Hmm, I still wonder why this dicussion comes up, why is someone using more time such a problem? Some decks require more time to play, it happens.
I don't mind someone taking more time because their deck requires more time, but when players deliberately play slowly in the hopes of a getting a draw, that's a problem.
Then call a judge for slow play, you don't need a chess clock for that. I think this just stems from a very american attitude which seems to think draws should never happen.
This is american...how? Or are you just shoehorning in your agenda where it doesn't belong?
Last thing. Thirty four lands seems a bit low. I know Mizzix makes your spells cheap, but you need to stick her first then start casting x spells. You said you had tested the deck before, did that many lands do the job?
Thing is that it's not like X spells get worse with more mana. Running fewer lands in a Mizzik deck revolving around X spells doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If the deck was just a kind of "make spells cheaper in general" that ran things like Searing Wind that would make sense(though, that deck is kind of bad) but more lands just means the X spell you get are going to be better quality. You'll almost always have a dump for excess mana. I can't imagine a scenario where 34 lands here would "do the job".
Uhm I dont think, Mizzix is that great with x spells. She checks for "converted mana cost" - and those are rather low because x=0. sure they`ll get cheaper, but they won't trigger experience counters for every bigger x spell than the last one.
anyway have fun building that deck, thinking, of it too!
No, X spells count as cmc equal to whatever you paid when you play them. A Fireball x=5 is a 6 CMC card on the stack and counts as playing a card of that CMC. So, yes, X spells work wonderfully with Mizzix.
Mineswipe is ok but the card is kind of awkward. On one hand you only want to make X big enough to get the spell countered but you also want to maximize it for more damage. I feel like a Mizzix deck will usually have better things to cast.
A couple of things. In decks like these I found Young Pyromancer to be invaluable. It fits comfortably as a 2 drop and gives you a board presence while you go crazy with spells.
I also think this list focuses too much on the best case scenario; i.e., there are too many X spells and not enough ways to get to them. Unless you want to cast X spells for 2-3 early on when you have few-to-no counters. I suggest taking out some of the weaker spells such as Seething Song(not a combo/storm deck),Increasing Confusion(not gonna mill in EDH without a dedicated deck), orProsperity and put in some mana rocks to accelerate a bit. Izzet Signet, Fellwar Stone, Thran Dynamo, Worn Powerstone, etc. Another concern is that you seem to be running 35 lands if I counted correctly. Again, this focuses a lot on assuming you get to have lots of experience counters. I'd say add in a Temple of Epiphany and an Izzet Boilerworks and beef up the manabase a bit. Oh, also Blue Sun's Zenith instead of Prosperity
Small nitpick with the decklist. Tormenting Voice, as far as I'm aware, is functionally equivalent to Wild Guess but better since it's 1R and not RR. It doesn't have much chance of mattering in a mono red deck but it is a straight upgrade.
It matters little enough in a mono-red deck that this is a legitimate reason. There are enough colorless-generating lands in this deck for it to have a non-zero impact though.
Small nitpick with the decklist. Tormenting Voice, as far as I'm aware, is functionally equivalent to Wild Guess but better since it's 1R and not RR. It doesn't have much chance of mattering in a mono red deck but it is a straight upgrade.
Fanning the Flames seems very good for Mizzix. Buyback can be reduced by the experience counters. Same deal with Capsize. Unfortunately it seems there aren't a lot of playable buyback cards in UR. Capsize,Spell Burst, andFanning the Flames is about it for UR cards with colorless buyback.
This is american...how? Or are you just shoehorning in your agenda where it doesn't belong?
Thing is that it's not like X spells get worse with more mana. Running fewer lands in a Mizzik deck revolving around X spells doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If the deck was just a kind of "make spells cheaper in general" that ran things like Searing Wind that would make sense(though, that deck is kind of bad) but more lands just means the X spell you get are going to be better quality. You'll almost always have a dump for excess mana. I can't imagine a scenario where 34 lands here would "do the job".
No, X spells count as cmc equal to whatever you paid when you play them. A Fireball x=5 is a 6 CMC card on the stack and counts as playing a card of that CMC. So, yes, X spells work wonderfully with Mizzix.
A couple of things. In decks like these I found Young Pyromancer to be invaluable. It fits comfortably as a 2 drop and gives you a board presence while you go crazy with spells.
I also think this list focuses too much on the best case scenario; i.e., there are too many X spells and not enough ways to get to them. Unless you want to cast X spells for 2-3 early on when you have few-to-no counters. I suggest taking out some of the weaker spells such as Seething Song(not a combo/storm deck),Increasing Confusion(not gonna mill in EDH without a dedicated deck), orProsperity and put in some mana rocks to accelerate a bit. Izzet Signet, Fellwar Stone, Thran Dynamo, Worn Powerstone, etc. Another concern is that you seem to be running 35 lands if I counted correctly. Again, this focuses a lot on assuming you get to have lots of experience counters. I'd say add in a Temple of Epiphany and an Izzet Boilerworks and beef up the manabase a bit. Oh, also Blue Sun's Zenith instead of Prosperity
It matters little enough in a mono-red deck that this is a legitimate reason. There are enough colorless-generating lands in this deck for it to have a non-zero impact though.