As an aggro player which would you rather put in your deck?
General Fight Club
- Thread starter Jason Waddell
- Start date
As an aggro player which would you rather put in your deck?
you know, i made a post about this a while ago... in this same thread
http://riptidelab.com/forum/threads/fight-club.560/page-45#post-40889
http://riptidelab.com/forum/threads/fight-club.560/page-45#post-40889
As per my prejudice I would run the little Ajani. I'm not saying it's correct, but the card is good and because I'm grumpy about magic I would just ignore new fangled planeswalkers that I don't care about.
Hallowed Spiritkeeper
Caller just feels like it has more play, after diddling with them both for a while. Steadfast would let a midrange player pull away from an aggro opponent or break board stalls, but in aggro decks he was a 4-mana anthem and any activation beyond that was pretty negligible. Caller lets aggro players sit back on their threats and not over-commit to the board, as well as finish their opponents / have a nice "haste" play that white aggro typically doesn't get.
White aggro players were generally happy to have caller, where anyone playing steadfast was just kind of "well... it's a planeswalker I guess," which was the deciding factor for me.
White aggro players were generally happy to have caller, where anyone playing steadfast was just kind of "well... it's a planeswalker I guess," which was the deciding factor for me.
Chris Taylor
Contributor
I do like that steadfast also works with going wide, but he's lower power.
I've always kinda wanted a less insane Ajani Goldmane with an actual +N, but this guy isn't really it
I've always kinda wanted a less insane Ajani Goldmane with an actual +N, but this guy isn't really it
I prefer Steadfast.
+ he can bust games wide open in a stall more easily (anything that can help break a stall is super sweet to me)
+ he comes down later than his little brother (most of my wraths have been pushed to the 5-mana point now which I tend to prefer these days, and I like planting 4 mana+ options for aggressive decks to play with)
+ single
is AWESOME because white is often clogged by double costs
+ he can be ran in multiple lists (does great in token swarm, aggro, midrange, or even a protect the queen plan in control due to superfriends interactions)
+ he encourages committing to the board, which is cool by me.
He's a very popular pick because he can do so much work, and I love these sort of powerful cards that have a lot of tension re: committing vs playing it safe
+ he can bust games wide open in a stall more easily (anything that can help break a stall is super sweet to me)
+ he comes down later than his little brother (most of my wraths have been pushed to the 5-mana point now which I tend to prefer these days, and I like planting 4 mana+ options for aggressive decks to play with)
+ single
is AWESOME because white is often clogged by double costs+ he can be ran in multiple lists (does great in token swarm, aggro, midrange, or even a protect the queen plan in control due to superfriends interactions)
+ he encourages committing to the board, which is cool by me.
He's a very popular pick because he can do so much work, and I love these sort of powerful cards that have a lot of tension re: committing vs playing it safe
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
I pretty much hate any aggro card, being presented as an aggro card, that costs 4cc. Aggro decks should be looking to maximize the number of spells they are running, in order to generate better top decks in the event they didn't close the game out earlier.
At that point they either need to have the base tools already in place to recover from whatever happened to them, or be drawing live to the tools they need to recover from whatever happened to them. In either situation, they end up being very vulnerable to bad top decks, and one or two extra lands usually means they won't be winning. This is particularly critical in a deck type that oftentimes can't smooth out its draws, and needs to be able to work efficiently with whatever land the top deck gods deem worthy to give it.
If you are looking to maximize spell density, 4cc spells can be difficult to cast (really uncastable an uncomfortable % of the time), and are just giant bricks anyways if they show up in the opening draws. This is why I lament why there isn't a higher powered goblin bushwhacker in existence: bushwhacker is a cheap overrun effect that can be reliably cast on a minimal mana base, but still scales well with more mana due to the haste it grants. This is pretty much everything an aggro deck wants: a cheap, brutal, and efficient burst of damage that can run off of 2 mana draws.
Little Ajani would be my pick, as it provides some unique effects that fill a few cube holes:
1. At 3cc it fits naturally into the top end of an aggro deck's curve.
2. Its one of only two double strike effects that is really good enough for higher power formats and isn't GRBS (the other being silverblade paladin). Double strike is a great ability that adds depth to aggro decks.
3. This is one of the only (if not the only) planeswalker that caters towards aggro rather than midrange or control.
At that point they either need to have the base tools already in place to recover from whatever happened to them, or be drawing live to the tools they need to recover from whatever happened to them. In either situation, they end up being very vulnerable to bad top decks, and one or two extra lands usually means they won't be winning. This is particularly critical in a deck type that oftentimes can't smooth out its draws, and needs to be able to work efficiently with whatever land the top deck gods deem worthy to give it.
If you are looking to maximize spell density, 4cc spells can be difficult to cast (really uncastable an uncomfortable % of the time), and are just giant bricks anyways if they show up in the opening draws. This is why I lament why there isn't a higher powered goblin bushwhacker in existence: bushwhacker is a cheap overrun effect that can be reliably cast on a minimal mana base, but still scales well with more mana due to the haste it grants. This is pretty much everything an aggro deck wants: a cheap, brutal, and efficient burst of damage that can run off of 2 mana draws.
Little Ajani would be my pick, as it provides some unique effects that fill a few cube holes:
1. At 3cc it fits naturally into the top end of an aggro deck's curve.
2. Its one of only two double strike effects that is really good enough for higher power formats and isn't GRBS (the other being silverblade paladin). Double strike is a great ability that adds depth to aggro decks.
3. This is one of the only (if not the only) planeswalker that caters towards aggro rather than midrange or control.
Pssh, don't steal my rolling thunder eric.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Grease Blightning!
Of those two, blightning, but were i in the market for damage + discard in rakdos id go with
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Yeah, that's a hard one! Ruinblaster is a great design as well!
Ruinblaster is probably more powerful, but Avalanche Riders has more interactions. Because I put such an emphasis on sacrifice effects, Riders is the more natural fit for my current list, but I ran Ruinblaster back in the day.
I ran both at different points, and while Ruinblaster was better in theory, I found I liked Avalanche Riders better in practice. Besides needing to cast, Ruinblaster isn't friendly to blink/Reveillark/etc., occasionally has zero targets to blow up (think newer players), and dies to literal anything. Whereas, over the years, Riders has become of my favourite cards for cube, as four mana for a Stone Rain with upside - but only if you work for it! - is the definition of Fair Land Destruction.
to cast, Ruinblaster isn't friendly to blink/Reveillark/etc., occasionally has zero targets to blow up (think newer players), and dies to literal anything. Whereas, over the years, Riders has become of my favourite cards for cube, as four mana for a Stone Rain with upside - but only if you work for it! - is the definition of Fair Land Destruction.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Plus, Avalanche Riders is an invitational design!
Can confirm, Riders is where it's at. I have had so many hilarious games saccing+reanimating this guy.
I ran both at different points, and while Ruinblaster was better in theory, I found I liked Avalanche Riders better in practice. Besides needing
How do you feel about Ravenous Baboons? Doesn't have the cheap mode that Ruinblaster has (would that get used very often?) but it is friendly to blink and Reveillark.
Is Avalanche Riders with echo better than Avalanche Riders without echo? Harder to shenanigan but having the body stick is nice.
Have to take Haste into the equation.
Being able to nuke basic lands is pretty key, in my experience. We all run a lot of nonbasic lands in our Riptide cubes and encourage people to go wild with their fixing, but if your playgroup is anything like mine, the newer players don't always appreciate the value of a good manabase at first. Having targets regardless of your opponent is essential.
That said, if you only play with experienced players, Ravenous Baboons might well be the better choice.
That said, if you only play with experienced players, Ravenous Baboons might well be the better choice.
"Better", but less interesting. Let's not go replacing the card with more interactions and lines of play for a vanilla substitute.
Chris Taylor
Contributor
Yeah can't pod into ruinblaster. I'd go with riders because always hitting a land is probably necessary at 4cc LD
Baboons can get kinda sketch if your opponents don't have non-basic lands. The Baboons trigger is not "you may," unfortunately.