2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • 1

    posted a message on Burn
    Hello Burning ppl.
    After almost a year and a half without the Game, I decided to roll in again, with the brand new Burn Deck. You have not seen me here, because I used to stick with the DnT people last years, but I own Burn now so here I am.

    Inspired by the honorable TS, I wantded to make my own expirements about what the best lands count for a Burn deck.

    As soon as I have a powerfull SQL server at my disposal, I made 15 millions runs (5 million per a deck type) with random starting hands.

    At fisrt I just want to check elconquistador1985 calculations but then I wander. What if we take 20 lands and 41(!) spells? And here is results

    For a 19-41-deck

    ZeroLands 5,8%
    OneLander 22,11%
    TwoToThree 58,58%
    FourPlus 13,5%
    TotalyUnkeepable 19,3%


    For a 20-40-deck

    ZeroLands 4,82%
    OneLander 19,85%
    TwoToThree 59,36%
    FourPlus 15,98%
    TotalyUnkeepable 20,8%

    And for a 21-40-deck

    ZeroLands 5,15%
    OneLander 20,6%
    TwoToThree 59,12%
    FourPlus 15,12%
    TotalyUnkeepable 20,27%

    And speaking of TotallyUnkeepable I mean both zerolanders and four-plus-landers in total(last one maybe arguable, but there is how I see the Game).

    The quick conclusion: it seems that 19 lands is the most correct decision. But if You're feel that You need more - 21+40 seems a bit better than 20+40.

    Best wishes Flame Nation, and if You want to see some more statistics play, just let me know.



    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • 1

    posted a message on Death And Taxes
    Quote from buildingadeck »
    So this is my idea for Mono-White DnT right now: Play a decent amount of flying beaters and use Bygone Bishop as a source of card advantage. Let me know what you think.

    Thraben Inspector
    Horizon Canopy
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • 1

    posted a message on Death And Taxes
    I don't argue with You, buddy. You re have your opinion already. I just want to caution other fellow players.
    Rather then relaying on a Hulk when Your state is bad, I prefer to use cards that prevent me from being in a bad state. I guess this is just a different approach for a game planning.


    PS
    that add nothing to the discussion.

    You know what? I have some arguments at least! About high cost of a Hulk's hardcasting. About loss of tempo when Yoou trying to vial it in. About thing that's it's bad to allow Youre enemy to choose what to keep. And other stuff.

    But from You I see only 'Muh Hulk so potent much wonder! Wonna not hear anybody! '

    I'd say 'The pot shouldn't call the kettle black' ;-)
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • 1

    posted a message on Death And Taxes
    Yet another input. Have tested 2 maindeck Nephalia Academy, helped vs BGx a lot.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • 1

    posted a message on Death And Taxes
    Darksteel Citadel, Blnkmoth Nexus, Crucible Of Worlds.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • 2

    posted a message on Death And Taxes
    Ok guys, let's make some math.
    "Kambal catches a bolt"
    It's true. But there is some calculations that are behind that simple fact:
    - If Kambal gets his bolt, it means that You don't get Yours. Which, virtually, gives you plus 3 HP
    - In order to bolt him, an enemy have to pay 2 lives. You, virtually trows a Shock at him (or make a free Hatebear attack)
    - And You get 2 lives, what means his next Bolt to You will 1/3rd effective (if any!)
    In TOTAL: we have 7 HP swing in our favor. Which I consider quite huge assist.
    Regarding non-bolt removal we still have 4 HP swing.

    I have to point, that now I'm talking about the worst scenario. Just imagine something more optimistic: an enemy have to cast 2-3 noncreature spells before removal. This might be just game-ender.
    (I suppose he must be especially good against the lantern control, ad nauseaum and other non creature spell heavy decks )

    And I just cant say how many times my adversary had stabilized in 1 or 2 hits and won a game (Im talking aboun Jund, Grixis, Dega midranges). So many times that I included the Inquisitor Exarch in my deck.

    But that guy will do much more.

    I'll definitely try 1 or 2 im my MB.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • 1

    posted a message on Death And Taxes
    I did not say that THIS guy is bad. He is 4th, it's the solid fact. I did say that his deck was far less powerful and consistent then many others we have here.

    I do believe that a mediocre player will not succeed with that build.

    During the Eldrazi Winter I almost get to the top 16 of one biggest tournaments here (more then 160 players including Russian tops). With a colorless-w build. Almost, because in a battle for 16th place (and following semi finals) I was beaten by a f..n Slivers! That guy also made top 8. Does it mean that the Slivers is the solid modern deck? I don't think so.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • 1

    posted a message on Death And Taxes
    Maybe it's because we all are here now?
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • 1

    posted a message on [Primer] Wx Death and Taxes
    No. The Game Engine checks several conditions ( allocated damage, life total. poison counters, -1/-1 counters and so on) EVERY change of prioriy and every phase(step).
    An 1/1 peewee got a bolt. When a bolt owner says 'pass' or 'you go on', bam, a peewee is dead.

    ETB - Enter The Battlefield
    LTB - Leave The Battlefield

    ps
    " AND kill the nacatl?"
    It was possible several years ago. I a time when the damage have had to be put in a stack.
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Established
  • 1

    posted a message on [Primer] Wx Death and Taxes
    Wake me up when you'll place bmoon by the vial and then attack for 3 with it, guys.
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Established
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.