|
Yeah, I'd love to get some hero of bladeholds but theyre just a bit expensive for my level of commitment to the game as of now lol. But thanks for responses, I do think not having any champion of the parish in my deck is just a bad idea, theyre not THAT expensive, only half the price of bladeholds and not a mythic so i'll crack a few packs and maybe try to do some trading. The lightning mauler is just a superior 2 drop to thraben valient and moorland inquisitor, correct? I'm running 2 valients and 1 moorland, should i switch those to 4 maulers plain and simple or try to cut out my 2 1 drop elite vanguards with the intent of putting in 4 champion of the parish?
Also with the aggressiveness of my deck do you think it's too much to be running 3 pacifism? It's probably what won me the 2 games against delver alone but I feel like it's not what my deck is about and should drop 1-3?
What is your opinion of mask of avacyn in this deck?
So many questions, sorry lol. Thanks again for any replies.
edit: deck list
creatures - 19
thraben valient - 2
riot ringleader - 4
benalish veteran - 2
moorland inquisitor - 1
zealous conscripts - 1
kessig malcontents - 2
elite vanguard - 2
goldnight commander - 3
kruin striker - 2
spells - 17
thatcher revolt - 4
pacifism - 3
thunderbolt - 2
fireball - 2
righteous blow - 1
vigilante justice - 2
incinerate - 2
pillar of flame - 1
Lands - 24
mountain - 11
plains - 11
evolving wilds - 2
|
I don't like pacifism in the deck as you're having problems with Delver and they can simply use vapor snag to get it back into their hand. Fiend hunter should definitely be the replacement for it. I also don't like Benalish veteran as he's basically a 3/3 for 3 in your deck. It seems like you don't want to invest a lot of money into the deck which I understand, but if you have the chance definitely replace it with Silverblade paladin. Stormblood beserker should also try to find it's way into your list.
Gather the townsfolk seem good in this deck as well. Accorder Paladin can be similar to a hero of blade hold for now if you wish to try it out.
I don't like the thin spread of removal. Many RW human decks don't run any removal at all as they're trying to just bash in quick but I figure the removal does allow you to removal blockers and troublesome creatures. If undying creatures are big in your meta such as Strangleroot geist or zombies, I would add in more pillar of flame and take out righteous blow and thunderbolt. Outside of angel tokens I can't think of a good target for thunderbolt, and if you're using it as a burn 3 to the face trick why not just run more incinerates? Fireball is the card that sticks out the most to me, It seems like you want to use it as a finisher (or an expensive board sweeper) but drawing them early seems like a dead card to me.
|
I would invest in champion of the parish and silverblade paladin. Your deck will be 10x better.
For a semi-budget humans list I would play
4 Champion of the Parish
2 Doomed Traveler
3 Gideon's Lawkeeper
4 Lightning Mauler
4 Loyal Cathar
3 Fiend Hunter
4 Silverblade Paladin
3 Hellrider
4 Gather the Townsfolk
3 Pillar of Flame
3 Thatcher's Revolt
11 Plains
5 Mountain
4 Clifftop Retreats
1 Slayer's Stronghold
Hellrider is one of the best cards in the deck even though it's not a human. With gather the townsfolk and revolt it does A LOT of dmg.
|
On June 12 2012 00:01 iCCup.Nove wrote:
I don't like pacifism in the deck as you're having problems with Delver and they can simply use vapor snag to get it back into their hand. Fiend hunter should definitely be the replacement for it. I also don't like Benalish veteran as he's basically a 3/3 for 3 in your deck. It seems like you don't want to invest a lot of money into the deck which I understand, but if you have the chance definitely replace it with Silverblade paladin. Stormblood beserker should also try to find it's way into your list.
Gather the townsfolk seem good in this deck as well. Accorder Paladin can be similar to a hero of blade hold for now if you wish to try it out.
I don't like the thin spread of removal. Many RW human decks don't run any removal at all as they're trying to just bash in quick but I figure the removal does allow you to removal blockers and troublesome creatures. If undying creatures are big in your meta such as Strangleroot geist or zombies, I would add in more pillar of flame and take out righteous blow and thunderbolt. Outside of angel tokens I can't think of a good target for thunderbolt, and if you're using it as a burn 3 to the face trick why not just run more incinerates? Fireball is the card that sticks out the most to me, It seems like you want to use it as a finisher (or an expensive board sweeper) but drawing them early seems like a dead card to me.
Sort of like you can read my mind.. lol I'll just assume you have a lot more experience as I just started, and yeah I wanted to avoid spending TOO much, I'm not tryin to be the bottom of the totem pole either, though.
I thinki gather the townsfolk just synergizes with this deck too well to not grab 2 of them at least.
I 100% agree on benalish, I didn't really see him as a great card but it came with the starter so I left him but I'd really like to get some of those accorder paladins in here as a great 2 drop.
I'm definitely gonna drop the fireballs, which I only have for finish and if I have the mana to kill some 6/6 or something, but usually by that point I'm losing anyways.
I also like the idea on dropping blow for pillar and bolt for incinerate, I'm not real sure why I was running bolt except it came with my starter deck, I'll recompose my list and see what you think.
edit: I do like your deck list Denied but idk if I can get all those cards together immediately.
|
Those cards shouldn't run you too much. I got most of those without too much effort from drafting and just doing value trades.
|
Also, glad people still "test" decks that have no chance at beating any Delver build.
|
Are you talking to me Judi? :[
|
On June 12 2012 11:39 ParanoiaDHerO wrote:
Are you talking to me Judi? :[
No, just people on MWS. I join PTQ testing or WMCQ testing serious and they bring some deck or some build that I know can't beat Delver (cause I have played it weeks prior). Then they get offended when I tell them that and why it can't beat Delver (the Mana Leak/Vapor Snag issues), and its like sweet glad I am testing against idiots.
Your situation is much different.
Edit:
I should clarify Paranoid, you have 2 ways of beating Delver, either go over Delver like Wolf-Run or go under it like Humans. Decks that try to durdle in the middle like Esper struggle with it and have to dedicate a large number of cards like Ratchet Bomb that is specifically meant to reduce the opponent's board while doing nothing for the Esper player. Your deck tries to go under Delver and put pressure on it which is a fair way of playing against it.
|
On June 12 2012 13:56 Judicator wrote:No, just people on MWS. I join PTQ testing or WMCQ testing serious and they bring some deck or some build that I know can't beat Delver (cause I have played it weeks prior). Then they get offended when I tell them that and why it can't beat Delver (the Mana Leak/Vapor Snag issues), and its like sweet glad I am testing against idiots. Your situation is much different. Edit: I should clarify Paranoid, you have 2 ways of beating Delver, either go over Delver like Wolf-Run or go under it like Humans. Decks that try to durdle in the middle like Esper struggle with it and have to dedicate a large number of cards like Ratchet Bomb that is specifically meant to reduce the opponent's board while doing nothing for the Esper player. Your deck tries to go under Delver and put pressure on it which is a fair way of playing against it.
Yeah, some people just can't take the criticism =\ I would want to know if I was really trying to make a good deck and someone had first hand exp that it DID NOT WORK. I don't know why that'd make anyone mad.. But I'm also very glad I have a chance against delver, I've done okay against them at FNM so far, considering no big power rares for my deck yet.
|
On June 12 2012 13:56 Judicator wrote:No, just people on MWS. I join PTQ testing or WMCQ testing serious and they bring some deck or some build that I know can't beat Delver (cause I have played it weeks prior). Then they get offended when I tell them that and why it can't beat Delver (the Mana Leak/Vapor Snag issues), and its like sweet glad I am testing against idiots. Your situation is much different. Edit: I should clarify Paranoid, you have 2 ways of beating Delver, either go over Delver like Wolf-Run or go under it like Humans. Decks that try to durdle in the middle like Esper struggle with it and have to dedicate a large number of cards like Ratchet Bomb that is specifically meant to reduce the opponent's board while doing nothing for the Esper player. Your deck tries to go under Delver and put pressure on it which is a fair way of playing against it.
This has been the case THROUGHOUT online 'f2p' mtg.
If you want to test seriously, either pony up the modo train (isn't this what this topic is supposed to be about anyways?  ) or get friends...
I miss all the week long testing camp sessions before nats/pts.
|
On June 12 2012 15:03 hkf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2012 13:56 Judicator wrote:On June 12 2012 11:39 ParanoiaDHerO wrote:
Are you talking to me Judi? :[ No, just people on MWS. I join PTQ testing or WMCQ testing serious and they bring some deck or some build that I know can't beat Delver (cause I have played it weeks prior). Then they get offended when I tell them that and why it can't beat Delver (the Mana Leak/Vapor Snag issues), and its like sweet glad I am testing against idiots. Your situation is much different. Edit: I should clarify Paranoid, you have 2 ways of beating Delver, either go over Delver like Wolf-Run or go under it like Humans. Decks that try to durdle in the middle like Esper struggle with it and have to dedicate a large number of cards like Ratchet Bomb that is specifically meant to reduce the opponent's board while doing nothing for the Esper player. Your deck tries to go under Delver and put pressure on it which is a fair way of playing against it. This has been the case THROUGHOUT online 'f2p' mtg. If you want to test seriously, either pony up the modo train (isn't this what this topic is supposed to be about anyways? ) or get friends... I miss all the week long testing camp sessions before nats/pts.
I don't mind the randoms who test those decks, just weird that the more "serious" players started to do so at this point in the standard cycle. Most of those players have been pretty cordial in dicussing their decks and MUs against the field, but recently its like the full-retard train (choo choo or is it derp derp not sure). I am just tweaking the Flare builds by 1 or 2 cards anyways so its whatever.
To me modo is just the same and worse than MWS. I can get 3 games in the time I play 1 game on MTGO. Plus I can clone the client 3 or 4 times and play 4 at once that way. Sure the pitfall of testing against baddies is there, but it's there on MtGO as well, plus I get a feel for the random deck crowd or the flavor of the month crowd so I at least know what to expect when someone drops BUG colors down.
MtGO for limited play is by far better though.
|
Testing on MWS is useless. Even if they are playing a good deck they are still usually terrible. Playing in DEs on mtgo is the best way to test online. If you can consistently go 4-0 or 3-1 then you have a solid deck. You can also enter 2man queues and play multiple matches at once if you like doing that. If you want serious testing online you gotta put your money where your mouth is.
|
On June 13 2012 07:43 DEN1ED wrote:
Testing on MWS is useless. Even if they are playing a good deck they are still usually terrible. Playing in DEs on mtgo is the best way to test online. If you can consistently go 4-0 or 3-1 then you have a solid deck. You can also enter 2man queues and play multiple matches at once if you like doing that. If you want serious testing online you gotta put your money where your mouth is.
CoE is too high ($300-600) for some people.
/spent over $1k on modo probably and only has 2 sick commandurr decks ^^
|
On June 13 2012 07:43 DEN1ED wrote:
Testing on MWS is useless. Even if they are playing a good deck they are still usually terrible. Playing in DEs on mtgo is the best way to test online. If you can consistently go 4-0 or 3-1 then you have a solid deck. You can also enter 2man queues and play multiple matches at once if you like doing that. If you want serious testing online you gotta put your money where your mouth is.
What makes you think the people on MtGO are better? Just because they're spending money on it or they are going 4-0 or 3-1? Because frankly neither of those makes it so. Sure you can say the top players are playing on it, but that hardly makes the other programs worse. If you want to say that the trash pool is larger in the f2p communities, then sure.
Like I know I have beaten shitty players running the top decks simply because they don't have a clue, but that doesn't mean I can't pick out possible issues with the deck that I am testing. Just because the deck went 4-0 or 3-1 doesn't tell me shit about the deck. I am more interested in the specific match ups, identifying specific problem cards and evaluating specific responses. Going consistently 4-0, 3-1 again, doesn't answer those questions. There are plenty of decks that just meta-ed to win in the MtGO environment which again tells me nothing about the deck that I am testing. The winning and losing doesn't really matter as long as I can gather information. When someone goes turn 3 Huntmaster, I am not going how I am going to win this game while testing a deck, I am asking myself what cards in this deck handles this situation then likewise think how likely this situation is and then tweak accordingly. MtGO and MWS aren't really any different in this regards.
HOWEVER, if you are testing a rogue deck or something relatively new or built from scratch (a meta-ed deck) then yes I would agree MtGO is better.
Basically testing on MWS requires a lot more personal critical analysis of your deck than testing on MtGO would probably take, but really, it's not that big of a difference. Talking with local people who test on MtGO (PT qualified people), we generally arrived at the same conclusions for certain match ups; sometimes I have sick tech that they didn't consider or wrote off, sometimes they bring the sick tech that I wrote off or didn't consider.
Plus you have situations like hkf's, MtGO can be a pretty significant money sink.
|
Plus you have situations like hkf's, MtGO can be a pretty significant money sink.
Oh I got more than my fair share of value out of modo. I just decided that I can't juggle like 4 'hobbies-turned-semi-pro activities' about halfway through 2nd year at uni and cashed down to tix then bought commander cards to play on a casual basis.
modo meta is definitely warped.
If you want serious testing MWS with your internal network is the best bet - modo for profit and to test against a 'defined' meta, imo at least.
I've played thousands of hours on apprentice testing with people.
|
On June 13 2012 12:55 hkf wrote:Show nested quote +Plus you have situations like hkf's, MtGO can be a pretty significant money sink. Oh I got more than my fair share of value out of modo. I just decided that I can't juggle like 4 'hobbies-turned-semi-pro activities' about halfway through 2nd year at uni and cashed down to tix then bought commander cards to play on a casual basis. modo meta is definitely warped. If you want serious testing MWS with your internal network is the best bet - modo for profit and to test against a 'defined' meta, imo at least. I've played thousands of hours on apprentice testing with people.
Shout outs to Apprentice, that program was lol. Every top deck was like is this guy hacking?
Yes, play groups are good to have if you want to take your game to the PTQ+ levels.
|
On June 13 2012 13:55 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 12:55 hkf wrote:Plus you have situations like hkf's, MtGO can be a pretty significant money sink. Oh I got more than my fair share of value out of modo. I just decided that I can't juggle like 4 'hobbies-turned-semi-pro activities' about halfway through 2nd year at uni and cashed down to tix then bought commander cards to play on a casual basis. modo meta is definitely warped. If you want serious testing MWS with your internal network is the best bet - modo for profit and to test against a 'defined' meta, imo at least. I've played thousands of hours on apprentice testing with people. Shout outs to Apprentice, that program was lol. Every top deck was like is this guy hacking? Yes, play groups are good to have if you want to take your game to the PTQ+ levels.
Because backwash was the best packet sniffer ^^
IMO groups are an awesome thing to have, if not only to add some social-ness to your grinding. Theres also the thing of card availability. Even if you don't all field the same deck (I really detest control decks and will rarely play one), you still have a lot of knowledge exchange that can go on.
|
Sure modo is expensive to start but if you are decent you can win it back easily. I spent $200 to make my standard deck and got those tix back in less than a month. The thing is, when people are playing for money you are much less likely to face a bad opponent, since they usually know they aren't good enough and don' want to waste their money, and you are much more likely to face skilled players since there is an opportunity for financial gain. If MWS works for you I guess that's ok but I didn't find going 50-0 with some random shitty rogue deck I brewed up to be very helpful. I do use MWS to play with people I know but I find playing vs random people such a waste of time.
Also, I have found my game as improved drastically after grinding DEs non-stop. Grinding games on MWS never improved my skills as a player.
|
On June 13 2012 15:04 DEN1ED wrote:
Sure modo is expensive to start but if you are decent you can win it back easily. I spent $200 to make my standard deck and got those tix back in less than a month. The thing is, when people are playing for money you are much less likely to face a bad opponent, since they usually know they aren't good enough and don' want to waste their money, and you are much more likely to face skilled players since there is an opportunity for financial gain. If MWS works for you I guess that's ok but I didn't find going 50-0 with some random shitty rogue deck I brewed up to be very helpful. I do use MWS to play with people I know but I find playing vs random people such a waste of time.
Also, I have found my game as improved drastically after grinding DEs non-stop. Grinding games on MWS never improved my skills as a player.
What is "DEs"? As I'm looking for ways to improve. :D
|
On June 13 2012 19:30 ParanoiaDHerO wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 15:04 DEN1ED wrote:
Sure modo is expensive to start but if you are decent you can win it back easily. I spent $200 to make my standard deck and got those tix back in less than a month. The thing is, when people are playing for money you are much less likely to face a bad opponent, since they usually know they aren't good enough and don' want to waste their money, and you are much more likely to face skilled players since there is an opportunity for financial gain. If MWS works for you I guess that's ok but I didn't find going 50-0 with some random shitty rogue deck I brewed up to be very helpful. I do use MWS to play with people I know but I find playing vs random people such a waste of time.
Also, I have found my game as improved drastically after grinding DEs non-stop. Grinding games on MWS never improved my skills as a player. What is "DEs"? As I'm looking for ways to improve. :D
Daily Events on MODO. They're events that occur at set times every day where people join and play 4 rounds of Swiss against each other in different formats (e.g. Modern, Sealed, Standard). Minimum 16 people for the event to start, but no maximum iirc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
