I am going to be playing in a couple of standard tournaments this weekend, and was considering playing a deck similar to BBD's. However, looking at mtgtop8, it seems like none of the recent events (past week), and very few of the events of the past 2 weeks were won by mono black. Is that a trend caused by the return of fast Boros/red based decks? Should I change my deck choice to be more competitive?
Mono black is/can still be a very strong deck. Some versions are including a light splash of either blue, white or green for one or two utility cards. Green in particular gives access to Abrupt Decay, a very powerful removal card.
it really comes down to how well you can read your local metagame.
mono-black, while not being the definitive "best deck" that some people thought it would be, doesn't have any really bad matchups.
how you construct the sideboard is also pretty relevant, since you can skew it pretty heavily towards fighting aggro or the mirror.
for instance main decking Lifebane Zombie, or Nightveil Specter? how many main deck pack rats? how many doomblades/ultimate price? how many thoughtseizes? etc
there is plenty of flexibility.
you can also splash green for abrupt decay and or golgari charm for enchantments (ie. Assemble the Legion), but you sacrifice access to Temple of Deceit.
the mono black shell in itself is still very powerful, and is one of the few midrange strategies that can go toe-to-toe with esper in the lategame.
it is also important to be comfortable with your deck. the few percentage points you might get in a certain matchup by playing another deck is easily offset by playing a deck you know how to navigate.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
Mono black has been really strong and popular lately, so what do you think the serious contenders are going to be focusing on beating at these tournaments?
What I'm saying is the deck itself is still solid, but because of it's popularity everyone was deck building with the idea that they'd be facing a lot of mono black devotion. It's a natural reaction. Over the next few weeks things will continue to develop and even out, and I think you'll see mono black start to regain it's standing a bit.
Mono black has been really strong and popular lately, so what do you think the serious contenders are going to be focusing on beating at these tournaments?
What I'm saying is the deck itself is still solid, but because of it's popularity everyone was deck building with the idea that they'd be facing a lot of mono black devotion. It's a natural reaction. Over the next few weeks things will continue to develop and even out, and I think you'll see mono black start to regain it's standing a bit.
Yep this is my point. People will be expecting mono black so they will prepare for it, making it weaker. Question is, with that in mind, should I still show up with mono black or should I expect a meta game that's geared against it? I haven't been playing for a long time so I do not know how fast the meta game moves.
As people all have said people are building decks to meet Mono Black Decks, Pros know this and have started to stay away from playing just the solid deck and looked to improve it or playing a whole new deck. You will see Mono Black making a come back after the haters die off a bit and move on to hating the next big deck. Just like Mono blue is starting to see a come back.
Per your question, alot of the time lgs are alittle behind, but there is a good chance alot of them are playing decks that have won a major event in the last 2-3 weeks.
As people all have said people are building decks to meet Mono Black Decks, Pros know this and have started to stay away from playing just the solid deck and looked to improve it or playing a whole new deck. You will see Mono Black making a come back after the haters die off a bit and move on to hating the next big deck. Just like Mono blue is starting to see a come back.
Per your question, alot of the time lgs are alittle behind, but there is a good chance alot of them are playing decks that have won a major event in the last 2-3 weeks.
Cool. The event I am going to is a star city games open, so I guess I should go with a tweaked variant. Thanks.
I don't think that the deck is dying. I think that it is evolving and adapting to this meta by adding in a second color. Personally I added green to mono black for access to abrupt decay and golgari charm. Both of which are very powerful cards in this meta.
I was at an IQ playing mono black this past weekend and many people were expecting the deck and were playing esper, which combats the deck very well.
Esper > Mono Black?
I've been doing it wrong this whole time!
On a serious note it has more to do with R+ based aggro seeing a rise in numbers due to Mono Black and Esper's strong showings, which in turn should bring Mono U back into the spotlight which in turn etc. etc.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Brilliant ideas are stupid ideas that worked - Patrick Chapin
On a serious note it has more to do with R+ based aggro seeing a rise in numbers due to Mono Black and Esper's strong showings, which in turn should bring Mono U back into the spotlight which in turn etc. etc.
Yep this is probably what is happening. So in order to be well prepared i should probably go to FNM at a very large store on Friday night, ser what decks are winning, and take a deck the next day to the SCG Open that matches the part of the cycle. If most are playing red, take blue or midrange. If most are blue or esper or midrange, take black. If most are black, take red/Boros.
On a serious note it has more to do with R+ based aggro seeing a rise in numbers due to Mono Black and Esper's strong showings, which in turn should bring Mono U back into the spotlight which in turn etc. etc.
I suspect, that while the format is cyclical like this, that may not entirely be the case here.
Mono Black has begun inbreeding to beat the mirror because Mono Black is such a represented deck.
I see Mono Blue coming back, but I do not see Mono Black making the rebound Mono Blue has, it is not as stable of a deck as Mono Blue is when you start to consider flexibility. Mono Black is an incredibly linear strategy and however powerful it may be in some situations, it does not have the ability to keep pace with a meta that is not stagnant. Mono Blue, while not having a whole plethora of available options, at least utilizes highly flexible cards in comparison to Mono Black.
I expect Mono Black to start going in the way of BWR and WB Midrange and really only staying afloat by the sheer number of people actually playing it, not necessarily how good it is.
mono black wasn't that good to begin with. There was a post showing mtgo daily stats. Basically it only had a 47% winrate even at its best while esper was the best with 54%. 9000 people play the same deck its bound to end up getting alot of 4-0. Then people see it has alot of 4-0 and play it more thinking its great. Both Esper and R/G have a higher winrate but they cost more money ;p
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Getting back into MTGO maybe, depending on the cost
mono black wasn't that good to begin with. There was a post showing mtgo daily stats. Basically it only had a 47% winrate even at its best while esper was the best with 54%. 9000 people play the same deck its bound to end up getting alot of 4-0. Then people see it has alot of 4-0 and play it more thinking its great. Both Esper and R/G have a higher winrate but they cost more money ;p
Money is generally not a factor on MTGO.
But you are correct about decks with numbers behind them are bound to put up results.
Welcome to the Law of Large Numbers, most people do not function on a level of rationality to actually see it for what it is, which is why when you see a lot of 4-0 lists of a certain archetype, people tend to flock to it rather than taking a peek behind the curtain.
If you take a deck with 1000 people playing it and a 50% win percentage against the field, and another deck with 500 people playing it and a 50% win percentage, you will see more of the deck that had 1000 people playing it than the deck with only 500.
Now, in the case of Esper, which has fewer people playing it and a higher win% against the field, you begin to understand what separates the men from the boys, as they say...
Yeah the real problem is finding out what deck has the actual win % behind it and even then you would only want to look at players at a higher rating. Its even possible mono B is better than I think and since the masses are playing it they drag it down to a lower win %
Wish I had that replay mining script that one guy has >.<
Also more on topic. I can say having played rdw vs B/g it hurts alot. Rdw started to come back into the scene splashing white for chained to the rocks for deso demon and sometimes assemble the legion (which is too slow for mono b anyways...).
Golgori charm on chained or against firefist strikers is great. Abrupt decay for boros reckoner and chained/hammer is good.
I think you would want a B/g scry though so maybe its best to splash after that comes in a few months.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Getting back into MTGO maybe, depending on the cost
Yeah the real problem is finding out what deck has the actual win % behind it and even then you would only want to look at players at a higher rating. Its even possible mono B is better than I think and since the masses are playing it they drag it down to a lower win %
Thats what I think too.
The deck basically exploded and A LOT of people play it. This doesnt take skill into account. A lot the players began to play this deck because of the hype without having a clue how to actually play it which could lead to the low win percentage.
Esper on the other hand is expensive and complicated which leads to only experienced players playing it.
Therefore I think these numbers are skewed and should be taken with a grain of salt.
Thats what I think too.
The deck basically exploded and A LOT of people play it. This doesnt take skill into account. A lot the players began to play this deck because of the hype without having a clue how to actually play it which could lead to the low win percentage.
Esper on the other hand is expensive and complicated which leads to only experienced players playing it.
Therefore I think these numbers are skewed and should be taken with a grain of salt.
Price and experience/skill levels do not go hand in hand. There are plenty of people who get into magic and sink money into expensive decks without a whole lot of skill to play the game.
Price and experience/skill levels do not go hand in hand. There are plenty of people who get into magic and sink money into expensive decks without a whole lot of skill to play the game.
True but the point about the hype train of mono-black still stands.
Its arguably the most popular deck so there are of course also worse people playing it than say Esper for example since there was never really hype about it. Its just there basically.
Im just saying that it is not so bad as you make it out to be.
There no best deck in the format right now. Just like we saw at the recent GP and SCG Open if Esper, mono-black and co get popular they will get beaten down by aggro decks and if the trend continues Espers win percentage will go down a lot since its really poor against an aggro meta.
Im interested in seeing how this keeps developing. If there will be no best deck for the season or if some kind of deck emerges like Jund was last season.
Well, considering game win % for a deck doesn't say much, because as has been said, only 10% of the users might actually be any good at the game.
Which leads to this point: Shouldn't we in this case just look at the larger tournaments for winning decklists? By round 6 or 7 or 8, the bad players will mostly have been filtered out. MTG is not only a game of chance and probability, but a game of skill as well. If it was a game of luck only I wouldn't be playing it. Given 500 players, with 450 playing deck A (10 of them skilled), and 50 playing deck B (10 of them skilled), I expect the skilled players to make it, and the better deck to end up winning, not deck A winning (if the better deck is B).
BBD won a GP with mono black, and there were a number of mono black decks in the top 8, which indicates that the deck inherently is not "bad" as postulated above; otherwise no matter how many people are wielding it, it wouldn't have performed well.
With that in mind, looking at the results from GP Santiago (http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=5948), and SCG LA (http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=5956) which both fit the description of the event above, the fact that the fast decks won the event is an indication that the more skilled players are moving to play anti-black.
I think that the cyclical theories concerning the meta are more at play here rather than the deck being a bad deck and just winning a number of events because of the number of people playing it.
Well, considering game win % for a deck doesn't say much, because as has been said, only 10% of the users might actually be any good at the game.
Which leads to this point: Shouldn't we in this case just look at the larger tournaments for winning decklists? By round 6 or 7 or 8, the bad players will mostly have been filtered out. MTG is not only a game of chance and probability, but a game of skill as well. If it was a game of luck only I wouldn't be playing it. Given 500 players, with 450 playing deck A (10 of them skilled), and 50 playing deck B (10 of them skilled), I expect the skilled players to make it, and the better deck to end up winning, not deck A winning (if the better deck is B).
BBD won a GP with mono black, and there were a number of mono black decks in the top 8, which indicates that the deck inherently is not "bad" as postulated above; otherwise no matter how many people are wielding it, it wouldn't have performed well.
With that in mind, looking at the results from GP Santiago (http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=5948), and SCG LA (http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=5956) which both fit the description of the event above, the fact that the fast decks won the event is an indication that the more skilled players are moving to play anti-black.
I think that the cyclical theories concerning the meta are more at play here rather than the deck being a bad deck and just winning a number of events because of the number of people playing it.
I dont think mono black was ever considered "bad", but it was never the boogyman of the format. Too many people were overhyping it to be taking over the format after 1 tournament, but obviously that wasnt true.
Too many people get sucked up into the MTGO results, but dont realize that the real meta is completely different than the MTGO one. The real meta adapts a lot quicker than the online one does and people use cheaper decks online since its easy to grind on mtgo. Daily events are a lot different than 11 round tournaments, they arent long events where you need to hold more consistency. Plus lets not even forget the wicked shuffler MTGO has, which has way more variance than the real game has.
Black Devotion is very much a thing, Gray Merchant is such a strong card at common in such a slow format that the deck will be around, Now will it stay mono black? doubtful It will have many variants and strats. Mono will die, devotion to Black wont.
True but the point about the hype train of mono-black still stands.
Its arguably the most popular deck so there are of course also worse people playing it than say Esper for example since there was never really hype about it. Its just there basically.
Im just saying that it is not so bad as you make it out to be.
There no best deck in the format right now. Just like we saw at the recent GP and SCG Open if Esper, mono-black and co get popular they will get beaten down by aggro decks and if the trend continues Espers win percentage will go down a lot since its really poor against an aggro meta.
Im interested in seeing how this keeps developing. If there will be no best deck for the season or if some kind of deck emerges like Jund was last season.
I don't think any of us are qualified to make such a statement. It is fair to assume, but the reality is that you are making a fairly baseless claim. a rough 7%-8% drop is pretty significant, and considering that theoretically, the skill disparity between players of a given archetype should scale...
Black Devotion is very much a thing, Gray Merchant is such a strong card at common in such a slow format that the deck will be around, Now will it stay mono black? doubtful It will have many variants and strats. Mono will die, devotion to Black wont.
I do not necessarily agree with that. The color splashes do very little to actually fix issues that Mono Black has.
I do not necessarily agree with that. The color splashes do very little to actually fix issues that Mono Black has.
I personally do not play Black Devotion, I played it well in my area and felt that it was played alot like control, not my cup of tea, but it doesn't mean that the deck is not a strong deck.
The color splashes do the minimal things BD needs to actually have a stronger showing. The deck already has one of the best showings against other devotion decks due to its removal. The problems it does have is against Aggro and Esper. My personal favorite splash is Green now your running Abrupt DecayGolgari Charm both able to answer the real problems both decks show, not to mention the charm can save you from a board wipe.
I personally do not play Black Devotion, I played it well in my area and felt that it was played alot like control, not my cup of tea, but it doesn't mean that the deck is not a strong deck.
The color splashes do the minimal things BD needs to actually have a stronger showing. The deck already has one of the best showings against other devotion decks due to its removal. The problems it does have is against Aggro and Esper. My personal favorite splash is Green now your running Abrupt DecayGolgari Charm both able to answer the real problems both decks show, not to mention the charm can save you from a board wipe.
Detention Sphere and Verdict aside though, the green splash is not really pulling enough weight to actually keep the deck afloat.
Reaching for answers to problems when it comes to colors, leaves the deck in a spot where it begins to just flounder and does worse overall.
I am going to be playing in a couple of standard tournaments this weekend, and was considering playing a deck similar to BBD's. However, looking at mtgtop8, it seems like none of the recent events (past week), and very few of the events of the past 2 weeks were won by mono black. Is that a trend caused by the return of fast Boros/red based decks? Should I change my deck choice to be more competitive?
Thanks for the thoughts!
Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici.
mono-black, while not being the definitive "best deck" that some people thought it would be, doesn't have any really bad matchups.
how you construct the sideboard is also pretty relevant, since you can skew it pretty heavily towards fighting aggro or the mirror.
for instance main decking Lifebane Zombie, or Nightveil Specter? how many main deck pack rats? how many doomblades/ultimate price? how many thoughtseizes? etc
there is plenty of flexibility.
you can also splash green for abrupt decay and or golgari charm for enchantments (ie. Assemble the Legion), but you sacrifice access to Temple of Deceit.
the mono black shell in itself is still very powerful, and is one of the few midrange strategies that can go toe-to-toe with esper in the lategame.
it is also important to be comfortable with your deck. the few percentage points you might get in a certain matchup by playing another deck is easily offset by playing a deck you know how to navigate.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)What I'm saying is the deck itself is still solid, but because of it's popularity everyone was deck building with the idea that they'd be facing a lot of mono black devotion. It's a natural reaction. Over the next few weeks things will continue to develop and even out, and I think you'll see mono black start to regain it's standing a bit.
Yep this is my point. People will be expecting mono black so they will prepare for it, making it weaker. Question is, with that in mind, should I still show up with mono black or should I expect a meta game that's geared against it? I haven't been playing for a long time so I do not know how fast the meta game moves.
Per your question, alot of the time lgs are alittle behind, but there is a good chance alot of them are playing decks that have won a major event in the last 2-3 weeks.
BURPerfectly Suited to Mindless Carnage, ThraximundarRUB
URBOckham's Mindrazer = Nekusar the MindrazerBRU
UBRMarchsea makes all the Men do Stupid ThingsRBU
GWBThe Best Offense is Defense, Doran 2.0BWG
XRDaretti, Artifact ShenanigansRX
RKrenko the Don of the Goblin MobR
GFreyalise and Elves have pet HydrasG
WArmy of the Heavens, Lead by the Angel of HopeW
BDrana, The Removal BloodchiefB
UAzami, Knowledge is PowerU
WBDaxos is Enchanting Enchantments to Enchant more EnchantsBW
GRI got 99 Permanents but Primal Surge ain't One, Ruric TharRG
GBNel Thot's Sacrificial SwarmBG
WRWifey's Wrath - Gisela Blade of GoldnightRW
WUPillowfort Tron - BrunaUW
XXThe TriadXX
Do you have what it takes to survive?
Cool. The event I am going to is a star city games open, so I guess I should go with a tweaked variant. Thanks.
And by tweaked I mean HEAVILY tweaked.
Esper > Mono Black?
I've been doing it wrong this whole time!
On a serious note it has more to do with R+ based aggro seeing a rise in numbers due to Mono Black and Esper's strong showings, which in turn should bring Mono U back into the spotlight which in turn etc. etc.
Yep this is probably what is happening. So in order to be well prepared i should probably go to FNM at a very large store on Friday night, ser what decks are winning, and take a deck the next day to the SCG Open that matches the part of the cycle. If most are playing red, take blue or midrange. If most are blue or esper or midrange, take black. If most are black, take red/Boros.
Does that summarize the situation haha?
I suspect, that while the format is cyclical like this, that may not entirely be the case here.
Mono Black has begun inbreeding to beat the mirror because Mono Black is such a represented deck.
I see Mono Blue coming back, but I do not see Mono Black making the rebound Mono Blue has, it is not as stable of a deck as Mono Blue is when you start to consider flexibility. Mono Black is an incredibly linear strategy and however powerful it may be in some situations, it does not have the ability to keep pace with a meta that is not stagnant. Mono Blue, while not having a whole plethora of available options, at least utilizes highly flexible cards in comparison to Mono Black.
I expect Mono Black to start going in the way of BWR and WB Midrange and really only staying afloat by the sheer number of people actually playing it, not necessarily how good it is.
Money is generally not a factor on MTGO.
But you are correct about decks with numbers behind them are bound to put up results.
Welcome to the Law of Large Numbers, most people do not function on a level of rationality to actually see it for what it is, which is why when you see a lot of 4-0 lists of a certain archetype, people tend to flock to it rather than taking a peek behind the curtain.
If you take a deck with 1000 people playing it and a 50% win percentage against the field, and another deck with 500 people playing it and a 50% win percentage, you will see more of the deck that had 1000 people playing it than the deck with only 500.
Now, in the case of Esper, which has fewer people playing it and a higher win% against the field, you begin to understand what separates the men from the boys, as they say...
Wish I had that replay mining script that one guy has >.<
Also more on topic. I can say having played rdw vs B/g it hurts alot. Rdw started to come back into the scene splashing white for chained to the rocks for deso demon and sometimes assemble the legion (which is too slow for mono b anyways...).
Golgori charm on chained or against firefist strikers is great. Abrupt decay for boros reckoner and chained/hammer is good.
I think you would want a B/g scry though so maybe its best to splash after that comes in a few months.
Thats what I think too.
The deck basically exploded and A LOT of people play it. This doesnt take skill into account. A lot the players began to play this deck because of the hype without having a clue how to actually play it which could lead to the low win percentage.
Esper on the other hand is expensive and complicated which leads to only experienced players playing it.
Therefore I think these numbers are skewed and should be taken with a grain of salt.
Price and experience/skill levels do not go hand in hand. There are plenty of people who get into magic and sink money into expensive decks without a whole lot of skill to play the game.
True but the point about the hype train of mono-black still stands.
Its arguably the most popular deck so there are of course also worse people playing it than say Esper for example since there was never really hype about it. Its just there basically.
Im just saying that it is not so bad as you make it out to be.
There no best deck in the format right now. Just like we saw at the recent GP and SCG Open if Esper, mono-black and co get popular they will get beaten down by aggro decks and if the trend continues Espers win percentage will go down a lot since its really poor against an aggro meta.
Im interested in seeing how this keeps developing. If there will be no best deck for the season or if some kind of deck emerges like Jund was last season.
Which leads to this point: Shouldn't we in this case just look at the larger tournaments for winning decklists? By round 6 or 7 or 8, the bad players will mostly have been filtered out. MTG is not only a game of chance and probability, but a game of skill as well. If it was a game of luck only I wouldn't be playing it. Given 500 players, with 450 playing deck A (10 of them skilled), and 50 playing deck B (10 of them skilled), I expect the skilled players to make it, and the better deck to end up winning, not deck A winning (if the better deck is B).
BBD won a GP with mono black, and there were a number of mono black decks in the top 8, which indicates that the deck inherently is not "bad" as postulated above; otherwise no matter how many people are wielding it, it wouldn't have performed well.
With that in mind, looking at the results from GP Santiago (http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=5948), and SCG LA (http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=5956) which both fit the description of the event above, the fact that the fast decks won the event is an indication that the more skilled players are moving to play anti-black.
I think that the cyclical theories concerning the meta are more at play here rather than the deck being a bad deck and just winning a number of events because of the number of people playing it.
I dont think mono black was ever considered "bad", but it was never the boogyman of the format. Too many people were overhyping it to be taking over the format after 1 tournament, but obviously that wasnt true.
Too many people get sucked up into the MTGO results, but dont realize that the real meta is completely different than the MTGO one. The real meta adapts a lot quicker than the online one does and people use cheaper decks online since its easy to grind on mtgo. Daily events are a lot different than 11 round tournaments, they arent long events where you need to hold more consistency. Plus lets not even forget the wicked shuffler MTGO has, which has way more variance than the real game has.
BURPerfectly Suited to Mindless Carnage, ThraximundarRUB
URBOckham's Mindrazer = Nekusar the MindrazerBRU
UBRMarchsea makes all the Men do Stupid ThingsRBU
GWBThe Best Offense is Defense, Doran 2.0BWG
XRDaretti, Artifact ShenanigansRX
RKrenko the Don of the Goblin MobR
GFreyalise and Elves have pet HydrasG
WArmy of the Heavens, Lead by the Angel of HopeW
BDrana, The Removal BloodchiefB
UAzami, Knowledge is PowerU
WBDaxos is Enchanting Enchantments to Enchant more EnchantsBW
GRI got 99 Permanents but Primal Surge ain't One, Ruric TharRG
GBNel Thot's Sacrificial SwarmBG
WRWifey's Wrath - Gisela Blade of GoldnightRW
WUPillowfort Tron - BrunaUW
XXThe TriadXX
Do you have what it takes to survive?
I don't think any of us are qualified to make such a statement. It is fair to assume, but the reality is that you are making a fairly baseless claim. a rough 7%-8% drop is pretty significant, and considering that theoretically, the skill disparity between players of a given archetype should scale...
I do not necessarily agree with that. The color splashes do very little to actually fix issues that Mono Black has.
I personally do not play Black Devotion, I played it well in my area and felt that it was played alot like control, not my cup of tea, but it doesn't mean that the deck is not a strong deck.
The color splashes do the minimal things BD needs to actually have a stronger showing. The deck already has one of the best showings against other devotion decks due to its removal. The problems it does have is against Aggro and Esper. My personal favorite splash is Green now your running Abrupt Decay Golgari Charm both able to answer the real problems both decks show, not to mention the charm can save you from a board wipe.
BURPerfectly Suited to Mindless Carnage, ThraximundarRUB
URBOckham's Mindrazer = Nekusar the MindrazerBRU
UBRMarchsea makes all the Men do Stupid ThingsRBU
GWBThe Best Offense is Defense, Doran 2.0BWG
XRDaretti, Artifact ShenanigansRX
RKrenko the Don of the Goblin MobR
GFreyalise and Elves have pet HydrasG
WArmy of the Heavens, Lead by the Angel of HopeW
BDrana, The Removal BloodchiefB
UAzami, Knowledge is PowerU
WBDaxos is Enchanting Enchantments to Enchant more EnchantsBW
GRI got 99 Permanents but Primal Surge ain't One, Ruric TharRG
GBNel Thot's Sacrificial SwarmBG
WRWifey's Wrath - Gisela Blade of GoldnightRW
WUPillowfort Tron - BrunaUW
XXThe TriadXX
Do you have what it takes to survive?
Detention Sphere and Verdict aside though, the green splash is not really pulling enough weight to actually keep the deck afloat.
Reaching for answers to problems when it comes to colors, leaves the deck in a spot where it begins to just flounder and does worse overall.