It's a 2/2 for 3 at first which honestly isn't that bad, a 2/3 for 1UU which isn't bad either, but the flip ability is basically 2U "Get a 2/3 and destroy target creature with Toughness 2 or less."
Also guys, I'm in need of help fixing my Rakdos section in my 450;
I added Spawn of Rix Maadi solely to just fit the curve and help that Rakdos aggro get its finish touch, but if I'm thinking about subbing it out. So far it's been okay.
The Shred Freak I'm also skeptical about, the haste is nice but I'm also thinking of putting in Goblin Deathraiders in it's place.
Rakdos Ickspitter is also another option right now. I'm really just looking for cards that can give Red/Black aggro that edge to finish off a low life opponent.
Lava Zombie and Dark Temper have both been great in B/R aggro decks for me. Lava Zombie is a really solid creature on curve, and Dark Temper is basically a Terminate for one more mana in that deck.
Lava Zombie and Dark Temper have both been great in B/R aggro decks for me. Lava Zombie is a really solid creature on curve, and Dark Temper is basically a Terminate for one more mana in that deck.
The Zombie has been recommended to me a lot, and it looks awesome - the thing that throws me off though is the 3 toughness, which makes it super easy to get rid of. You can multiblock it easily, and it dies to basically every removal spell that isn't a "Destroy target creature effect". The only reason I like the Spawn more than that is because of the 4 toughness, which when you think about it, is much more difficult to get rid of.
The Zombie has been recommended to me a lot, and it looks awesome - the thing that throws me off though is the 3 toughness, which makes it super easy to get rid of. You can multiblock it easily, and it dies to basically every removal spell that isn't a "Destroy target creature effect". The only reason I like the Spawn more than that is because of the 4 toughness, which when you think about it, is much more difficult to get rid of.
I might just be over thinking it though :/
I think the fact that the Zombie comes down at least two turns earlier than the Spawn (5 mana is a lot for B/R aggro decks in my cube) and threatens at least 5 damage on turn 4 vastly outweighs the 3 toughness. Almost all the B/R aggro creatures die to almost every removal spell anyway and the Zombie does exactly what you want your 3 drop aggro creatures to do - put a ton of pressure on your opponent. It's really good against things like the G/x midrange decks with things like Penumbra Spider, and there have been at least a few occasions where the bounce ability has saved something like a Pacifism'ed creature.
I think the fact that the Zombie comes down at least two turns earlier than the Spawn (5 mana is a lot for B/R aggro decks in my cube) and threatens at least 5 damage on turn 4 vastly outweighs the 3 toughness. Almost all the B/R aggro creatures die to almost every removal spell anyway and the Zombie does exactly what you want your 3 drop aggro creatures to do - put a ton of pressure on your opponent. It's really good against things like the G/x midrange decks with things like Penumbra Spider, and there have been at least a few occasions where the bounce ability has saved something like a Pacifism'ed creature.
That's true, I didn't give it enough credit for the bounce back.
Gah, switches like this make me nervous haha. Can anyone else vouch for the zombie? If that's the case I'll definitely put it in.
The Zombie is not great, but my 4th card. 3 toughness is super solid and multiple blocks are always terrible for your opponent. On the one hand you can pump your zombie to trade 2 for 1, on the other hand you could have a removal spell, so your zombie won't even die in combat. In red and black that chance is super high.
The Zombie is not great, but my 4th card. 3 toughness is super solid and multiple blocks are always terrible for your opponent. On the one hand you can pump your zombie to trade 2 for 1, on the other hand you could have a removal spell, so your zombie won't even die in combat. In red and black that chance is super high.
15 isn't too big - see modern masters: the extra cards help a bunch with supporting archetypes and especially mono-coloured strategies. Just because the cards are better doesn't mean you need fewer of them.
15 is way too much, IMO. Even 14 has been too much. The normal boosters have way less playables and in my experience, you will always see similar decks with the same cards played if the players have too much, to choose. With 2 or 3 players we normally use the Winchester draft system. With 4+, we play 4x10. That's a pool of 40 cards per player, exactly 1/10 of my cube and it's fairer than 3x13 (39 cards), because it goes 2 times in one direction and 2 times in the other direction.
I can only recommend 4x10 boosters.
The difference between 3x15 and 4x10 with 4 players is a difference of 5% of your total cube, an increase from 40% to 45% (not even half of your total cube present in one draft.) I don't see how that 5% margin could make it from seeing diverse decks to the same old decks every draft. If anything, more cards present = more possibilities but once again...5%. I'm not saying its not worth running a different pack size but I think the thought process goes in the other direction. Smaller packs and less total cards is likely to promote tighter goodstuff.dec building in which people are trying to get as many quality cards as possible rather than taking fringe cards in hopes for finding its pair to create a synergistic deck.
I will say that I am a fan of having more packs and fewer cards per pack ( I run 5x9) with 4 people because it makes it not so awkward seeing the same pack go around 3 times as it would with 3x15 with 4 people.
The difference between 3x15 and 4x10 with 4 players is a difference of 5% of your total cube, an increase from 40% to 45% (not even half of your total cube present in one draft.) I don't see how that 5% margin could make it from seeing diverse decks to the same old decks every draft. If anything, more cards present = more possibilities but once again...5%. I'm not saying its not worth running a different pack size but I think the thought process goes in the other direction. Smaller packs and less total cards is likely to promote tighter goodstuff.dec building in which people are trying to get as many quality cards as possible rather than taking fringe cards in hopes for finding its pair to create a synergistic deck.
I will say that I am a fan of having more packs and fewer cards per pack ( I run 5x9) with 4 people because it makes it not so awkward seeing the same pack go around 3 times as it would with 3x15 with 4 people.
This is pretty much what I was trying to say, more cards means more fixing, more synergy and better decks.
What are peoples' experiences with Intimidator Initiate? I haven't been that impressed with it - it seems like a nice effect on paper, but in most games it usually can't attack on its own, the permanent mana (and spell) investment can be pretty problematic, and I'd usually rather just have another burn or hard removal spell over the Initiate's pseudo-removal. It certainly has not played like Frenzied Goblin. Looking over the recent Number Crunch results, as well as things like Al's evaluate everything project, it gives the impression that the Initiate is generally considered solidly borderline. The main reason I ask is that there was some discussion on the Peasant thread about the Initiate, and the consensus there seems to be that the Initiate is pretty much a staple, if not a bomb, in peasant cubes. It could just be a format difference, but I wonder why there's such a discrepancy in card evaluations and if maybe I'm not giving the Initiate the credit it deserves?
What are peoples' experiences with Intimidator Initiate? I haven't been that impressed with it - it seems like a nice effect on paper, but in most games it usually can't attack on its own, the permanent mana (and spell) investment can be pretty problematic, and I'd usually rather just have another burn or hard removal spell over the Initiate's pseudo-removal. It certainly has not played like Frenzied Goblin. Looking over the recent Number Crunch results, as well as things like Al's evaluate everything project, it gives the impression that the Initiate is generally considered solidly borderline. The main reason I ask is that there was some discussion on the Peasant thread about the Initiate, and the consensus there seems to be that the Initiate is pretty much a staple, if not a bomb, in peasant cubes. It could just be a format difference, but I wonder why there's such a discrepancy in card evaluations and if maybe I'm not giving the Initiate the credit it deserves?
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume its because you can come much closer to making a mono-red aggro deck in Peasant than you can in Pauper.
I just made the experience how awesome a card like Ichor Slick can be, in combination with cards like Gathan Raiders, Faithless Looting and Wild Mongrel, even if you would normally play a boring, but better card, like Doom Blade far above it, if you get it.
This is an example of an instance in which seeing more cards creates more opportunities for putting synergies together.
Well there's already a 2-drop common pegasus spoiled from the duel deck, and I doubt they'd print two cards with the same creature type, casting cost, and rarity in the same set. Maybe in one of the follow-up expansions?
I wouldn't cut any of the red control cards, especially because both Chain Lightning and Disintegrate work well in the R/x control deck.
My first cut would probably be Act of Treason - it's best with a sac outlet (which most pauper cubes don't have many of), and both Disintegrate and Chain Lightning fill the ability to get rid of (most) blockers. I also haven't had very many situations where an aggressive Act of Treason simply to get a few extra points of damage in would have decided a game any more than having another removal spell would have decided that game.
The second cut is a lot harder ... I might consider cutting a big red creature like Tenement Crasher since it looks like you're trying to make slower red decks more control-oriented and 6 mana is a lot for non-R/G aggressive decks. Rubblebelt Maaka is another card I might consider cutting, for similar reasons - Bloodrush gives it some flexibility, but control decks don't really want either mode and it's not quite aggressive enough at 4CMC for most aggressive red decks to be happy playing.
Not bad at all, if anything I wish it was longer.
It's a 2/2 for 3 at first which honestly isn't that bad, a 2/3 for 1UU which isn't bad either, but the flip ability is basically 2U "Get a 2/3 and destroy target creature with Toughness 2 or less."
Also guys, I'm in need of help fixing my Rakdos section in my 450;
http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/690
I added Spawn of Rix Maadi solely to just fit the curve and help that Rakdos aggro get its finish touch, but if I'm thinking about subbing it out. So far it's been okay.
The Shred Freak I'm also skeptical about, the haste is nice but I'm also thinking of putting in Goblin Deathraiders in it's place.
Rakdos Ickspitter is also another option right now. I'm really just looking for cards that can give Red/Black aggro that edge to finish off a low life opponent.
Lava Zombie and Dark Temper have both been great in B/R aggro decks for me. Lava Zombie is a really solid creature on curve, and Dark Temper is basically a Terminate for one more mana in that deck.
The Zombie has been recommended to me a lot, and it looks awesome - the thing that throws me off though is the 3 toughness, which makes it super easy to get rid of. You can multiblock it easily, and it dies to basically every removal spell that isn't a "Destroy target creature effect". The only reason I like the Spawn more than that is because of the 4 toughness, which when you think about it, is much more difficult to get rid of.
I might just be over thinking it though :/
I think the fact that the Zombie comes down at least two turns earlier than the Spawn (5 mana is a lot for B/R aggro decks in my cube) and threatens at least 5 damage on turn 4 vastly outweighs the 3 toughness. Almost all the B/R aggro creatures die to almost every removal spell anyway and the Zombie does exactly what you want your 3 drop aggro creatures to do - put a ton of pressure on your opponent. It's really good against things like the G/x midrange decks with things like Penumbra Spider, and there have been at least a few occasions where the bounce ability has saved something like a Pacifism'ed creature.
That's true, I didn't give it enough credit for the bounce back.
Gah, switches like this make me nervous haha. Can anyone else vouch for the zombie? If that's the case I'll definitely put it in.
Fair enough, seeing as how I'm playing all 4 of those I'll pop him in
Why aren't you writing for us.
Haha, good article! Can't wait to check out more.
My Pauper Cube ♤ The Pauper Cube Thread Common Knowledge — 1 2
My reason for not playing the zombie is because cards like Shadow Guildmage are just way better.
Draft it on Cubetutor!
My Pauper Cube ♤ The Pauper Cube Thread Common Knowledge — 1 2
Draft it on Cubetutor!
The difference between 3x15 and 4x10 with 4 players is a difference of 5% of your total cube, an increase from 40% to 45% (not even half of your total cube present in one draft.) I don't see how that 5% margin could make it from seeing diverse decks to the same old decks every draft. If anything, more cards present = more possibilities but once again...5%. I'm not saying its not worth running a different pack size but I think the thought process goes in the other direction. Smaller packs and less total cards is likely to promote tighter goodstuff.dec building in which people are trying to get as many quality cards as possible rather than taking fringe cards in hopes for finding its pair to create a synergistic deck.
I will say that I am a fan of having more packs and fewer cards per pack ( I run 5x9) with 4 people because it makes it not so awkward seeing the same pack go around 3 times as it would with 3x15 with 4 people.
This is pretty much what I was trying to say, more cards means more fixing, more synergy and better decks.
Draft it on Cubetutor!
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume its because you can come much closer to making a mono-red aggro deck in Peasant than you can in Pauper.
This is an example of an instance in which seeing more cards creates more opportunities for putting synergies together.
5 packs of 9 with 4-5 people drafting and 3 packs of 15 with 6-8 people. The smaller packs with fewer players makes the draft feel a lot less boring.
Draft it on Cubetutor!
That would be awesome. Unfortunately, we'll probably get a Stormfront Pegasus reprint instead
My first cut would probably be Act of Treason - it's best with a sac outlet (which most pauper cubes don't have many of), and both Disintegrate and Chain Lightning fill the ability to get rid of (most) blockers. I also haven't had very many situations where an aggressive Act of Treason simply to get a few extra points of damage in would have decided a game any more than having another removal spell would have decided that game.
The second cut is a lot harder ... I might consider cutting a big red creature like Tenement Crasher since it looks like you're trying to make slower red decks more control-oriented and 6 mana is a lot for non-R/G aggressive decks. Rubblebelt Maaka is another card I might consider cutting, for similar reasons - Bloodrush gives it some flexibility, but control decks don't really want either mode and it's not quite aggressive enough at 4CMC for most aggressive red decks to be happy playing.
mogg fanatic
intimidator initiate
hearth kami
keldon marauders
mogg flunkies
hanweir lancer
suq'ata lancer
flowstone crusher
chartooth cougar
tenement crasher
Knowledge is power, money is power, time is money, you are actually gaining time by reading my posts
check out my EDH and Pauper EDH decks here