevant.
I have a lot more thoughts on the bigger picture, how this card can be incorporated, and specifically, whether it's right for the changing meta is all worth discussing I think. More on that in another post due to time constraints and already risking turning this into a rambling wall. :>
The main drive for Lifebane Zombie is jund rising up in numbers. In a vacuum, Messenger is much better.
So I did some streamlined testing with the version of the Rock I'm playing now that I'm back in the US against solely Jund and UWR Flash/Control because those are what we've been having trouble with and here are my thoughts and my records so far. This deck isn't just meant to beat Jund and UWR Flash/Control solely. It's the Rock but I've changed it a bit to make those match-ups more in our favour.
Jund #1: Matches 5-2 in my favour. This is the version of Jund that runs 3 Lifebane MB. Man, Lifebane is a ***** to deal with. It's incredibly good for both of us and we each hate it. Him more so because he has less Black blockers and more green creatures than me. I definitely think Lifebane is better than Geralf's Messenger now because of the information we get from it and the chance to exile a good creature. This MU was easier than the other Jund I played against because it dropped 1 creature and 2 removal spells for the 3 Lifebanes MB. What was the biggest powerhouse in this match was Lifebane and Underworld Connections. Drawing all those cards and having the intimidate to get through to the Garruks is AMAZING. Garruks were less of a problem and Rakdos Return wasn't as bad because I could draw cards with Underworld COnnections to quickly rebuild my hand. From the sideboard Primeval Bounty did so much work. That card is perfect for this deck and just wrecked them. Being able to create creatures by casting and then making any creature huge is actually a big deal and I loved it. In the last match we played, he scooped as soon as I laid down the Bounty in game 3.
Jund #2: Matches were 6-1 in my favour. "Normal" Jund deck. The matches are a little deceptive. All of the matches went to the 3rd game and it was a hard fought battle each time. What made me sad was that Victim didn't hit everything I wanted it to and I wanted more removal in the board, but I'm not sure how useful Curse of Death's hold will be and if it isn't amazing, it WILL be pitched 2x Putrefy. The same powerhouses were important as was so in the first Jund deck matches. What I really liked was that Abrupt Decay became better because it hits Scavenging Ooze, no matter how big it is.
UWR Flash: Matches were 7-0 in my favour. This was unbelievable. I don't know if he had extremely bad draws or if I had amazing draws, but the biggest powerhouses were Liliana, Underworld Connections, and Lifebane Zombie. Lifebane Zombie is basically a 3/1 unblockable and the information I received from it in addition to the 2x Cavern of Souls, I was able to resolve major spells and steal the games. I think the matches shouldn't have been 7-0 for me but I don't think my opponent made the best plays at all times and that may have attributed to the problem. The Underworld Connections allowed my hands to always be full and be able to keep up with Sphinx's Rev. Primeval Bounty replaced the slips and having a guaranteed creature that's a 3/3 is huge vs. them. Untapping with a Bounty is so much fun it should be illegal.
UWR Control: 4-2 in my favour. This was actually easier than Flash (or it felt like it though the results say differently) and it was incredibly frustrating. The UWR deck was a Sphinx's Rev deck with the wincon being Assemble the Legion and creatures like Resto Angel, Augur, and Snapcaster in addition to the burn/removal. A few games I lost to land despite running 25 which happens, but the information and Underworld Connections were incredibly good. Being able to know when they have counters and how to get around them was amazing and all the CA from Connections kept me on par with them.
If I were to change the deck I would do -1 Tragic Slip, +1 Disciple for the extra lifegain and draw and in the board I would do -2 Curse +2 Putrefy or +1 Slip +1 Putrefy.
Well, those are my thoughts and that's the list I was testing, feel free to edit it because I'm very interested as to how it will do vs. the other decks that it wasn't modified for.
EDIT: All the testing was done against players at the more competitive LGS in my town and these results probably aren't as accurate as they would be if I was playing against players who consistently did well at SCG Opens, GPs, IQs, etc.
Basher - I actually like that list a lot - replacing SiB w/ UC seems awesome. I was going to say that you need at least one putrefy MD but the more I think about, the more I like all the spot removal being 2 cmc and under. Overall the deck seems very streamlined without hurting the aggro MU. I would probably make a few changes to the SB personally though - its hard for me to get away from appetite and golgari charm in the board. That, and I don't feel that 2 scavenging ooze is enough GY hate (which makes me think the board needs a singleton crypt incursion). CDH has been a house for me but I don't think there needs to be more than 1, and to make room for appetite/charm I'd probably look at cutting the 4th Lilly and possibly the ratchet bombs - my feeling is that w/ 4 mutilates and a gaze, coupled w/ charm and Vraska, there shouldn't be too many permanents that you can't answer.
I'm probably going to try to modify my deck to look more like yours (eschewing the messengers for lifebanes since everyone seems to rave about them) and run a SB like this (as a starting point):
2 Pithing needle
1 CDH
2 Golgari Charm
3 Appetite
2 Duress
1 Vraska
1 Mutilate
1 Gaze
2 Primeval Bounty
I didnt end up putting more GY hate in there i guess (hard to find room) - maybe between Ooze, lifebane, and appetite post board ill have enough tools combat reanimator in it's new form (less gy centric and more midrangey). I can't think of really any MUs that would be too difficult (auras should be a cake walk w/ 3 Lilly's 2 edicts 3 mutilate MD, with charms and the 4th mutilate in the side -- aggro should be about the same (favorable) -- aristocrats/BW humans isn't a problem with CDH (remember to remove xathrid before sweeping) -- and the Naya MU is fine as long as you get your removal for thundermaw and Aurelia). I dislike not having putrefy somewhere in the 75 but this deck may not end up needing it.
I'm curious why your testing vs Jund makes you feel like you need more removal with all the sweepers + decay/slip for zombie + Vraska + Lilly + your own zombie to hopefully hit tusk/Huntmaster. I can see how a resolved Huntmaster can be a problem with none of your removal being able to answer it though (except decay after it flips or Vraska). Also, do you find yourself siding in needles against Jund to combat KRR?
I still like Sign in Blood, the two extra cards on turn 2 or 3 are what help find the lands so that we can cast Mutilate on turn 4. UC is slow and while I'm sure it's great vs. Jund and UWx it does weaken the aggro matchup.
I actually kinda like this list Basher - A few questions though -
The deck went up to 25 lands because we now had a small mana sink in the form of Mutavault to help when we flood out - We all know how precarious 24 lands was and not hitting land number 4 was game over a lot of the time -
How has 25 lands been without the mutavault mana sink? The games I've played with that set up, I feel I've been flooding out more than usual anyway..
Underworld Connections over Sign in Blood might be one of the most inspired changes I've seen recently with the deck..Theoretically it addresses quite a few problems we have, I'm exited about trying this out..
My only concern, and I saw this during Brad's playtesting videos, is the small amount of actual spot removal spells -
I'm not sure we need devour flesh (MB at least), but that's because I feel our hexproof match is good anyway, what worries me more is the very small amount of ways we have to instant speed kill a hydra or hellkite for example -
For the MB I'd rather those devour flesh be hard removal spells..
This also ties into other concerns that other people have with the new direction, although it could well be the right direction - But, we're trading spot removal for creatures that die to our own mutilate, and this is a mutilate deck..
Thanks, I really appreciate that.
The reason I chose 25 Lands with no mana sinks is because of the lack of Sign in Blood. I also wanted the 25 Lands to consistently get to the Curse of Death's Hold and Primeval Bounty on time rather than a turn or two late.
Yeah, I was disliking not having the hard removal. I think the Devour Flesh could become hard removal like Doomblade or Putrefy. I really miss having Putrefy. I can agree that it would be better SB.
@Fhorar:
Basher - I actually like that list a lot - replacing SiB w/ UC seems awesome. I was going to say that you need at least one putrefy MD but the more I think about, the more I like all the spot removal being 2 cmc and under. Overall the deck seems very streamlined without hurting the aggro MU. I would probably make a few changes to the SB personally though - its hard for me to get away from appetite and golgari charm in the board. That, and I don't feel that 2 scavenging ooze is enough GY hate (which makes me think the board needs a singleton crypt incursion). CDH has been a house for me but I don't think there needs to be more than 1, and to make room for appetite/charm I'd probably look at cutting the 4th Lilly and possibly the ratchet bombs - my feeling is that w/ 4 mutilates and a gaze, coupled w/ charm and Vraska, there shouldn't be too many permanents that you can't answer.
I'm probably going to try to modify my deck to look more like yours (eschewing the messengers for lifebanes since everyone seems to rave about them) and run a SB like this (as a starting point):
2 Pithing needle
1 CDH
2 Golgari Charm
3 Appetite
2 Duress
1 Vraska
1 Mutilate
1 Gaze
2 Primeval Bounty
I didnt end up putting more GY hate in there i guess (hard to find room) - maybe between Ooze, lifebane, and appetite post board ill have enough tools combat reanimator in it's new form (less gy centric and more midrangey). I can't think of really any MUs that would be too difficult (auras should be a cake walk w/ 3 Lilly's 2 edicts 3 mutilate MD, with charms and the 4th mutilate in the side -- aggro should be about the same (favorable) -- aristocrats/BW humans isn't a problem with CDH (remember to remove xathrid before sweeping) -- and the Naya MU is fine as long as you get your removal for thundermaw and Aurelia). I dislike not having putrefy somewhere in the 75 but this deck may not end up needing it.
I'm curious why your testing vs Jund makes you feel like you need more removal with all the sweepers + decay/slip for zombie + Vraska + Lilly + your own zombie to hopefully hit tusk/Huntmaster. I can see how a resolved Huntmaster can be a problem with none of your removal being able to answer it though (except decay after it flips or Vraska). Also, do you find yourself siding in needles against Jund to combat KRR?
Thanks. I really like the Rachet Bombs because Artifact removal isn't a huge thing right now and I don't think they should be taken out. The Charm I didn't feel was needed. Sure, it's good against Hexproof, but look at what is there. 4 Liliana and 2 Devour Flesh along with Gaze and Rachet Bombs after board. After adding 4 Lifebane MB I feel like I don't need the Appetite and it can replaced by Duress. If there wasn't any Lifebanes, there would be 4 Appetites in the board. I feel that Appetite is kinda useless now that we have Lifebane and now that Aetherling decks aren't as huge as when Aetherling first came out.
I wanted more removal because you need the instant speed removal to kill something on their turn then untap and do something on your turn. I want to have that removal in my hand and lay it down as soon as they lay their creature down.
What's KRR? I have no idea what that is. Do you mean Olivia or Big Garruk or something?
Been playing basher's updated list and wow - I am now a believer in lifebane zombie... just wow. And UC is amazing - I might go 2 UC MD 1 Bounty MD and throw the 3rd UC in the side - I find I'm almost always siding in bounty.
edit - I really meant to say 'now a believer' - not 'not a believer' lol.
Thoughts on a rock build utilizing trading post, bubbling cauldron, and festering newt? It'd shift the deck towards an even more control oriented route, but I'd like to see if it has any chance in the standard metagame.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to DarkNightCavalier for the Avatar and Sig.
Check out my Trade Thread for your Chinese Standard and Pox needs Here!
Thoughts on a rock build utilizing trading post, bubbling cauldron, and festering newt? It'd shift the deck towards an even more control oriented route, but I'd like to see if it has any chance in the standard metagame.
The combo is too cute to work in Competetive matches. I could see Trading Post maybe but we have better stuff.
The more and more I play this the more I love it - primeval bounty is just bonkers!! It literally makes every draw a live draw - with the worst one being a land that gives you 3 life. I mean holy crap some of the plays I've made with that card in play.
I'm also starting to see why I don't want charm in the board... kind of. I mean I love how versatile it is but I can see a reason to not run it in the board.
On the subject of ooze - it's been mediocre at best for me in testing. Sometimes I have 1 or 2 green on the field... sometimes I just cast a 1G grizzly bear... in standard constructed... I haven't yet lived the dream of disciple saccing an X/X ooze for awesome value but only further testing will show whether I will cut it or not. I almost wonder if running 2 putrefies in its place is the better play.
Thoughts on a rock build utilizing trading post, bubbling cauldron, and festering newt? It'd shift the deck towards an even more control oriented route, but I'd like to see if it has any chance in the standard metagame.
I've thought about a deck using newt/cauldron/post/angel's accord/tenacious dead but I don't think that combo is really viable or quick enough for standard... nor is it a direction the rock wants to go.
Been playing basher's updated list and wow - I am now a believer in lifebane zombie... just wow. And UC is amazing - I might go 2 UC MD 1 Bounty MD and throw the 3rd UC in the side - I find I'm almost always siding in bounty.
edit - I really meant to say 'now a believer' - not 'not a believer' lol.
The 1 Bounty main deck is rather dead vs. aggro despite the lifegain per land because it's a 6 drop and Underworld Connections comes in earlier to dig. Bounty is for making all draws live while UC is for drawing in the first place. If aggro becomes less prominent I'll put in a Bounty MB but until then, it doesn't look like it.
The more and more I play this the more I love it - primeval bounty is just bonkers!! It literally makes every draw a live draw - with the worst one being a land that gives you 3 life. I mean holy crap some of the plays I've made with that card in play.
I'm also starting to see why I don't want charm in the board... kind of. I mean I love how versatile it is but I can see a reason to not run it in the board.
On the subject of ooze - it's been mediocre at best for me in testing. Sometimes I have 1 or 2 green on the field... sometimes I just cast a 1G grizzly bear... in standard constructed... I haven't yet lived the dream of disciple saccing an X/X ooze for awesome value but only further testing will show whether I will cut it or not. I almost wonder if running 2 putrefies in its place is the better play.
Ooze does a lot of work vs. Reanimator which isn't quite dead and it's mostly for utility in the Flash/Control match-ups. Being able to deny snapcasters for a green mana is huge. Usually I'll have 2 green sources out and that wil be enough. The fact of the matter is that our Oozes won't become huge behemoths all that quickly, they're there for utility.
Ooze does a lot of work vs. Reanimator which isn't quite dead and it's mostly for utility in the Flash/Control match-ups. Being able to deny snapcasters for a green mana is huge. Usually I'll have 2 green sources out and that wil be enough. The fact of the matter is that our Oozes won't become huge behemoths all that quickly, they're there for utility.
Doesn't Deathrite Shaman do the same thing against flash/control for a black mana with the bonus of hitting our opponent for 2 life?
Doesn't Deathrite Shaman do the same thing against flash/control for a black mana with the bonus of hitting our opponent for 2 life?
Ooze can hit multiple targets in a turn, can get big enough to be a threat/useful to sac to disciple, and is better against aggro. DRS is a good card, but Ooze is better for this deck. Ooze is also better vs Reanimator because Ooze can hit multiple targets per turn.
Is deadbridge chant better then primeval bounty with ooze being in the deck has anyone tested both? I realize verse opposing oozes the chant gets much worse but at the same time we have a lot of ways to deal with their ooze and then pretty much guranteed getting back our removal or whatever next we put in gy if they cleared it.
I might test both but wanted to hear opinions on why bount>chant and what not.
Is deadbridge chant better then primeval bounty with ooze being in the deck has anyone tested both? I realize verse opposing oozes the chant gets much worse but at the same time we have a lot of ways to deal with their ooze and then pretty much guranteed getting back our removal or whatever next we put in gy if they cleared it.
I might test both but wanted to hear opinions on why bount>chant and what not.
bounty allows you to trigger it as soon as it comes in most of the time, gets around renounce the guilds, and is extremely hard, once resolved, for any control deck to deal with it. i wouldn't be surprised seeing control/ramp decks maindecking it sooner or later. i tried deadbridge at my last fnm and while it did win me a game i did have to get both of them that i sided in in play for it to be effective enough. ooze being in the deck; i think it is fine with it as you can use ooze to manipulate what you get back into play or to your hand. i however wont be using this card going forward as i feel it is just lack luster, esp. compared to bounty.
Ooze can hit multiple targets in a turn, can get big enough to be a threat/useful to sac to disciple, and is better against aggro. DRS is a good card, but Ooze is better for this deck. Ooze is also better vs Reanimator because Ooze can hit multiple targets per turn.
Ooze can hit multiple targets if you have multiple green sources available, which is something I don't like to count on too much with this deck. The whole better vs. Aggro argument also depends on being able to cast it on turn 2.
I'll concede the point that Ooze is an incredibly good late game draw as it can immediately start doing work (3 or 4 green sources), whereas DRS doesn't do anything for a turn. Also it's obviously a better sacrifice to Bolas.
I guess for me the tradeoff is late game power for early game consistency and I do see how the matchups you want either the Ooze or the Shaman will tend to go longer so it's likely you'll have access to multiple green sources but I see Ooze in the main deck of some people's lists and I just don't see it being workable with the current mana base.
Primeval Bounty seems like a 6 mana enchantment that doesn't generate card advantage. I think if you already have a method of CA then Bounty is just insane. So to me it just looks like a win more and I'd rather have Underworld Connections or Deadbridge Chant or even Staff of Nin.
Is deadbridge chant better then primeval bounty with ooze being in the deck has anyone tested both? I realize verse opposing oozes the chant gets much worse but at the same time we have a lot of ways to deal with their ooze and then pretty much guranteed getting back our removal or whatever next we put in gy if they cleared it.
I might test both but wanted to hear opinions on why bount>chant and what not.
Primeval Bounty's power comes from making every draw a live draw. It turns an empty board with a Disciple in hand into a powerful opportunity to get ahead. it guarantees a creature vs. control decks and gives you 2 creatures in the Jund match-up. It makes everything you do better. Chant is a CA engine, but if you run Chant you can't run Bounty because that would be too many 6 drops. The CA engine I use is UC + Disciple. You're comparing the wrong cards. Bounty is used to make every draw a live draw while Deadbridge Chant is used to generate CA. They have different purposes. What you should be comparing is UC vs. Chant. Chant is better than UC as a 1 of, however, it's possible to run multiple UCs where multiple Chants is bad. Another benefit of running the UCs is the ability to run Bounty where with Chant you can't run Bounty because that would be too many 6 drops.
Primeval Bounty doesn't make every draw a live draw. Lands are still just 3 life (which is nice but not a game breaker), and non-creature spells without creatures are still dead draws. Primeval Bounty with any sort of CA will provide so much value that you probably win the game but even without the bonus Primeval Bounty provides the CA will win you games.
I can totally understand UC + Primeval Bounty, extra cards being fueled through Primeval Bounty will just win you the the game on value most of the time while I agree with Basher that Deadbridge Chant and Primeval Bounty don't work nearly as well. They are both 6 mana which means some of the draws you'll get will just have you doing nothing for too many turns and don't forget you're not casting the creature that you're casting from the Chant so that doesn't trigger Primeval Bounty.
I'm not super big on Primeval Bounty because I don't see it being as beneficial as real CA but I don't think it's horrible either.
Well primebounty having 2 creatures verse bonfire doesn't really change things late game or even with mortars....or olivia it can but verse jund if they have already stabilized and have a garruk5 drawing cards or olivia with tons of mana etc i have my doubts that the 3/3 is what is winning the game. turning a dead disciple into 4 mana gain 3 draw 3 isn't bad its quite nice, and being able to pump up creatures while controlling the board can certainly win games but the only question i have is verse those decks does +3/+3=win more to begin with? i can see the random plays of mid combat after blocks cast decay/putrefy pump creature kill you but i think this is probably its weakest mode considering demon already outclasses almost every creature seeing play, ooze has the same potential, and tusk is just value etc.
Deadbridge has more potential verse uwr i thought then prime bounty, and yes you can probably run 1 copy of each since they do completely different things. Prime bounty turns every draw better, deadbridge recycles cards and potentially casts creatures for free(not always wanted like disciple of bolas with no creature in play etc).
Previously i did test 2 deadbridge chants+4 drs(prem14) and chant was a allstar verse jund/junk/creature based decks and annoying for uwr decks getting enough removal to beat a aetherling, recover from board wipes while not being susceptible to counterspells, etc etc.
I was just curious why everyone favored bounty>chant, is the field just that fast that the extra lifegain guaranteed essentially from bounty outweighs the randomness that can easily happen with chant before it can take over a game, is chant too slow on average the field to fast(would of thought differently with so many midrange decks but not sure), or is UC just preferred since slimes have dropped seeing as much play and getting 2 for 1 early isn't happening as much as it used to? is ooze just deterring people or shown to be too good verse chant in comparison? Or d-sphere on chant and being forced to decay to get ahead in the race and having to mill 10 again being really bad verse jace decks and those are already the worst mu so bounty is just better there?
Both cards probably aren't really affecting the game turn 6-7 to begin with...And renounce the guild isn't exactly seeing too much play if any at all and would probably be wrong to side it in verse the deck with all mono color creatures.
I just see benefits to each, and am not sure if bounty+UC>combination of chant+other cards. and don't exactly have the opportunity to test as much as i would prefer currently. But i can see UC+bounty being better due to more reliable on average then chant+combination especially with slime currently only in the mono green elves deck if any.
TLDR probably going with UC+bounty thanks for opinions.
12 Swamp
2 Mutavault
4 Woodland Cemetery
4 Overgrown Tomb
2 Golgari Guildgate
4 Thragtusk
4 Desecration Demon
2 Disciple of Bolas
3 Scavenging Ooze
3 Lifebane Zombie
3 Mutilate
2 Liliana of the Veil
1 Vraska the Unseen
2 Garruk Relentless/Garruk, the Veil-Cursed
2 Putrefy
3 Tragic Slip
2 Abrupt Decay
3 Underworld Connections
1 Lifebane Zombie
1 Mutilate
1 Vraska the Unseen
3 Duress
3 Golgari Charm
2 Ratchet Bomb
2 Pithing Needle
2 Primeval Bounty
NYC DARK KNIGHTS
cred to perv 90210 for the incredible sig.
http://roxiecards.com/rocking-the-scg-invitational/
Also vs jund I think the life gain they have makes vault attacks moot. The benefits of caverns outweigh those of the vault I think.
NYC DARK KNIGHTS
cred to perv 90210 for the incredible sig.
I'd like to suggest a card that's way out there, and was mentioned way earlier in the thread; Rot Farm Skeleton. In the interest of keeping any discussion on our skelly friend here constructive, I think before we draw up a "list" of his "pros" and "cons" (or before anyone immediately says "dies to Pillar of Flame"), we should evaluate a lot of other subtle factors again. To get the absolute most out of this card, and properly evaluate the advantages of bringing him in; i.e what we're taking out for it, what version of control we're playing against, and the inherent synergies he has with the rest of the deck is all relevant.
I have a lot more thoughts on the bigger picture, how this card can be incorporated, and specifically, whether it's right for the changing meta is all worth discussing I think. More on that in another post due to time constraints and already risking turning this into a rambling wall. :>
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=9157664&postcount=1
South Carolina State Champion: 2012
Yo dawg Frites Player, we herd you liked getting 1 for 3'd by Angel of Serenity, so we put some Angels in your Angel (Avacyn) so you can get chained while you get exiled. ANGELCEPTION.
The main drive for Lifebane Zombie is jund rising up in numbers. In a vacuum, Messenger is much better.
First, here is my deck list:
4x Thragtusk
4x Lifebane Zombie
4x Desecration Demon
2x Disciple of Bolas
2x Scavenging Ooze
Instants: 9
3x Abrupt Decay
2x Victim of the Night
2x Tragic Slip
2x Devour Flesh
3x Mutilate
Planeswalker: 4
3x Liliana of the Veil
1x Vraska the Unseen
Enchantments: 3
3x Underworld Connections
Land: 25
2x Cavern of Souls
2x Golgari Guildgate
4x Overgrown Tomb
4x Woodland Cemetary
13x Swamp
2x Pithing Needle
2x Rachet Bomb
2x Curse of Death's Hold
2x Primeval Bounty
1x Liliana of the Veil
1x Vraska the Unseen
3x Duress
1x Gaze of Granite
1x Mutilate
Now, here are my thoughts:
Jund #1: Matches 5-2 in my favour. This is the version of Jund that runs 3 Lifebane MB. Man, Lifebane is a ***** to deal with. It's incredibly good for both of us and we each hate it. Him more so because he has less Black blockers and more green creatures than me. I definitely think Lifebane is better than Geralf's Messenger now because of the information we get from it and the chance to exile a good creature. This MU was easier than the other Jund I played against because it dropped 1 creature and 2 removal spells for the 3 Lifebanes MB. What was the biggest powerhouse in this match was Lifebane and Underworld Connections. Drawing all those cards and having the intimidate to get through to the Garruks is AMAZING. Garruks were less of a problem and Rakdos Return wasn't as bad because I could draw cards with Underworld COnnections to quickly rebuild my hand. From the sideboard Primeval Bounty did so much work. That card is perfect for this deck and just wrecked them. Being able to create creatures by casting and then making any creature huge is actually a big deal and I loved it. In the last match we played, he scooped as soon as I laid down the Bounty in game 3.
Jund #2: Matches were 6-1 in my favour. "Normal" Jund deck. The matches are a little deceptive. All of the matches went to the 3rd game and it was a hard fought battle each time. What made me sad was that Victim didn't hit everything I wanted it to and I wanted more removal in the board, but I'm not sure how useful Curse of Death's hold will be and if it isn't amazing, it WILL be pitched 2x Putrefy. The same powerhouses were important as was so in the first Jund deck matches. What I really liked was that Abrupt Decay became better because it hits Scavenging Ooze, no matter how big it is.
UWR Flash: Matches were 7-0 in my favour. This was unbelievable. I don't know if he had extremely bad draws or if I had amazing draws, but the biggest powerhouses were Liliana, Underworld Connections, and Lifebane Zombie. Lifebane Zombie is basically a 3/1 unblockable and the information I received from it in addition to the 2x Cavern of Souls, I was able to resolve major spells and steal the games. I think the matches shouldn't have been 7-0 for me but I don't think my opponent made the best plays at all times and that may have attributed to the problem. The Underworld Connections allowed my hands to always be full and be able to keep up with Sphinx's Rev. Primeval Bounty replaced the slips and having a guaranteed creature that's a 3/3 is huge vs. them. Untapping with a Bounty is so much fun it should be illegal.
UWR Control: 4-2 in my favour. This was actually easier than Flash (or it felt like it though the results say differently) and it was incredibly frustrating. The UWR deck was a Sphinx's Rev deck with the wincon being Assemble the Legion and creatures like Resto Angel, Augur, and Snapcaster in addition to the burn/removal. A few games I lost to land despite running 25 which happens, but the information and Underworld Connections were incredibly good. Being able to know when they have counters and how to get around them was amazing and all the CA from Connections kept me on par with them.
If I were to change the deck I would do -1 Tragic Slip, +1 Disciple for the extra lifegain and draw and in the board I would do -2 Curse +2 Putrefy or +1 Slip +1 Putrefy.
Well, those are my thoughts and that's the list I was testing, feel free to edit it because I'm very interested as to how it will do vs. the other decks that it wasn't modified for.
EDIT: All the testing was done against players at the more competitive LGS in my town and these results probably aren't as accurate as they would be if I was playing against players who consistently did well at SCG Opens, GPs, IQs, etc.
I'm probably going to try to modify my deck to look more like yours (eschewing the messengers for lifebanes since everyone seems to rave about them) and run a SB like this (as a starting point):
2 Pithing needle
1 CDH
2 Golgari Charm
3 Appetite
2 Duress
1 Vraska
1 Mutilate
1 Gaze
2 Primeval Bounty
I didnt end up putting more GY hate in there i guess (hard to find room) - maybe between Ooze, lifebane, and appetite post board ill have enough tools combat reanimator in it's new form (less gy centric and more midrangey). I can't think of really any MUs that would be too difficult (auras should be a cake walk w/ 3 Lilly's 2 edicts 3 mutilate MD, with charms and the 4th mutilate in the side -- aggro should be about the same (favorable) -- aristocrats/BW humans isn't a problem with CDH (remember to remove xathrid before sweeping) -- and the Naya MU is fine as long as you get your removal for thundermaw and Aurelia). I dislike not having putrefy somewhere in the 75 but this deck may not end up needing it.
I'm curious why your testing vs Jund makes you feel like you need more removal with all the sweepers + decay/slip for zombie + Vraska + Lilly + your own zombie to hopefully hit tusk/Huntmaster. I can see how a resolved Huntmaster can be a problem with none of your removal being able to answer it though (except decay after it flips or Vraska). Also, do you find yourself siding in needles against Jund to combat KRR?
Thanks, I really appreciate that.
The reason I chose 25 Lands with no mana sinks is because of the lack of Sign in Blood. I also wanted the 25 Lands to consistently get to the Curse of Death's Hold and Primeval Bounty on time rather than a turn or two late.
Yeah, I was disliking not having the hard removal. I think the Devour Flesh could become hard removal like Doomblade or Putrefy. I really miss having Putrefy. I can agree that it would be better SB.
@Fhorar:
Thanks. I really like the Rachet Bombs because Artifact removal isn't a huge thing right now and I don't think they should be taken out. The Charm I didn't feel was needed. Sure, it's good against Hexproof, but look at what is there. 4 Liliana and 2 Devour Flesh along with Gaze and Rachet Bombs after board. After adding 4 Lifebane MB I feel like I don't need the Appetite and it can replaced by Duress. If there wasn't any Lifebanes, there would be 4 Appetites in the board. I feel that Appetite is kinda useless now that we have Lifebane and now that Aetherling decks aren't as huge as when Aetherling first came out.
I wanted more removal because you need the instant speed removal to kill something on their turn then untap and do something on your turn. I want to have that removal in my hand and lay it down as soon as they lay their creature down.
What's KRR? I have no idea what that is. Do you mean Olivia or Big Garruk or something?
edit - I really meant to say 'now a believer' - not 'not a believer' lol.
Thanks to DarkNightCavalier for the Avatar and Sig.
Check out my Trade Thread for your Chinese Standard and Pox needs Here!
The combo is too cute to work in Competetive matches. I could see Trading Post maybe but we have better stuff.
The more and more I play this the more I love it - primeval bounty is just bonkers!! It literally makes every draw a live draw - with the worst one being a land that gives you 3 life. I mean holy crap some of the plays I've made with that card in play.
I'm also starting to see why I don't want charm in the board... kind of. I mean I love how versatile it is but I can see a reason to not run it in the board.
On the subject of ooze - it's been mediocre at best for me in testing. Sometimes I have 1 or 2 green on the field... sometimes I just cast a 1G grizzly bear... in standard constructed... I haven't yet lived the dream of disciple saccing an X/X ooze for awesome value but only further testing will show whether I will cut it or not. I almost wonder if running 2 putrefies in its place is the better play.
I've thought about a deck using newt/cauldron/post/angel's accord/tenacious dead but I don't think that combo is really viable or quick enough for standard... nor is it a direction the rock wants to go.
The 1 Bounty main deck is rather dead vs. aggro despite the lifegain per land because it's a 6 drop and Underworld Connections comes in earlier to dig. Bounty is for making all draws live while UC is for drawing in the first place. If aggro becomes less prominent I'll put in a Bounty MB but until then, it doesn't look like it.
Ooze does a lot of work vs. Reanimator which isn't quite dead and it's mostly for utility in the Flash/Control match-ups. Being able to deny snapcasters for a green mana is huge. Usually I'll have 2 green sources out and that wil be enough. The fact of the matter is that our Oozes won't become huge behemoths all that quickly, they're there for utility.
Doesn't Deathrite Shaman do the same thing against flash/control for a black mana with the bonus of hitting our opponent for 2 life?
Ooze can hit multiple targets in a turn, can get big enough to be a threat/useful to sac to disciple, and is better against aggro. DRS is a good card, but Ooze is better for this deck. Ooze is also better vs Reanimator because Ooze can hit multiple targets per turn.
I might test both but wanted to hear opinions on why bount>chant and what not.
bounty allows you to trigger it as soon as it comes in most of the time, gets around renounce the guilds, and is extremely hard, once resolved, for any control deck to deal with it. i wouldn't be surprised seeing control/ramp decks maindecking it sooner or later. i tried deadbridge at my last fnm and while it did win me a game i did have to get both of them that i sided in in play for it to be effective enough. ooze being in the deck; i think it is fine with it as you can use ooze to manipulate what you get back into play or to your hand. i however wont be using this card going forward as i feel it is just lack luster, esp. compared to bounty.
NYC DARK KNIGHTS
cred to perv 90210 for the incredible sig.
Ooze can hit multiple targets if you have multiple green sources available, which is something I don't like to count on too much with this deck. The whole better vs. Aggro argument also depends on being able to cast it on turn 2.
I'll concede the point that Ooze is an incredibly good late game draw as it can immediately start doing work (3 or 4 green sources), whereas DRS doesn't do anything for a turn. Also it's obviously a better sacrifice to Bolas.
I guess for me the tradeoff is late game power for early game consistency and I do see how the matchups you want either the Ooze or the Shaman will tend to go longer so it's likely you'll have access to multiple green sources but I see Ooze in the main deck of some people's lists and I just don't see it being workable with the current mana base.
Primeval Bounty seems like a 6 mana enchantment that doesn't generate card advantage. I think if you already have a method of CA then Bounty is just insane. So to me it just looks like a win more and I'd rather have Underworld Connections or Deadbridge Chant or even Staff of Nin.
Primeval Bounty's power comes from making every draw a live draw. It turns an empty board with a Disciple in hand into a powerful opportunity to get ahead. it guarantees a creature vs. control decks and gives you 2 creatures in the Jund match-up. It makes everything you do better. Chant is a CA engine, but if you run Chant you can't run Bounty because that would be too many 6 drops. The CA engine I use is UC + Disciple. You're comparing the wrong cards. Bounty is used to make every draw a live draw while Deadbridge Chant is used to generate CA. They have different purposes. What you should be comparing is UC vs. Chant. Chant is better than UC as a 1 of, however, it's possible to run multiple UCs where multiple Chants is bad. Another benefit of running the UCs is the ability to run Bounty where with Chant you can't run Bounty because that would be too many 6 drops.
I can totally understand UC + Primeval Bounty, extra cards being fueled through Primeval Bounty will just win you the the game on value most of the time while I agree with Basher that Deadbridge Chant and Primeval Bounty don't work nearly as well. They are both 6 mana which means some of the draws you'll get will just have you doing nothing for too many turns and don't forget you're not casting the creature that you're casting from the Chant so that doesn't trigger Primeval Bounty.
I'm not super big on Primeval Bounty because I don't see it being as beneficial as real CA but I don't think it's horrible either.
Deadbridge has more potential verse uwr i thought then prime bounty, and yes you can probably run 1 copy of each since they do completely different things. Prime bounty turns every draw better, deadbridge recycles cards and potentially casts creatures for free(not always wanted like disciple of bolas with no creature in play etc).
Previously i did test 2 deadbridge chants+4 drs(prem14) and chant was a allstar verse jund/junk/creature based decks and annoying for uwr decks getting enough removal to beat a aetherling, recover from board wipes while not being susceptible to counterspells, etc etc.
I was just curious why everyone favored bounty>chant, is the field just that fast that the extra lifegain guaranteed essentially from bounty outweighs the randomness that can easily happen with chant before it can take over a game, is chant too slow on average the field to fast(would of thought differently with so many midrange decks but not sure), or is UC just preferred since slimes have dropped seeing as much play and getting 2 for 1 early isn't happening as much as it used to? is ooze just deterring people or shown to be too good verse chant in comparison? Or d-sphere on chant and being forced to decay to get ahead in the race and having to mill 10 again being really bad verse jace decks and those are already the worst mu so bounty is just better there?
Both cards probably aren't really affecting the game turn 6-7 to begin with...And renounce the guild isn't exactly seeing too much play if any at all and would probably be wrong to side it in verse the deck with all mono color creatures.
I just see benefits to each, and am not sure if bounty+UC>combination of chant+other cards. and don't exactly have the opportunity to test as much as i would prefer currently. But i can see UC+bounty being better due to more reliable on average then chant+combination especially with slime currently only in the mono green elves deck if any.
TLDR probably going with UC+bounty thanks for opinions.