Magnus, excellent write-up. My next question to you or really anyone else involves spellskites. I sorta went half-in on the skite plan and currently have two in my board. They've over-performed to be honest. What are your thoughts on this card (and wild defiance) against certain decks.
Spellskite is a great card in terms of the role it has played for Infect and other combo decks since it was first printed. The main reason that I don't run it is because it costs 2 mana and is not reactive, if it is in your hand it is not doing anything. That is not to say that it can't work in an Infect deck, but since there are so many options that are reactive such as Vines of Vastwood, Apostle's Blessing, Guttural Response, and Ranger's Guile (and Dispel / Spell Pierce for blue), I have found it difficult to fit into the list. The same is true with Wild Defiance, again it is not reactive, but once on the battlefield it can certainly have a positive impact. I can't say these cards are wrong, but I tend to favor reactive cards.
@Ultra_Magnus
Excellent report, and I appreciated hearing from someone who switched to mono-green for non-budgetary reasons. An oft repeated mantra of people who have a lot of experience playing the deck has been that it has a long game/is not simply a "glass cannon" (debates about exactly what glass cannon means aside)
This has also been my experience, playing with the U/G version, with notable exception of the combo mirror vs storm or similar.
I have been playing Infect religiously since day one of Scars, and during that time there have been 2 Infect myths that have come up over and over again:
1) You have to win quickly with Infect or you can't win at all.
This is just false. Although it is true that all green based Infect decks will win quickly at times, the deck is more than capable of winning at any stage of the game, and this is certainly not limited to the MonoG version.
2) It takes no skill to pilot an Infect Deck.
It takes very little skill to win on turn 2 or 3 when it is handed to you on a plate, and during the course of a long tournament the deck will have some of these quick wins. The real skill is in how to play the long game, and the only way to achieve the consistency you need to make a big top 8, is by mastering this 'long game' that apparently Infect doesn't have. The deck takes an incredible amount of skill to pilot effectively, with consistency over the course of a tournament. What is easy to do with Infect is to make a mess of it. The deck can fall apart so easily with just one incorrect decision. As such, Infect is a deck that requires precise and correct decision making with harsh consequences for any mistakes.
I hope to get your opinion on why the mono-green list you piloted cannot be improved by the addition of fetchlands/hierarch/more colors.
I think that running 4 Cathedral of War makes it more suited to a MonoG list, since the deck is running 8 land that tap for colorless. In a way, Cathedral is taking the place of Noble Hierarch in this list. Hierarch is more susceptible to removal, but Cathedral rarely gets removed. This makes accumulating exalted triggers over the course of a long game more reliable.
Instead of looking at MonoG Cathedral as a mono deck, it is probably more useful to look at it as a 2 color deck, green and colorless. The cards that don't require green mana are extremely important for the consistency of the deck, such as Ichorclaw Myr, Necropede, Apostle's Blessing, and Mutagenic Growth. Trying to replace any of these cards with cards that require colored mana could prove problematic for the mana base.
All this is not to say that you couldn't run a UG list with 4 Cathedral of War, but it does seem that MonoG is the most suited choice for such a deck. Even running a few fetch lands in a MonoG deck has it's positives and negatives, but could work. I would be most interested to hear how any of these experiments go.
I am a big fan of all flavors of green based Infect, and rather than thinking that MonoG Cathedral is currently the best, I look at it as a new viable version that has surfaced along with the UG, BUG and BG versions of the deck that have already proven themselves. I think MonoG Cathedral is doing well at the moment for 2 reasons, it copes well in a blue heavy meta, which is where we find ourselves since the banning of Deathrite Shaman, and it doesn't break the budget.
Some time ago Wizards stopped reporting all daily results online. Now they only report 1 daily event per day, per format. Unfortunately this means that the smaller archetypes such as Infect, get less information and less encouragement. All Premier events still get reported though, and thus have become a regular, reliable and competitive source for meta data, including smaller archetypes.
I do so adore the Mono~Green infect build I employ. It's still my most favorite deck to play. Even now, when I compete in tourneys at LGSs, I whip this deck out to play casually, between matches. Perhaps it's due to the less competitive, more casual mentality of these casual duels, but I still manage to win at least over half of the duels I engage in.
What does your joy of playing this deck casually have to do with the argument of the decks viability? I like playing my premium deck foil slivers deck in between rounds, doesn't mean I'm going to top 8 a gap anytime soon with it.
I think that running 4 Cathedral of War makes it more suited to a MonoG list, since the deck is running 8 land that tap for colorless. In a way, Cathedral is taking the place of Noble Hierarch in this list. Hierarch is more susceptible to removal, but Cathedral rarely gets removed. This makes accumulating exalted triggers over the course of a long game more reliable.
For me the exalted trigger's are a bonus to what else the card can do, not the sole reason to run a card, i run hierarch over birds because she has the exalted trigger but to me that's a nice bonus to her ability to produce the 3 colors i run in my deck or 2 of the 3 if i'm running BUG. I'm also running Qasali Pridemage as a beater if i have to attack life directly or as artifact removal, it's a bonus that he comes with an exalted trigger. i've never minded when either of them have been removed, that's just one less piece of removal that could of been aimed at my infecters.
As for Blood Moon, i can't say it's ever been an issue, i've faced opp's who have landed it and every time i've had both my forests in play and been able to work around it, hierarch has been useful there with her ability to produce mana in most of the match up's, but the few times she has been removed and a blood moon is on the table i've been able to roll through, but i've never had to face other hatebear or taxes type decks locally so i'm not sure how my list would handle that.
My main issue is how many spellskites have started showing up in my meta, every deck is either running them MD or bringing them in for G2 except for burn.
I like playing my premium deck foil slivers deck in between rounds, doesn't mean I'm going to top 8 a gap anytime soon with it.
No, no you won't. But piloting mono~green infect, you could most certainly place in the top 8. Hence the argument that the deck could be viable, as opposed to "premium deck foil slivers deck".
For me the exalted trigger's are a bonus to what else the card can do, not the sole reason to run a card, i run hierarch over birds because she has the exalted trigger but to me that's a nice bonus to her ability to produce the 3 colors
Yeah, UGx Infect is far more explosive and any exalted triggers compliment the main pump spells, where as MonoG has traded some of that explosiveness for accumulating hard to remove land buffs over the course of the game, which gives it this strange end game where your infect guy can be quite big every time it swings without using any cards in hand. As such the deck has this different feel about it, compared with the Infect decks I am used to piloting.
My main issue is how many spellskites have started showing up in my meta, every deck is either running them MD or bringing them in for G2 except for burn.
Opposing main deck Spellskites have basically made main deck hate for it a must. I am running 2 Dismember main deck for it and Melira, Sylvok Outcast. With MonoG, accumulating land buffs over the course of the game can help win against an opposing Spellskite, especially when you have managed to get a few poison in early before the kite hit the table. I would so like to fit Slaughterhorn in the list somehow too, since it can't be redirected by Spellskite or countered, but I have never been able to fit it in. Although it would be hilarious winning against an opposing kite with Slaughterhorn and a pile of exalted triggers!
I would so like to fit Slaughterhorn in the list somehow too, since it can't be redirected by Spellskite or countered, but I have never been able to fit it in. Although it would be hilarious winning against an opposing kite with Slaughterhorn and a pile of exalted triggers!
That would be quite the epic win. If Spellskite is that much of an issue, then consider siding in artifact hate, which there is plenty of in Mono Green. Oxidize, Nature's Claim, heck even Naturalize.
Here's a question I've had a lot recently of my own deck monogreen version. Outside of budget reasons wouldn't it be beneficial to run some Misty Rainforests/Fetches just for the opportunity to turn on the landfall aspect of Groundswell at a moments notice?
Also I read something earlier about as more in-depth bug INFECT primer and I'd love to hear more details from people who play that. I wanna get more of a representation of the difference in play styles between monogreen and BUG. Also, since waterd placed high with monoblack infect a few weeks back has there been anybody else messing with that? I really liked how oppressive it was.
EDIT: Also I wanted to ask what people's thoughts on surgical extraction were? Couldn't that shore up some weaknesses a bit.
Fwiw I stopped playing green infect, so it´s not that i stopped performing well with the deck i stopped playing, was having a decent win ratio of 67% with it, but i thought i could do better. Well after playing soul sisters, tokens, GW hatebears, Zoo and burn with worse results, I´m comming back to monogreen infect starting today. I hope for good results.
I have money for fetchlands and hierarchs. I just don´t see what im winning, I do not like hierarch that much. The only reason I would splash back is for phyrexian crusader and something like thoughtseize. Maybe abrupt decay?
But the current manabase is alredy weak, I can´t see splashing too much black without making it worse and having worse matchups vs agressive decks, specially burn. The hardest matchups for this deck are Burn, Affinity, Zoo and BG (also meliria pod i think but it doesn´t count for this problem) less life and more weak manabase only make those matchups even worse.
I really do not see the value of having a worse manabase, The only way i can justify it is if someone come with a nongreen tech that makes the BG matchup even. god i hate that matchup.
Btw the monoblack version is very very very metagame dependant, i just played it a weekend because I expected the right metagame, long story short, the monoblack version owns UWR, Twin, affinity, delver and that was exactly what i was expecting. But really it´s bad to terrible vs the rest of hte game, tron is impossible, meliria is bad (most combo matchups are even though), if you somehow expect a metagame without meliria, BG and tron, monoblack is awesome, but otherwise stay as far as you can from it. Because those 3 decks 8-2 you or worse even....
Lately the metagame has been very heavy on combo decks (storm, ad naseum, cascade, and other random stuff) + Lots of twin, delver and UWR, so i think it´s a godo time to pull out the monoblack infect imo. however I´m gonna play green infect for a while but maybe i will do play monoblack in one premier this weekend and report back
Also I read something earlier about as more in-depth bug INFECT primer and I'd love to hear more details from people who play that. I wanna get more of a representation of the difference in play styles between monogreen and BUG. Also, since waterd placed high with monoblack infect a few weeks back has there been anybody else messing with that? I really liked how oppressive it was.
BUG is the best version of Infect i've seen, if your playing paper and not online then i dont see any real reason to not play BUG unless your like me and want to play W over B, or it's a budget thing, but i have the B pieces and will most likely go back to it in time.
plague stinger is really unexciting to me, sure if i would splash black i would play it, but it´s a really weak push to the black side. Btw on the reporting side on my first daily after a long time i did pull a 3-0-Split, Why did i leave the coozy hands of the green infect....
Also I read something earlier about as more in-depth bug INFECT primer and I'd love to hear more details from people who play that. I wanna get more of a representation of the difference in play styles between monogreen and BUG.
With BUG you have more evasion. I mean, Ichorclaw Myr does discourage blocking but it doesn't discourage chump blocking - if your opponent is just going to throw a 0/1 or 1/1 in the way of the Myr then getting +2/+2 is irrelevant, unless you have Rancor.
I find that the games you win with BUG pan out in one of two ways:
1) You get an Infect creature down and swing with enough pumps to one-shot your opponent. Fast and painless. This usually happens if you're playing against some helpless combo deck.
2) You connect with a nonlethal pumped Infect creature (putting your opponent at 6-8 poison), then chip away at him for the rest of the game. When your opponent is at 7 poison he is dead to a lot of things - Rancor, any pump spell (even no-landfall Groundswell), Hierarch + Pendelhaven. At this stage, you basically ask him "do you have an answer?" every turn. If he doesn't, you win. If he does, you play one of your protection spells or another Infect creature and ask again. Keep doing this until your opponent runs out of answers, and you win. BUG's creatures having evasion helps a lot, because you eliminate one possible answer: blockers.
The mono-green version actually has fewer mana sources than BUG (22 land vs 20 land + 4 Hierarch), but fewer green sources (14 vs 16, 20 if you count Hierarch). The other thing about Hierarch is that it accelerates your mana, so you get to unload your hand faster.
I like playing my premium deck foil slivers deck in between rounds, doesn't mean I'm going to top 8 a gap anytime soon with it.
No, no you won't. But piloting mono~green infect, you could most certainly place in the top 8. Hence the argument that the deck could be viable, as opposed to "premium deck foil slivers deck".
Premium deck is a magic brand name
Slivers was the name if the deck, foil is what the cards are.
So premium deck slivers all foil deck narrows it down to people who have been playing magic long enough to know what a premium deck is. I know you're a noob but damn, ***** the **** up kid.
My post pointed out the in effectiveness of your statement about it being fun to play casually.
Also you should calm down on these posts. 90% of it is just trash! slaughter horn can be countered! it can have the target switched! and it is not a good card for the deck. Neither is ghor clan or whatever standard trash you're trying to jam into a half baked infect deck to lower the price of a t2 dexk
slaughter horn can be countered! it can have the target switched! and it is not a good card for the deck. Neither is ghor clan or whatever standard trash you're trying to jam into a half baked infect deck to lower the price of a t2 deck
Technically the bloodrush ability of Slaughterhorn can be countered by something like Trickbind or Squelch, because they counter activated abilities. However it can't be countered by cards like Mana Leak and Remand, because Slaughterhorn itself does not go on the stack, just the bloodrush ability. Also Spellskite can't successfully redirect the bloodrush ability, because Spellskite is not attacking and the card states that the target must be an attacking creature. That is why the card is appealing, but it is just very difficult to fit in with all the other great 1 mana pump spells we have access to.
I think it is good that Mono Green Cathedral has surfaced as something new in the infect universe and prompted discussions. I look at MonoG, UGx and BG as all viable competitive options. There is no doubt though that UGx does have some serious raw power
I think it is good that Mono Green Cathedral has surfaced as something new in the infect universe and prompted discussions. I look at MonoG, UGx and BG as all viable competitive options. There is no doubt though that UGx does have some serious raw power
Yeah mono g putting up results is only doing good things for infect, having people playing and discussing it gives me a look at different options i may want to the transfer into UGx like Slaughterhorn.
The mono-green version actually has fewer mana sources than BUG (22 land vs 20 land + 4 Hierarch), but fewer green sources (14 vs 16, 20 if you count Hierarch). The other thing about Hierarch is that it accelerates your mana, so you get to unload your hand faster.
This is interesting, i'd never bothered to have a count up up of mana sources between the 2 versions.
I decided I won´t play the monoblack for reasons that are long to explain and have nothing to do with the issue at hand or it´s power level.
Ive been playing more the monogreen infect, i played the first premier and went 0-2 drop. I lost against a Balance deck (impossible match if you ask me, at least how he drew), and Affinity. Now i joined a new premier, I hope I have more luck on it.
Would you mind giving us more details about the games? I havent started playing the infect deck (building mono-green atm) but I can't figure how these match-ups are «impossible». What's so hard about them? Or what when wrong? Maybe we can work something out
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MODERN Blue Lantern, UBx Tezzerator. OLD SCHOOL 93/94 «The Pain Train» Black Sligh, Esper «Machine Gun» Artifacts, Jund «Psycho» Ponza-Disko.
I played other premier and i went 5-0 in the rounds this time, amazingly beating 2 BG decks. But i got affinity AGAIn on the brackets and despite this time i got 7 anti artifact cards. I draw zero of them and a single spellskite from him spelled gg. My record vs affinity is really terrible.
Both games he won, won in the same way, he dropped spellskite, and i couldn´t do a damn about it. SEcond game i finally draw a artifact destroyer, and i had my only creature down, he proceeded to kill it in response, and i never draw a creature in the following 5 turns, that was my only creture of the game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Spellskite is a great card in terms of the role it has played for Infect and other combo decks since it was first printed. The main reason that I don't run it is because it costs 2 mana and is not reactive, if it is in your hand it is not doing anything. That is not to say that it can't work in an Infect deck, but since there are so many options that are reactive such as Vines of Vastwood, Apostle's Blessing, Guttural Response, and Ranger's Guile (and Dispel / Spell Pierce for blue), I have found it difficult to fit into the list. The same is true with Wild Defiance, again it is not reactive, but once on the battlefield it can certainly have a positive impact. I can't say these cards are wrong, but I tend to favor reactive cards.
I have been playing Infect religiously since day one of Scars, and during that time there have been 2 Infect myths that have come up over and over again:
1) You have to win quickly with Infect or you can't win at all.
This is just false. Although it is true that all green based Infect decks will win quickly at times, the deck is more than capable of winning at any stage of the game, and this is certainly not limited to the MonoG version.
2) It takes no skill to pilot an Infect Deck.
It takes very little skill to win on turn 2 or 3 when it is handed to you on a plate, and during the course of a long tournament the deck will have some of these quick wins. The real skill is in how to play the long game, and the only way to achieve the consistency you need to make a big top 8, is by mastering this 'long game' that apparently Infect doesn't have. The deck takes an incredible amount of skill to pilot effectively, with consistency over the course of a tournament. What is easy to do with Infect is to make a mess of it. The deck can fall apart so easily with just one incorrect decision. As such, Infect is a deck that requires precise and correct decision making with harsh consequences for any mistakes.
I think that running 4 Cathedral of War makes it more suited to a MonoG list, since the deck is running 8 land that tap for colorless. In a way, Cathedral is taking the place of Noble Hierarch in this list. Hierarch is more susceptible to removal, but Cathedral rarely gets removed. This makes accumulating exalted triggers over the course of a long game more reliable.
Instead of looking at MonoG Cathedral as a mono deck, it is probably more useful to look at it as a 2 color deck, green and colorless. The cards that don't require green mana are extremely important for the consistency of the deck, such as Ichorclaw Myr, Necropede, Apostle's Blessing, and Mutagenic Growth. Trying to replace any of these cards with cards that require colored mana could prove problematic for the mana base.
Then there is the consideration of non-basic/fetch land hate such as Blood Moon, Shadow of Doubt, Leonin Arbiter, Aven Mindcensor and Suppression Field. The MonoG list has certain advantages here against these cards, not to mention taking zero damage from the mana base.
All this is not to say that you couldn't run a UG list with 4 Cathedral of War, but it does seem that MonoG is the most suited choice for such a deck. Even running a few fetch lands in a MonoG deck has it's positives and negatives, but could work. I would be most interested to hear how any of these experiments go.
I am a big fan of all flavors of green based Infect, and rather than thinking that MonoG Cathedral is currently the best, I look at it as a new viable version that has surfaced along with the UG, BUG and BG versions of the deck that have already proven themselves. I think MonoG Cathedral is doing well at the moment for 2 reasons, it copes well in a blue heavy meta, which is where we find ourselves since the banning of Deathrite Shaman, and it doesn't break the budget.
Some time ago Wizards stopped reporting all daily results online. Now they only report 1 daily event per day, per format. Unfortunately this means that the smaller archetypes such as Infect, get less information and less encouragement. All Premier events still get reported though, and thus have become a regular, reliable and competitive source for meta data, including smaller archetypes.
For me the exalted trigger's are a bonus to what else the card can do, not the sole reason to run a card, i run hierarch over birds because she has the exalted trigger but to me that's a nice bonus to her ability to produce the 3 colors i run in my deck or 2 of the 3 if i'm running BUG. I'm also running Qasali Pridemage as a beater if i have to attack life directly or as artifact removal, it's a bonus that he comes with an exalted trigger. i've never minded when either of them have been removed, that's just one less piece of removal that could of been aimed at my infecters.
As for Blood Moon, i can't say it's ever been an issue, i've faced opp's who have landed it and every time i've had both my forests in play and been able to work around it, hierarch has been useful there with her ability to produce mana in most of the match up's, but the few times she has been removed and a blood moon is on the table i've been able to roll through, but i've never had to face other hatebear or taxes type decks locally so i'm not sure how my list would handle that.
My main issue is how many spellskites have started showing up in my meta, every deck is either running them MD or bringing them in for G2 except for burn.
No, no you won't. But piloting mono~green infect, you could most certainly place in the top 8. Hence the argument that the deck could be viable, as opposed to "premium deck foil slivers deck".
Yeah, UGx Infect is far more explosive and any exalted triggers compliment the main pump spells, where as MonoG has traded some of that explosiveness for accumulating hard to remove land buffs over the course of the game, which gives it this strange end game where your infect guy can be quite big every time it swings without using any cards in hand. As such the deck has this different feel about it, compared with the Infect decks I am used to piloting.
Opposing main deck Spellskites have basically made main deck hate for it a must. I am running 2 Dismember main deck for it and Melira, Sylvok Outcast. With MonoG, accumulating land buffs over the course of the game can help win against an opposing Spellskite, especially when you have managed to get a few poison in early before the kite hit the table. I would so like to fit Slaughterhorn in the list somehow too, since it can't be redirected by Spellskite or countered, but I have never been able to fit it in. Although it would be hilarious winning against an opposing kite with Slaughterhorn and a pile of exalted triggers!
That would be quite the epic win. If Spellskite is that much of an issue, then consider siding in artifact hate, which there is plenty of in Mono Green. Oxidize, Nature's Claim, heck even Naturalize.
Also I read something earlier about as more in-depth bug INFECT primer and I'd love to hear more details from people who play that. I wanna get more of a representation of the difference in play styles between monogreen and BUG. Also, since waterd placed high with monoblack infect a few weeks back has there been anybody else messing with that? I really liked how oppressive it was.
EDIT: Also I wanted to ask what people's thoughts on surgical extraction were? Couldn't that shore up some weaknesses a bit.
I have money for fetchlands and hierarchs. I just don´t see what im winning, I do not like hierarch that much. The only reason I would splash back is for phyrexian crusader and something like thoughtseize. Maybe abrupt decay?
But the current manabase is alredy weak, I can´t see splashing too much black without making it worse and having worse matchups vs agressive decks, specially burn. The hardest matchups for this deck are Burn, Affinity, Zoo and BG (also meliria pod i think but it doesn´t count for this problem) less life and more weak manabase only make those matchups even worse.
I really do not see the value of having a worse manabase, The only way i can justify it is if someone come with a nongreen tech that makes the BG matchup even. god i hate that matchup.
Btw the monoblack version is very very very metagame dependant, i just played it a weekend because I expected the right metagame, long story short, the monoblack version owns UWR, Twin, affinity, delver and that was exactly what i was expecting. But really it´s bad to terrible vs the rest of hte game, tron is impossible, meliria is bad (most combo matchups are even though), if you somehow expect a metagame without meliria, BG and tron, monoblack is awesome, but otherwise stay as far as you can from it. Because those 3 decks 8-2 you or worse even....
Lately the metagame has been very heavy on combo decks (storm, ad naseum, cascade, and other random stuff) + Lots of twin, delver and UWR, so i think it´s a godo time to pull out the monoblack infect imo. however I´m gonna play green infect for a while but maybe i will do play monoblack in one premier this weekend and report back
I wonder if Slaughterhorn is worth a SB slot if Skite is pissing in our Kool-Ade.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/modern-archives/modern-archives-established/511601-infect-8-2013-5-2014
That's the earlier primer.
Plague Stinger, Thoughtseize, Abrupt Decay and Inquisition of Kozilek are all fine choices in Black, i've never used Crusader, though i've never run a GB list, if i did i'd be more prepared to run him.
Agree.
BUG is the best version of Infect i've seen, if your playing paper and not online then i dont see any real reason to not play BUG unless your like me and want to play W over B, or it's a budget thing, but i have the B pieces and will most likely go back to it in time.
With BUG you have more evasion. I mean, Ichorclaw Myr does discourage blocking but it doesn't discourage chump blocking - if your opponent is just going to throw a 0/1 or 1/1 in the way of the Myr then getting +2/+2 is irrelevant, unless you have Rancor.
I find that the games you win with BUG pan out in one of two ways:
1) You get an Infect creature down and swing with enough pumps to one-shot your opponent. Fast and painless. This usually happens if you're playing against some helpless combo deck.
2) You connect with a nonlethal pumped Infect creature (putting your opponent at 6-8 poison), then chip away at him for the rest of the game. When your opponent is at 7 poison he is dead to a lot of things - Rancor, any pump spell (even no-landfall Groundswell), Hierarch + Pendelhaven. At this stage, you basically ask him "do you have an answer?" every turn. If he doesn't, you win. If he does, you play one of your protection spells or another Infect creature and ask again. Keep doing this until your opponent runs out of answers, and you win. BUG's creatures having evasion helps a lot, because you eliminate one possible answer: blockers.
The mono-green version actually has fewer mana sources than BUG (22 land vs 20 land + 4 Hierarch), but fewer green sources (14 vs 16, 20 if you count Hierarch). The other thing about Hierarch is that it accelerates your mana, so you get to unload your hand faster.
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
Premium deck is a magic brand name
Slivers was the name if the deck, foil is what the cards are.
So premium deck slivers all foil deck narrows it down to people who have been playing magic long enough to know what a premium deck is. I know you're a noob but damn, ***** the **** up kid.
My post pointed out the in effectiveness of your statement about it being fun to play casually.
Also you should calm down on these posts. 90% of it is just trash! slaughter horn can be countered! it can have the target switched! and it is not a good card for the deck. Neither is ghor clan or whatever standard trash you're trying to jam into a half baked infect deck to lower the price of a t2 dexk
Warning for spamming
-ktkenshinx-
I think it is good that Mono Green Cathedral has surfaced as something new in the infect universe and prompted discussions. I look at MonoG, UGx and BG as all viable competitive options. There is no doubt though that UGx does have some serious raw power
Yeah mono g putting up results is only doing good things for infect, having people playing and discussing it gives me a look at different options i may want to the transfer into UGx like Slaughterhorn.
This is interesting, i'd never bothered to have a count up up of mana sources between the 2 versions.
Ive been playing more the monogreen infect, i played the first premier and went 0-2 drop. I lost against a Balance deck (impossible match if you ask me, at least how he drew), and Affinity. Now i joined a new premier, I hope I have more luck on it.
OLD SCHOOL 93/94 «The Pain Train» Black Sligh, Esper «Machine Gun» Artifacts, Jund «Psycho» Ponza-Disko.
Both games he won, won in the same way, he dropped spellskite, and i couldn´t do a damn about it. SEcond game i finally draw a artifact destroyer, and i had my only creature down, he proceeded to kill it in response, and i never draw a creature in the following 5 turns, that was my only creture of the game.