Magic Market Index for Aug 10th, 2018
Treasure Cruisin' Modern Big Red
Magic Market Index for Aug 3rd, 2018
  • posted a message on BridgeVine
    With concerns to sideboarding I'm usually doing something like this:

    If Leyline is not good/only mediocre in the match up:
    -4 Leyline of the Void
    -1 Macabre Waltz/Hangarback Walker/Gravecrawler
    +3 Destructive Revelry
    +2 Lightning Axe/Brutality/Darkblast/Bont's

    If Leyline is good in the match up:
    -2 Macabre Waltz
    -1 Hangarback/Gravecrawler
    +3 Destructive Revelry

    That is for Game 2. In game 3 you have to decide if you want the 4th Revelry, if there are any other cuts to make, etc. But generally that's how I have been sideboarding. I find you always bring in 2-3 Revelry for every single Game 2 because it is just better to err on the side that your opponent is running Leyline.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on BridgeVine
    Quote from lwdgg »
    I have some questions about your choices and the deck in general, I have been trying it out in a couple leagues on mtgo and having mixed results with a variaty of lists... going from 5-0 , to 0-3 drop lol...

    - Do you really think Leylines main are good ? From my experience on mtgo, the decks seems less explosives with 4 leylines main, but it's able to go to a longer game, due to bridges never going away... still, it's weird.
    - Do you think the green splash is worth ? Let's be realistic, we almost never cast Vengevines with 2 greens, usually we mill 1 of those, or something like that, because most of the time you can't fetch them... RiP isn't a big of issue, only Leylines, if you are not facing a lot of mirrors and leylines in general, seems sketchy to deviate from your aggro plan and use desenchant effects...
    - What do you think of splashing white for wear//tear instead of green, since casting vengevine is very unlikely?
    - Thoughts on only 1 Bushwacker ?

    srry for bad english :p

    So honestly, Leyline is a weird card. I really do like it in the mainboard as it does a lot against a lot of decks. Like some match-ups where it just does really well for you game 1 are Grixis Death's Shadow, Storm, Dredge, KCI, and decks running Snapcaster Mage, etc. You get a lot of splash damage running Leylines in the main. On top of that against other go-wide creature decks like Humans you have the added benefit of getting to keep you Bridges around while killing their dudes, which is amazing. Though it is important to note that against decks like Mardu Pyromancer, their tokens dying will still exile your Bridge, even if you happen to have a Leyline in play. However in order to play with Leyline correctly, you need to pretend it isn't in your deck. I know, it's weird. Essentially you need to be fine with not aggressively mulliganing to find Leyline, and also know to mulligan a hand even if it contains Leyline. It is a very good card to help you with your game plan Game 1, but not so good that you can blindly keep every hand that has it, or feel forced to mulligan down to 4 to find one. If you have one in your opener, cool, it'll do some work for you this game. If you don't, well you have some discard fodder.

    How do you deal with Rest in Peace or Leyline without the green splash? Are you just resigned to concede those games? These seems like an exceptionally poor decision, especially on Magic Online where everyone is now running either of the previously mentioned cards because of how many people are playing this deck.

    With that in mind, I mean you can splash white instead if you want to. Wispmare and Wear//Tear are both fine magic cards. A while ago there was someone who even ran a Ranger of Eos in their sideboard, which I thought was kind of cute. Personally I prefer the green splash because then you just have Destructive Revelry as a catch-all, which takes up less sideboard slots.

    1 Bushwhacker was great. I've been doing previous testing with 4 and I hated it. There are so many times when you're running 4 Bushwhackers that you just get too many Bushwhackers that end up being bad Raging Goblins, which makes you feel horrible. I've heard some people make the argument that that isn't a problem because you can at least trigger your Vengevines, but you wouldn't put Raging Goblin in your deck, so why do you want to put potentially worse Raging Goblins in your deck? The games where Bushwhacker isn't Raging Goblin though are amazing, so you definitely want some number of them. I could understand maybe running 2 instead of 1, but I'm liking my singleton. With me running 2 Macabre Waltz I can kind of cheat and run up to 3 Bushwhackers in the deck without actually putting 3 Bushwhackers in the deck.

    BTW, your english is perfectly fine. Smile
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on BridgeVine
    Okay so, I didn't have enough time to do a League on MTGO last night, however I did go 4-0 at the weekly Modern event. I split for prizes in the last round, but we played matches anyway so I could get some more testing in. Here are how the games went.

    For the event I took a note one of the users on the /r/spikes subreddit suggested. I mulliganed every single 7 or 6 card hand that did not meet one of these two criteria:

    1. Stitcher's Supplier and a sacrifice outlet. For this, part of me wanted to consider hands with Walking Ballista and two lands meeting this, but I decided against it.
    2. A payoff card with at least one discard effect

    One benefit to this deck is it mulligans extremely well. And if you actually keep yourself honest with the above criteria, you get to keep a lot of hands that are pretty gas.

    Round 1 - VS KCI (2-1)
    Game 1 was pretty close. I managed to get enough power in play quickly enough that he died before he could even cast Ironworks.
    Game 2, using my above mulligan rules I ended up mulliganing down to 5 cards. The hand I kept was 3 lands, Vengevine and Macabre Waltz because honestly, I can't really envision too many good 4 card hands, and this was at least a sub-par hand. Drew a Vengevine on turn 1 (yay) and just kind of slowly fetched up some lands. On turn 2 I drew a Neonate, and figured since I only needed to draw a single castable creature that I should try to go for getting a Vengevine on board. So I cast Neonate, activate it pitching a Vengevine, and draw Gargadon. Oh well. I put Gargadon on suspend and pass. Turn 3 I draw a walking Ballista. So I cast Waltz, returning Neonate and Vengevine to my hand, discarding Vengevine. Then I cast the Neonate, discard my other Vengevine and cast Hangarback to reanimate both the V8 juicers in my graveyard. Time to get in for 8 baby! The next turn I draw a Stitcher's Supplier which mills over a Gravecrawler. So I sacrifice both Vengevines to Gargadon, cast Gravecrawler, remove another counter from Gargadon, and cast Gravecrawler again to reanimate the Vines. Gargadon now has 6 time counters on it. On the battlefield my opponent cast Scrap Trawler, and I know he has Ironworks in hand because he revealed it off of Stirrings two turns ago. My opponent is at 12 so I need to kill him this turn. So I sacrifice Supplier, Crawler, and all 4 of my lands to Gargadon to put it into play, and then swing for a crisp 17. My opponent has to block Gargadon with Trawler, so he goes down to 4, but he loses the Trawler so it's a win for me. Unfortunately he had the second one in hand, so he untaps, plays Ironworks, sacs a few artifacts and goes off. Even though I lost I really enjoyed this game as it showed to me the potential of Gargadon and Waltz. If my opponent had not had the 2nd Trawler already in hand, I more than likely would have won that game.
    Game 3 was pretty good. Ended up getting some early aggression in and got him down to two life. I keep doing the math, and I don't think my hand lined up so that I could have done that 2 damage at any other point in the game, so it is what it is. He untaps, plays Ironworks and tries to go off. But he never finds Retreiver or Trawler so he concedes. First win in the bag!

    Round 2 - VS 8-Rack (2-1)
    Game 1 I came out of the gates swinging. I believe I had 2 Vengevines out on turn 2 after casting Supplier and Hangarback. My opponent eventually lands an Ensnaring Bridge on turn 3, tapping out for it with 3 cards remaining in his hand, and being at 4 life. So my Vines can't attack, but I have a Supplier and Gravecrawler in play, so I untap and attack him down to 1. Then I cast Viscera Seer and pass the turn. On my opponent turn, he points every discard spell he has at himself, putting himself down to 0 cards. At end of turn I sacrifice Supplier to Seer to Scry, end up hitting a Bridge off of the Supplier Trigger. Perfect. Sacrifice Gravecrawler, get a zombie, scry. Sac both Vengevine, get zombies, scry. I am just sacrificing my board continually scrying to the bottom looking for my single out. Eventually I scry to the top and let it be my turn. Untap, cast Walking Ballista for 1, and kill my opponent.
    Game 2, I mulligan down to 5 because of my mulligan rules. With the hand i keep I scry a Destructive Revelry to the bottom of my deck because I have only fetchlands in hand. Honestly this was a mistake that probably cost me the match. Something similar to Game 1 happens where I get locked behind an Ensnaring Bridge. Only this time my opponent has a Shrieking Affliction in play so he has a clock. Unfortunately I am unable to find an out and I lose the game. If only I hadn't let myself get that Revelry :\
    Game 3 I came out swinging. Reanimated a Vengevine on turn 1, as well as another one and some zombies on turn 2. My opponent was dead before he got a turn 3.

    Round 3 - VS Grixis Death's Shadow (2-0)
    Game 1 I keep an opener with Leyline. Put out Leyline, cast looting discarding two Vengevines, pass the turn. Opponent cycles two Street Wraiths, plays a MIshra's Bauble, then concedes. He apparently kept a no-lander and was hoping he'd both:
    A) Find a land in the top 4 cards and
    B) Be able to quickly cast the Gurmag Angler in his hand.
    He didn't find a land, and Leyline shut down B, so we move quickly to game 2.
    Game 2 wasn't too special. I was able to go really wide with Bridge from Below and he wasn't able to stay alive.

    Round 4 - VS Burn (2-0)
    Game 1 had a bit of a back and forth. It ended coming down to him needing to top deck a burn spell, and me having an army I just needed to untap with. Luckily for me, no burn spell was top-decked and we went to game 2.
    Game 2 my opponent aggressively mulliganed to find a hand with Leyline of the Void. So I sit there for a few turns not doing too much, then I Revelry the Leyline, and proceed to go off. Again I get a little lucky off my opponent's draws. He is 3 damage short of killing me but he never draws the 2nd land for the Searing Blaze he has in hand. GGs.

    So all in all the deck worked wonderfully. I ended up sideboarding my mainboard Leylines out in every match I played tonight (except GDS) because they just weren't really match-ups that Leyline was fantastic against. Sure, in Game 1 it gives me some good mileage against decks like KCI as well as protecting my Bridges, but if it isn't good, it needs to be cut for better cards.

    I found it was pretty smart to proactively board in 2-3 Revelry every game. If you know you can get extra mileage out of it, putting in all 4 is also good.

    I was thoroughly impressed with Macabre Waltz tonight, as even though it was a 2-of I basically had it almost every game and was able to get value out of it. I like to think of it like Tormenting Voice only you get to choose what you actually draw, which is nice.

    All in all, I don't think I'd make any changes before the PPTQ this weekend, but I'll try to get some more testing in and report back.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on BridgeVine
    So after ruminating on it for a bit, this is the decklist I will be testing out at tonight's weekly Modern event and (if I have enough time afterwards) in some Competitive Modern Leagues on MTGO

    I'll make another post either tonight or tomorrow to let everyone know how I did.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    What is the typical Hearthstone payout look like?

    Here's a start:

    For Hearthstone being astronomically larger (competitively) than magic, Pro tours don't look too bad by comparison.

    Some more info-
    Hearthstone top paid pro -
    Magic top all-time earnings list -

    Magic has definitely been around a lot longer so keep that in mind. With that said though, these numbers certainly aren't small.

    The problem with Hearthstone is that the random elements of the game make it hard for players to consistently do well. Some people just lose tournaments literally because of die rolls. With that in mind, the fact that Pavel has won enough to put himself in 21st place if we place him on the MTG money leaders board is....just wow.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    I am going to go through this comment slowly because there is so much I disagree with, I can't tackle it all in one go.

    Quote from BlueTronFTW »
    Skitzafreak, did you read my topic in the general forum about pro play? Supply and demand rules here. Pros shouldn't get paid to appear, because none of them draw enough eyeballs to justify it. There's a reason none of these guys are sponsored by red bull, verizon, pizza hut, budweiser, or nintendo.

    This is a false equivalence fallacy. You cannot state as a fact that these players do not draw enough eyeballs when Wizards does nothing to promote them. And as for sponsorships, you do realize a lot of the Platinum level Pros are sponsored right? Sure it might not be Red Bull, or Verizon, but why the f%ck do we care about those sponsorships anyway? They don't matter to people who play Magic in the first place. Ultra Pro, Ultimate Guard, Dex Protection, you know companies that make products that Magic players use actively sponsor teams and players and it is where I am sure they get a bulk of their money from (if there are any random Gold or Plat Pros that are sponsored reading these, feel free to chime in to confirm or deny my claim here).

    Then there is the fact that Wizards wants the PT to be a sole promotion for just Magic. They don't want to share the spotlight with Pizza Hut. They want people just thinking about Magic. That's why there's no sponsors, Wizards doesn't want to share the limelight.

    Quote from BlueTronFTW »
    Not enough people care about any particular individual pro or team. If Gabriel Nassif never played Magic again, there would be no change in viewer count. If the entire team cfb retired, there would be no change in viewer count. The fact that four guys can say "hey everybody we're trying another game over here!" and bring eyeballs is proof enough. You get what you deserve, and pros deserve very little. Side note, I found it great that the finals were a hearthstone pro pairing. It's always nice to remind the world that these few dozen MtG people aren't much better than any of us. They just catch breaks (the bye system at GPs is awful).

    Again, this is all false equivalence. You can't state with certainty that player's wouldn't care about Pro players leaving. Because there are people that don't know pr players exist, because Wizards doesn't tell people about Pro players! If you go on League of Legends you see the pro players. In the dashboard you see the teams. Riot throws the players in your face because the company understands their importance. And by broadcasting them, we get to enjoy them being there. Pro players are only 'disposable' because Wizards wants them to be disposable. The rest of your comment just sounds like someone who is pissed off he isn't better at Magic, so I'm not even gonna touch that.

    Quote from BlueTronFTW »
    You want bigger payouts at events? So do I. Eliminating appearance fees for pro players, not paying for travel or lodging for e-celebs who don't draw, that turns into bigger payouts that are actually earned that weekend by winning. It means you or I have a shot at the cash. WOTC could, and should, sell promo tokens or lands to help fund bigger payouts, too. I'd buy half a dozen foil islands with classic artwork (or brand new, if it's good) if I knew the profit margin was being redirected to pro play.

    Why are you advocating for not appear fees for tournaments? Do you just want to Magic competitive scene to just be people only going to a GP whne it's in their home town? What incentive is there for people to grind GPs and event every year to try and make Gold and Platinum if there isn't at least that (completely embarrassing) income at the end to tell them, "hey good job". What you are suggesting would literally kill the Magic Pro circuit. And maybe that's what you want, and I legitimately don't understand why.

    Though I do agree with your point on Wizards could back-end funding for premier level events with premier level cards that can be purchased at only GPs or something. Instead of a booster pack of cards you can just buy a premier GP promo for X Dollars. That would be cool.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    I think this is pretty disingenuous, especially when they literally just had the largest pro tour payout they've ever had. No, it's not what League players or Hearthstone players get, but those games both have tens of millions of ad revenue and sponsorships pouring into their games as well.

    Do they support the pro scene like pros or those dedicated to watching wish they would? Not really. That doesn't mean that they hate them, or don't care. They know tournaments are the lifeblood of the game, and they're financially incentivized to continue to care about that section of the game and community.

    The largest Pro Tour Payout ever? Now that is disingenuous. Sure, the amount of money given away does seem much larger than usual. $850,000! Wow! That's a hell of a lot of money for a single Pro Tour! I mean, normal Pro Tours only have a payout of $250,000....and aren't team tournaments.

    If you account for the fact that Pro Tour 25th Anniversary was a TEAM Pro Tour and the top prize needed to be paid out to THREE players, the prize pool for PT 25th Anniversary was only increased by $100,000. Honestly, that is pennies. In fact, there are very few people who actually see any of that prize increase. Let's go over every single prize metric to see who actually sees any increase in their prize payout.

    Pro Tour Prizes. Standard Pro Tour Payout is bolded, PT 25th Anniversary Payout is in brackets.
    1st: $50,000 ($50,000/player)
    2nd: $20,000 ($24,000/player)
    3rd: $15,000 ($15,000/player)
    4th: $12,500 ($15,000/player)
    5th: $10,000 ($9,000/player)
    6th: $9,000 ($9,000/player)
    7th: $7,500 ($9,000/player)
    8th: $6,000 ($9,000/player)
    9th - 16th: $5,000 ($5,000/player)
    17th - 24th: $3,000 ($4,000/player)
    25th - 32nd: $2,000 ($3,000/player)
    33rd - 48th: $1,500 ($2,000/player)
    49th - 64th: $1,000 ($1,000/player)

    So yes, some placings made a little bit more money. The most pronounced is 2nd place where each player made $4,000 more than they would have at a regular PT if they had gotten the same placing. However the $850,000 isn't all that big of a number when you account for the fact that it was a team tournament. Of course they had to have a large payout! Do you think people are going to be excited for a Pro Tour where 3 people have to split the regular PT Winnings among all their team mates? Christ that's idiotic.

    So WotC really only juiced the PT prize pool by $100,000. Or $33,333.33_/player for the team. Now let us shift over to the SILVER SHOWCASE!!! Where WotC paid $12,500 to HEARTHSTONE PLAYERS just to get them to show up! Please, you can't sit there and pretend like WotC actually gives a ***** about competitive players. The entire Silver Showcase Prize Pool was $150,000!! $50,000 MORE than what they added to the PT!!
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    Quote from BlueTronFTW »
    I think it is fair to say this highlights the EV problem of MtG. The sentiments by the grinders is that this is some sort of side hustle instead of a hobby. We all know that even top level pros don't make that much money, so nobody should really go into this thinking they are going to end up in the black at the end of X years. This is a money sink, period, and the best 99% of us can hope to do is slightly mitigate the loss by accumulating enough inventory from prize support. That is a partial subsidy at best, not a profit.

    This is my biggest problem with Wizards as a company. They give exactly 0 support to the people outside of their company that are helping to keep their brand alive. While I agree with the point that the casual playing crowd is much larger than those of us that are competitive, we are the ones singing the praises of Magic everywhere. WotC the past few years has been slowly killing off all support for professional play. I can see there being no appearance fee for any pro level in the next 5 years in this trend continues. In 10 years I can see the Platinum, Gold, and Silver pro levels all being squished into a singular Pro Players Club which only guarantees you entry into Pro Tours based on a pro point threshold. Wizards doesn't want to support those of us who try to play this competitively, who want to try to push this game as (for all intents and purposes) a sport.

    There is a reason I still have the #PayThePros in my signature. Like here is a great example of how much Wizards doesn't give a *****.

    The yearly season is almost over. World's will soon be upon us. Do any of you know what the Leaderboard for Player of the Year looks like right now? Because oh damn does it look amazing this year.

    1st Place
    Seth Manfield - 79 Points
    2nd Place
    Reid Duke - 78 Points
    3rd Place
    Luis Salvatto - 77 Points

    Look at how close this race is!?! Any one of these players could hold the lead, or take the lead by doing well at the next GP. It's such an exciting narrative that can be pushed to garner excitement from the competitive crowd. But NOPE Wizards don't give a f&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&ck.

    Hell even if you good the player of the year race the standings aren't at the top of the page. If you go to the Premier Play Leaderboard you have to scroll down an entire page's worth of text to even see the leaderboard. WotC doesn't care about what we want from the game. WotC doesn't care that we play the game. ***** WotC would love it if we all just bought 10 booster boxes of every new set and then lit them on fire.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on BridgeVine
    Good job guys! I gave up on the deck after 2 PPTQs and an FNM in which I did terribly. Overall I was 7-8-1 with it, ugh. I may try it again at FNM, but variance is really a pain! Are there any streams to watch?

    The deck can be difficult to play as there are a lot of un-intuitive interactions. For example, if you have a sac outlet when you kick a Goblin Bushwhacker, with the Bushwhacker trigger on the stack you can sacrifice all your non-tokens creatures to create more zombies that will be both hastey and 3/2.

    Additionally, there are things like if you're running Gargadon in your list, it coming off us suspend counts as casting a creature, so it can be used as a way to recur Vengevines.

    Finally, one of the best ways to protect Bridges from being exiled is to just sacrifice blocked creatures before they do damage. Sometimes this ends up being a net loss, but if you have enough Bridges in your yard it can be worth it.

    Those are some small interactions that may not be 100% obvious from a first glance with the deck. Sideboarding is also a challenge as you don't want to dilute the game plan too much. Then there is knowing which hands are actually good, and which are complete garbage. There is a lot you have to learn to pilot this deck well, it isn't something you can just pick up and spike a tournament with. :p
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    Quote from Lav Dafka »
    Ive always loathed the idea of planned obsolescence, and that’s the whole basis of standard. I’m not terribly attached to any standard deck because before even building it I’m thinking about it rotating and getting upset. Why even bother.

    It’s hard to make money off someone playing a RTR deck forever, of course and that needs to be considered. But if you take his deck away, does he happily buy a new one every few months? Or does he quit? Wouldn’t it be better to keep him in the game, maybe paying entry fees at an LGS, maybe getting exposed to new decks and new products that he might eventually want to try out? Worst case, maybe he helps LGS events fire?

    The argument for Standard (imho) is that it is an easier way to incentivize new players to join the game. Want to learn to play Magic? Cool, we'll be playing decks with these last few sets where you can easily get your hands on the cards no problem! Compare that to Modern. It took me 2 weeks to find a playset of Goblin Lores and that was before Hollow One took off as a deck. Yes the planned obsolescence can be a bit frustrating, but it has a purpose and a good reason for existing within a 25 year old game.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    Quote from gkourou »
    Look at dickman's list. He maindecked 4 leyline of the void.

    Adding a little bit of context here. In BridgeVine the main reason to mainboard Leyline of the Void is so that in creature match-ups like Humans, you can just swing your creatures sideways without the fear of your opponent killing one of their creatures and exiling any Bridge from Below that are in your graveyard.

    Does it help against other decks that make use of the graveyard? Of course, but that's honestly just gravy.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on BridgeVine
    Quote from mnelson325 »
    Doesn’t Legion Loyalist do more for this deck than Goblin Bushwhacker? One less R as well. I’m not a bridgevine player so pardon me for even posting lol. I was spying your decks for SB plans

    The reason for Bushwhacker is so that you can create a bunch of tokens off of Bridge from Below and then use Bushwhacker to give them plus +1/+0 and haste to attack with them in the same turn. Legion Loyalist does stone cold nothing in this deck :p
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    With concerns to the League numbers, Modern Friendlies are showing to have 146% of the players of Standard Friendlies, with Modern Competitive having 121% the amount of players. Yeah, there is no contest for Modern being the most popular constructed format. The fact that it took Wizards this long to clue in that, "Oh we can make money off this crowd" is laughable.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on [[Official]] Modern Prices Discussion
    Quote from BlueTronFTW »
    It is depressing, because MM17 was really good overall. Then WOTC for some reason decided that this theme stuff mattered more.

    Does the "for some reason" line up with Chris Cocks becoming the new CEO of Wizards of the Coast? I know for Standard legal sets they're designed almost a year in advance, so might the same be true for supplemental sets? Was Modern Masters 2017 the last Masters Set we might have had before Chris had a say in anything? Let me go grab my tinfoil hat....
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on BridgeVine
    So someone on Reddit posted a tournament report on winning a 50 person PPTQ with Bridgevine (link). One of the big take aways for me where his points about Goblin Bushwhacker.

    Essentially, Bushwhacker is not a good card. While in some avenue it may be an effect that the deck wants, it isn't one it needs in abundance. The poster kjmeua suggests Bushwhacker as a singleton card. In the /r/spikes Discord channel, we've been talking about this as well. One of the users there made a great comparison to Bushwhacker in BridgeVine being akin to Temur Battle Rage in Grixis Death's Shadow. It's a combo card that essentially wins us the game the turn we cast it. If you look at GDS decks however, they are only running 2 Battle Rage. Yes they have a lot of draw effects to let them get it more often, but they also have Snapcaster Mage to flash it back if they mill over it with a Thought Scour.

    So with all of this in mind I have been thinking on how to reduce Bushwhacker down in number, while also making it so that we can consistently get some use out of it. Then I remembered one of my favorite cards from when I first started playing magic: Macabre Waltz. Now this card seems a little lackluster in a lot of decks. But surprisingly, the more I thought about it, the more I like it in Bridgevine.

    The deck really needs a few more discard effects, and Waltz definitely provides on that front. While not discarding a lot of cards, sometimes you just have a single Vengevine or Bridge stranded in your hand, looking longingly at the graveyard. Waltz helps you get it there where it can start giving you some actual value. Secondly, while Stitcher's Supplier is a great card for this deck, it's always a pain when it mills over some cards like Neonate that you wish you had in your hand. Well wish no longer! Waltz returns that Neonate, that extra Stitcher's Supplier to your hand for you to use again!

    I think one of the great plays I had go through my head was using Waltz on turn 2 to get back two XX creatures, discarding a Bridge, and then cards those creatures to make Zombies. The card just really seems like gas to me in this deck.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.