I like Razormane a lot in a midrange focused list. 5/5 FS is not easy to handle, especially one that creature bolts for essentially a discard. It's got some drawbacks though. Doesn't regenerate and the discard happens a step prior to the bolt, so you can get two for one'd with the razor. Razormane cuts both ways yo.
General Fight Club
- Thread starter Jason Waddell
- Start date
I'll join you in up voting Razormane Masticore. I have been running it since the worse and most budget friendly *cough* bad *cough* version of my cube, and it does tend to hold its own against Pol'k from what I have seen. Part of the reason for that is that it gets rid of small annoyances and its "down side" is often better referred to as upside in my cube (I support madness, Alesha, Who Smiles at Death, and other graveyard synergies.) or it falls into WU control variants drafted that really couldn't care less. Another reason is that one of my regular drafters is a little too in love with the card.
The regeneration bit is fine by me. One, the card tends to do enough by itself already. Two, Razormane's very well can be summed up with putting things into the graveyard, and occasionally winning the game by itself is an added bonus. Three, explaining regeneration to newer players is fairly difficult. Explaining it to older casual players who curmudgeonly misunderstand the mechanic is an exercise in futility at times. (I feel like the last part may be better deserved for protection tho.)
The regeneration bit is fine by me. One, the card tends to do enough by itself already. Two, Razormane's very well can be summed up with putting things into the graveyard, and occasionally winning the game by itself is an added bonus. Three, explaining regeneration to newer players is fairly difficult. Explaining it to older casual players who curmudgeonly misunderstand the mechanic is an exercise in futility at times. (I feel like the last part may be better deserved for protection tho.)
Regeneration is confusing, I agree. People forget it taps the creature all the time. Classic misplay: wildfire (regen), swing? Yeah... no.
Protection is easier IMO. DEBT. People still jack it up but I think anything with a cool mnemonic is fairly easy to remember (maybe that's just me). I can still do it with star sizes (OBAFGKM = oh boy, astronomy final's gonna kill me).
Protection is easier IMO. DEBT. People still jack it up but I think anything with a cool mnemonic is fairly easy to remember (maybe that's just me). I can still do it with star sizes (OBAFGKM = oh boy, astronomy final's gonna kill me).
Maybe I should try that. Thank you. What I am going off of is an experience where a couple of casual players continued to debate me even after I pulled up the rules for protection. Just too many parts to it for some people perhaps? Or, they just wanted to get the leg up as the rules pointed in my favor. The other problem with protection, and I consider this to be the real one, is that it does not lead to good interaction most of the time and can be rather frustrating. That was the reason why I took out Mirran Crusader for Silverblade Paladin.
Chris Taylor
Contributor
Shame only one of these gives you evasion
Though on the whole you're right. Static protection limits what you can interact with in a pretty slanted way
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Shame only one of these gives you evasion
Though on the whole you're right. Static protection limits what you can interact with in a pretty slanted way
I love Stave Off (or better yet, Gods Willing, though Stave Off is funny if you run an aura theme), it's the Mirran Crusaders and Sword of Fire and Ices of this world that make for rubbish non-games.
Chris Taylor
Contributor
And since someone is going to bring it up, banes layer angel
(honorable mention goes to Dragon hunter who I think is super cool)
(honorable mention goes to Dragon hunter who I think is super cool)
Baneslayer offends me for it's blatant disregard for power to cost ratio. But one thing I feel my combo list has shown me... these types of cards are not as oppressive in that context where gameplay revolves around a higher level of degeneracy. No matter how above the curve a card is in raw power (outside stupid things like Time Walk), it's always going to be below some of the game breaking mechanics you can assemble with synergy based on busted Magic cards.
I feel like midrange lists have a much bigger problem dealing with things like Baneslayer because they warp midrange game play so much more. Even hyper efficient stuff like Reflector Mage. Card choices matter a lot more in typical lists on this forum where people are crafting more limited focused environments. I always knew that was true, but feel it's even more so now. I used to think a lot of the people on MTGS were just being obtuse, but high powered lists I feel function vastly different to the point where we really should not be classifying lower powered and higher powered rare lists together. They are as different as rare vs pauper/peasant.
I feel like midrange lists have a much bigger problem dealing with things like Baneslayer because they warp midrange game play so much more. Even hyper efficient stuff like Reflector Mage. Card choices matter a lot more in typical lists on this forum where people are crafting more limited focused environments. I always knew that was true, but feel it's even more so now. I used to think a lot of the people on MTGS were just being obtuse, but high powered lists I feel function vastly different to the point where we really should not be classifying lower powered and higher powered rare lists together. They are as different as rare vs pauper/peasant.
Know all about regeneration and DEBT. Never heard of OBAMA..sry OBAFGKM.
Teach me
What's OBAFGKM?
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I run Panharmonicon, and in the right deck it's super sweet durdle value
Teach me
Nothing at all to do with Magic. It's a way to remember the order of main sequence star sizes. O is the hottest (blue giants) all the way down to M which is the coolest (red dwarfs). Our sun is a G-type star for reference.
i'm suuuuuuper late to the discussion here, but bear in mind that until recently, he ran Juzam Djinn in his "power max" list, out of pure nostalgia. when challenged on this, he went on a tirade about how good a vanilla 5/5 for four in black was, even as reasonable commentors replied that no one has ever come close to cubing Plague Sliver.
point being, i wouldn't consider his list as some sort of "top 360 battle-tested power max cards", even if their forum is known for that kinda thing... maybe there is a more definitive ranking out there, somewhere, but just not his list
Juzam Djinn is fine. Are we really going to argue that a 5/5 for 4 isn't a solid creature (the drawback is not relevant for a deck wanting to run that card)? And lots of people were running Plague Sliver years ago as a replacement for Juzam due to price considerations (Tom Lapille was running it apparently - http://www.cubetutor.com/cubeblog/15423).
wtwlf's list is mostly a power list. Does he run some weaker cards due to nostalgic/misevaluation? Sure (I think most of us are doing this). I actually feel Nick (http://mtgcube.blogspot.com) runs a more competitive list that gets played more often and by a wider range of players. His list is also much less influenced by "group think" as I don't believe he follows the forums much if at all.
wtwlf's list is mostly a power list. Does he run some weaker cards due to nostalgic/misevaluation? Sure (I think most of us are doing this). I actually feel Nick (http://mtgcube.blogspot.com) runs a more competitive list that gets played more often and by a wider range of players. His list is also much less influenced by "group think" as I don't believe he follows the forums much if at all.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
The game right now is designed in a way where running a vanilla 5/5 for 4 in black opens you up to a lot of game losing sequences.
That entire class of cards is actively bad in the absence of some kind of permanent form ramp.
That entire class of cards is actively bad in the absence of some kind of permanent form ramp.
Black is well positioned though to remove blockers and a 5/5 does a lot of damage on a clear board (and even without a clear board, it costs your opponent a blocker each turn).
I think people exaggerate to some extent how obsolete older creatures are. Sure, Juzam is not above curve anymore but you could slot it in a lot of decks and the card would be good and win games still. Magic hasn't changed that much. Most of this has been incremental. There are a plethora of creatures still good enough for cube that people just shine on because it hasn't been in a list in years (or ever). Erhnam Djinn is still good for example. Wasn't until my retro experiment that it struck me. 5 toughness is a lot (survives wildfire) and it's splashable, so sweet as a filler pick in any Xg midrange/aggro deck. Polukranos is more powerful, but that GG in the casting cost is an actual cost.
Just the other day I was watching a cube draft with I think a ChannelFireball person and their opponent played a morphed Exalted Angel and they proceeded to mock the card only to lose that game to it.
I think people exaggerate to some extent how obsolete older creatures are. Sure, Juzam is not above curve anymore but you could slot it in a lot of decks and the card would be good and win games still. Magic hasn't changed that much. Most of this has been incremental. There are a plethora of creatures still good enough for cube that people just shine on because it hasn't been in a list in years (or ever). Erhnam Djinn is still good for example. Wasn't until my retro experiment that it struck me. 5 toughness is a lot (survives wildfire) and it's splashable, so sweet as a filler pick in any Xg midrange/aggro deck. Polukranos is more powerful, but that GG in the casting cost is an actual cost.
Just the other day I was watching a cube draft with I think a ChannelFireball person and their opponent played a morphed Exalted Angel and they proceeded to mock the card only to lose that game to it.
Freak accidents happen statistically speaking. Although Exalted Angel is three times better than both Erhnam Djinn and Juzam Djinn
Long time lurker and former powermax disciple here, I feel like it's finally time to join the fray now that I have a bit of insight to offer! Before discovering this site I followed wtwlf123 and his cube regularly for nearly two years, and his articles and opinions were instrumental to the design of my initial unpowered power max cube (which I came to loath unfortunately). I can't say I recall ever seeing Juzam Djinn in his list during the time that I followed him however, though after seeing how vigorously he's defended pet cards of his such as Morphling your story does not sound out of character. When it comes to assessing new cards wtwlf123 adopts the veneer of a scientist, dogmatically pursuing the optimal power max cube, frequently cutting cards he'd been raving about for weeks during spoiler season after a weeks worth of testing. When it comes to cutting older cards however it's a much more nuanced matter, complicated not just by nostalgia, but also by the degree of customization he's done to the veteran cards in his cube. I still remember when it came time for wtwlf123 to cut Soltari Trooper and co. from his cube and him solemnly reminiscing about the origins of the custom art of his soltaris and the memories they created among his group. It may not be easy to discern on the surface but take a quick look at the visual spoiler for his list on cube tutor and you'll see an incredibly large collection of custom art cards, altered cards, and cards with signatures. As uninspiring as powermax cubes can be, I imagine this personalization and his nostalgic pet cards give his cube a degree of 'soul' for him and his group. And to his credit he highlights pet cards in his list. For reference the spoiler can be found here:
http://www.cubetutor.com/visualspoiler/170
And regarding your last point, mtgsalvation does in fact do a top battle tested cards. It's basically a yearly power ranking where members vote on the top 20 cards in each respective category and the data is collected to get an idea of the consensus of the community. I've found them to be a rather interesting resource for tracing the evolution of cube over the years, especially as someone relatively new to the format. An example of the results of the 2016 top black cards power ranking can be found here:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/...power-rankings-2016-cube-power-rankings-black
Edit: For those interested in both the process and results from each category the link below should be of greater use.
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/...87-power-rankings-2016-cube-power-rankings#c2
Welcome to the forums Wumpa (officially)!
I too have found a lot of valuable information on MTGS over the years and still go there often. While it focuses mostly on power max design, having that context to lens data through is helpful. And I have started to see a small shift in posts even by wtwlf where comments are being made with context attached. So not just a straight X > Y, but why you'd run one over the other or vice versa depending on what your cube needs or is looking to push. The viable card pool even for high powered lists is quite massive at this point. And that's really where cube design should be evolving - more towards a customizable thing. The whole C/Ube and power/unpowered paradigm is basically obsolete at this point.
Also worth pointing out, some people should probably just focus on writing blogs versus the forums. Wtwlf IMO is one such individual. Someone I feel whose contributions would be better served just focusing on a blog instead of spending so much time arguing their position in absolute terms on forums. That has been quite frustrating over the years. Though to be fair, I might be the pot calling the kettle black here at this point.
I too have found a lot of valuable information on MTGS over the years and still go there often. While it focuses mostly on power max design, having that context to lens data through is helpful. And I have started to see a small shift in posts even by wtwlf where comments are being made with context attached. So not just a straight X > Y, but why you'd run one over the other or vice versa depending on what your cube needs or is looking to push. The viable card pool even for high powered lists is quite massive at this point. And that's really where cube design should be evolving - more towards a customizable thing. The whole C/Ube and power/unpowered paradigm is basically obsolete at this point.
Also worth pointing out, some people should probably just focus on writing blogs versus the forums. Wtwlf IMO is one such individual. Someone I feel whose contributions would be better served just focusing on a blog instead of spending so much time arguing their position in absolute terms on forums. That has been quite frustrating over the years. Though to be fair, I might be the pot calling the kettle black here at this point.
Thank you, I appreciate the welcome! I've noticed this trend with wtwlf123 of late too and I've appreciated it quite abit too, nods towards unpowered cubes and not just different powered cube sizes during his Amonkhet preview was a refreshing change of pace and inspired me to give Forsake the Worldly a shot which I probably wouldn't have otherwise. But yeah I really wish people would consider the context of different cubes before engaging in a battle of the best. And speaking of fighting over different cards, I'm curious as to which golgari two drop you guys prefer:
I've noticed the flayer and delirium as a mechanic seem quite popular around these forums, however with the new zombie support in Dread Wanderer and Plague Belcher I've been tempted to go more heavily into a zombie theme for black. Rishkar, Peema Renegade, Asylum Visitor, and Winding Constrictor/Hardened Scales all have some neat interactions with the troll as well, and while I don't run the last two just yet I've been tempted to support +1 counters more explicitly as well. Then again I love the human synergy and the 'delirium minigame' flayer brings to the table.
I've noticed the flayer and delirium as a mechanic seem quite popular around these forums, however with the new zombie support in Dread Wanderer and Plague Belcher I've been tempted to go more heavily into a zombie theme for black. Rishkar, Peema Renegade, Asylum Visitor, and Winding Constrictor/Hardened Scales all have some neat interactions with the troll as well, and while I don't run the last two just yet I've been tempted to support +1 counters more explicitly as well. Then again I love the human synergy and the 'delirium minigame' flayer brings to the table.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
They're both very different cards in the niche's they fill. Lotleth troll is a very plastic cards that enables a lot of different types of GB decks.
Grim Flayer is an excellent card, but a much more narrow signal towards a specific type of GB deck, that is concerned with self-mill, pressure, and vertical growth.
Grim Flayer is an excellent card, but a much more narrow signal towards a specific type of GB deck, that is concerned with self-mill, pressure, and vertical growth.
Dom Harvey
Contributor
I see Flayer as much more flexible than Troll. The controlling delirium decks in Standard ran Flayer anyway as a threat that's good early and late as well as stitching all of your other synergies together.