I would agree so far as one plan isn't needed, but I wanted a deck with all of them. There is a reason I will ignore posts about only part of the deck: those decks exist already.
@godec My tournament play says otherwise. And since I'm a glutton for punishment, that is where and how I test.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
------------------- Keep Abiding or Get Mangled ------------------
I would agree so far as one plan isn't needed, but I wanted a deck with all of them. There is a reason I will ignore posts about only part of the deck: those decks exist already.
I put all the things you asked for in the deck, just moved one to the board. That said:
1) you can have all those things you want in the maindeck and enough lands to cast your spells if you take a completely proactive (if counter-top can be called that) approach and cut force of will and swords to plowshares. I wouldn't recommend it if winning is a high priority for you, but it is an option. That is a design space worth exploring.
2) You can play this in vintage where demonic and mystical tutor allow more plans to coexist
3) If you don't want to do either of those however, then your deck simply needs to be more than 60 cards. In which case you can have all the things you want if consistent play isn't part of the requirement, which is fine, since for many people it isn't. 22 lands and 66 maindeck cards will get you where you want to be. It might be worth it to you to build it that way and see what works and what doesn't.
At 60 cards with all the things you want, you have what you have already assembled, a deck with 3-4 cards of 4 different packages which normally each require 6-7 cards to function properly and consistently in a 60 card deck. I have been you. Trust me when I say, build 2 good lists and switch them back and forth from week to week to keep you entertained and your opponents on their toes. Jamming it all into one will simply make all your games less satisfying, and life in the 1-3 bracket really isn't all it is cracked up to be.
As for "There is a reason I will ignore posts about only part of the deck...", in atonal text that comes off as petulant. Don't be that guy. Some decks simply won't work. If people take the time to read your posts and give thoughtful responses at least have the courtesy to say 'thank you'. Lots of us choose to be part of a community and spend our time trying to increase the enjoyment of this game we love for strangers we will never meet. Please demonstrate the maturity to not be rude when those well meaning strangers give you feedback that challenges your stances, doesn't satisfy you, or that doesn't make you feel brilliant or warm and fuzzy.
Limbo none of that was even directed at you. In fact when I had posted that your post was not visible to me. So please don't be that guy yourself.
That said I did appreciate your input. That does seem like what I had originally envisioned. Since I'm not going 1-3 with the deck and instead going 2-2 at worst with a deck that I have played twice now I know I am on to something. In fact I have come to realize that not playing a GSZ package was probably the best part. That actually would have been the package that would have made this unplayable. I have been very satisfied with the build so far.
The "ignore" comment is more of a carry over from other boards. It's like you ask for a burn deck and the replies are play force of will and delver. Well that ignores what I was asking so why would I not ignore that in return when my first response is "that's not what I am asking for." It's true some decks don't work. The difference is I am coming in with this list saying I have results telling me it's working. Again I did appreciate your post, thank you for that. Please also show some maturity, not everything is about you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
------------------- Keep Abiding or Get Mangled ------------------
Well thank you very much local legacy community. 2 tournaments didn't fire this week.
I had done some more tweaking to the deck but lacked more tournament level play of testing. I did get to play some more casual testing games though. The problem being one was UR delver which I know I can beat and the other was MUD. It felt like the MUD player was not familiar with his deck as the games were walk overs for me.
I think the biggest change was:
-1 karakas
+1 dryad arbor
While I was considering SB slots for this, having it main decked makes more sense. Having it in the opener is awful but it does help playing brainstorm and jace.
I have also cleaned up the board a bit and have 1 slot free that I'm not sure of. Today it was a snapcaster mage because reasons. I will try to get my updated list posted soon. It continues to feel strong.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
------------------- Keep Abiding or Get Mangled ------------------
Well, I have been extremely happy with the list in its current state. So many powerful plays are available, navigating the correct line is difficult sometimes however. This may be the last tournament with it for awhile as there are still numerous ideas I would like to get started on.
I would reccomend playing this deck if you want to outplay your opponents and not just net deck something. There is a lot of depth to this list so putting in the time will let you reap the rewards.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
------------------- Keep Abiding or Get Mangled ------------------
Another split of top 4 with this deck. Only downside through the tournament was colour screw which was quite frustrating with all the manipulation and search available. Glad that issue happened before top 4. It did seem an odd tournament since counter/top was quite bad with the influx of decks going over the top while the NoPro plan was always a green light. The ability to side out packages for a higher threat density for specific matchups was great. That said I think it's time to shelf this deck for a bit. I want to go back to parfait since it has yet to get bad, oddly it got stronger when everyone was on the treasure cruise plan. Also I have more brewing to do; psychatog is due to make a comeback.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
------------------- Keep Abiding or Get Mangled ------------------
@godec My tournament play says otherwise. And since I'm a glutton for punishment, that is where and how I test.
-----The Legacy Flowchart-----
Tiny Leaders Overlord
I put all the things you asked for in the deck, just moved one to the board. That said:
1) you can have all those things you want in the maindeck and enough lands to cast your spells if you take a completely proactive (if counter-top can be called that) approach and cut force of will and swords to plowshares. I wouldn't recommend it if winning is a high priority for you, but it is an option. That is a design space worth exploring.
2) You can play this in vintage where demonic and mystical tutor allow more plans to coexist
3) If you don't want to do either of those however, then your deck simply needs to be more than 60 cards. In which case you can have all the things you want if consistent play isn't part of the requirement, which is fine, since for many people it isn't. 22 lands and 66 maindeck cards will get you where you want to be. It might be worth it to you to build it that way and see what works and what doesn't.
At 60 cards with all the things you want, you have what you have already assembled, a deck with 3-4 cards of 4 different packages which normally each require 6-7 cards to function properly and consistently in a 60 card deck. I have been you. Trust me when I say, build 2 good lists and switch them back and forth from week to week to keep you entertained and your opponents on their toes. Jamming it all into one will simply make all your games less satisfying, and life in the 1-3 bracket really isn't all it is cracked up to be.
As for "There is a reason I will ignore posts about only part of the deck...", in atonal text that comes off as petulant. Don't be that guy. Some decks simply won't work. If people take the time to read your posts and give thoughtful responses at least have the courtesy to say 'thank you'. Lots of us choose to be part of a community and spend our time trying to increase the enjoyment of this game we love for strangers we will never meet. Please demonstrate the maturity to not be rude when those well meaning strangers give you feedback that challenges your stances, doesn't satisfy you, or that doesn't make you feel brilliant or warm and fuzzy.
This thread seems rather redundant; I'd suggested closing this one and welcome you guys to the primer.
Either way, keep the idea flowing.
Sidenote: Don't see why you wouldn't run Scavenging Ooze in your list if you have access to Green Sun's Zenith.
Twitch: gamerchamp
Modern: UGrand Architect, UBTezzeret Control, UBWRG Bridge From Below (Dredge)
Legacy: UWGTrue-Name Bant
That said I did appreciate your input. That does seem like what I had originally envisioned. Since I'm not going 1-3 with the deck and instead going 2-2 at worst with a deck that I have played twice now I know I am on to something. In fact I have come to realize that not playing a GSZ package was probably the best part. That actually would have been the package that would have made this unplayable. I have been very satisfied with the build so far.
The "ignore" comment is more of a carry over from other boards. It's like you ask for a burn deck and the replies are play force of will and delver. Well that ignores what I was asking so why would I not ignore that in return when my first response is "that's not what I am asking for." It's true some decks don't work. The difference is I am coming in with this list saying I have results telling me it's working. Again I did appreciate your post, thank you for that. Please also show some maturity, not everything is about you.
-----The Legacy Flowchart-----
Tiny Leaders Overlord
I had done some more tweaking to the deck but lacked more tournament level play of testing. I did get to play some more casual testing games though. The problem being one was UR delver which I know I can beat and the other was MUD. It felt like the MUD player was not familiar with his deck as the games were walk overs for me.
I think the biggest change was:
-1 karakas
+1 dryad arbor
While I was considering SB slots for this, having it main decked makes more sense. Having it in the opener is awful but it does help playing brainstorm and jace.
I have also cleaned up the board a bit and have 1 slot free that I'm not sure of. Today it was a snapcaster mage because reasons. I will try to get my updated list posted soon. It continues to feel strong.
-----The Legacy Flowchart-----
Tiny Leaders Overlord
1 underground sea
1 bayou
2 tundra
3 flooded strand
2 tropical island
4 Misty rainforest
4 wasteland
1 dryad arbor
1 island
1 forest
4 noble hierarch
3 deathrite shaman
2 Geist of saint traft
3 Rhox war monk
4 force of will
4 swords to plowshares
4 brainstorm
2 dig through time
1 jace, the mind sculptor
2 sensei's diving top
2 stoneforge mystic
1 umezawa's jitte
1 sword of fire and ice
1 progenitus
2 natural order
1 enlightened tutor
1 rest in peace
1 batterskull
1 grafdigger's cage
2 detention sphere
2 spell pierce
2 zealous persecution
1 krosan grip
1 natural order
1 mindbreak trap
1 ethersworn canonist
1 phyrexian revoker
Gave myself a little more consistency of the natural order hand and added my second black source. I feel like the board keeps improving.
-----The Legacy Flowchart-----
Tiny Leaders Overlord
I would reccomend playing this deck if you want to outplay your opponents and not just net deck something. There is a lot of depth to this list so putting in the time will let you reap the rewards.
-----The Legacy Flowchart-----
Tiny Leaders Overlord
-----The Legacy Flowchart-----
Tiny Leaders Overlord