| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
inneutral
Apprentice
Joined: 16 Sep 2009
Posts: 116
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 1:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| I assume he meant that drawing fireblast with gathan raiders down puts you in a bit of a predicament. The two cards do seem anti-synergetic to me, and the presence of some cards that like a lot of mana on the table just magnifies that. You haven't had issues? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sroush77
Neophyte
Joined: 06 Jan 2009
Posts: 92
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| inneutral wrote: | | I assume he meant that drawing fireblast with gathan raiders down puts you in a bit of a predicament. The two cards do seem anti-synergetic to me, and the presence of some cards that like a lot of mana on the table just magnifies that. You haven't had issues? |
tl;dr: Having Gathan Raiders and multiple Fireblasts would seem like a very low occurrence that I wouldn't worry about it. Might consider a swap of Firebolt and Burst Lightning to instead Chain Lightning and Incinerate.
Long:
I can see everyone's point. It's just the deck has 24 lands (20 mana producers) and the curve is super low:
6cc - 4
3cc - 8
2cc - 8
1cc - 16
If you take out the Fireblasts the average casting cost of the deck is 1.75. That's excluding Firebolt flashback or kicked Burst Lightnings.
Having either over say Chain Lightning I think is the thought that some games you'll get to 5 mana had have the chance to use them to full potential over the games where you'll get stuck at 4 land.
Also having Gathan Raiders and Fireblasts I don't think is that big of a problem. The only time it becomes a problem is when you have first a Gathan Raiders out there and 3 Fireblasts in hand.
If you have Gathan Raiders out there you can cast everything else in your deck. What other card are you discarding other then Fireblast when you have Gathan Raiders out there and need to flip him? If you're discarding any other card other then Fireblast I think that's a mistake.
If you have 4 land and Gathan Raiders and have to sac 2 mountains to get to Hellbent you still only have 10 cards remaining of your deck that you won't be able to cast. (3 Gathan Raiders, 4 Molten Rain, 3 Fireblast) You could still cast Fireblast in most cases unless you have Teetering Peeks.
I should also note my game plan is not a long game plan. If you're planning for turn 8 with this deck I also think that's a mistake. (when I say mistake I'm talking in general terms and it would change with game state or vs specific decks)
The real question should be would you get more value from replacing Firebolt and Burst Lightning with Chain Lightning and Incinerate so you don't have virtual 5 drops.
Firebolt, Burst Lightning = 4 damage for 2 mana
Chain Lightning, Incinerate = 6 damage for 3 mana
Firebolt, Firebolt flashback, Burst Lightning = 6 damage for 7 mana
Firebolt, Burst Lightning kicked = 6 damage for 6 mana
Firebolt, Firebolt flashback, Burst Lightning kicked = 8 damage for 11 mana
I think maybe those changes should be tested instead of dropping Fireblast. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YrdBrd420
Wizard
Joined: 18 May 2009
Posts: 472
Location: Portsmouth, VA
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
After building, testing, and failing with Boros Landfall, I want to try out a few of the cards I liked from it (Plated Geopede and Zektar Shrine Expedition) in a RDW style deck. Keep in mind this is totally untested atm.
4 Terramorphic Expanse
4 Naya Panorama (any of the mountain fetching ones will do)
4 Teetering Peak
12 Mountain
4 Keldon Halberdier
4 Plated Geopede
4 Skirk Marauder
4 Zektar Shrine Expedition
4 Gathan Raiders
4 Oxxida Golem
1 Flame Jab
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Incinerate
3 Kaervek's Torch
_________________
 
 2  4  5
YrdBrd420 on MTGO
Clan: A Common Cause |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
