@Khahan said in Am I crazy or does The Locust God (HOU) work?:
@letseeker said in Am I crazy or does The Locust God (HOU) work?:
I think the draw 7's are win-more with locust god. There are other cards like beck and sylvan library and dack that grind out the win without giving your opponent more answers.
Sounds to me like you mean "win less" :D
@Griselbrother said in Let's discuss White based hatebears!:
Sorry, I don't know how to format the decklist. If a mod reads this, feel free to edit it to look nice!
fixed! for future reference you were already 99% there!, all I had to do was add three backticks at the top and the bottom of your list like:
```
[decklist content]
```
TMD magic does the rest for you! (original post here: http://themanadrain.com/topic/1047/card-links-and-decklist-formatting )
No matter what you take away from the rest of this post ... you're running a LOT of 4+drops. With 11 cards that cost 4 or more (not counting Blightsteel Colossus and Force of Will). You're going to have a lot of games where turns 1-2-3 you'll be stuck without a lot of options. I would strongly recommend dropping some number of these cards for something cheaper to smooth out your curve.
So you're running a TON of cards that are great with The Locust God out, which don't really do anything if you don't have a Locust God out (Porphoros, Skullclamp, Bident)
I think this is a little misbalanced, which gives you 2 options:
Maybe there's a version of your deck that runs Young Pyromancer to make Clampable tokens before you've resolved a Locust God?
On the subject of Locust God support cards - I think you can do better. There's some universal magic law in here some where, so I'll try to abstract it.
With the list you've posted, you're in a situation where you have [Card A] (Locust God) and [Card B] (Clamp, Bident, Purphoros), where Card B is ONLY good if you already have Card A in play. There's nothing wrong with that, there are lots of great decks built with that pattern.
When you have a deck with this pattern, though, you really want the synergy of those two cards to be maximized. You want [Card B] to be the best possible thing to combo with [Card A], which means it's a little awkward to have 3 different cards there ... surely one of those three options is better than the other two?
Imagine a Time Vault deck that ran 1 Voltaic Key and 3 Twiddle. Twiddle+Time Vault is actually pretty fantastic synergy. An extra turn for one blue mana is pretty amazing. The problem is, you could just be running extra Voltaic Keys instead, which is significantly better. There are a few situations where Twiddle is better, but largely speaking, you'd be wrong to run a mix of Twiddles and Final Fortunes (which also combo with Time Vault) and so on, when you're not already running a full set of Voltaic Keys and Tezzeret, the Seekers. I worry that this is where your list is.
Bident + Locust God is pretty awesome, but I suspect it's a lot worse than Skullclamp. Purphoros + Locust God is the same. Obviously you're at 3 Skullclamps though, so you can only do so much by adding more, and to be fair, your other cards aren't Null Roddable. But I think you're missing a bigger opportunity here.
The card Beck (Beck/Call) is just a kill with Locust God. As awesome as it is to draw 2 cards for 1 mana and probably overwhelm the opponent with card advantage over 3 turns, Beck wins immediately. I think it's pretty splashable in this list for you, and if it isn't, it's probably better than what black is giving you here.
Of course, if you're going with the earlier strategy of adding more token generators, this is less true. Beck is much better with Locust God than Skullclamp is, but Skullclamp is better with Young Pyromancer, so I think there's a list there, too.
So if I personally were working on this deck, I'd go down one of two different paths:
@hierarchnoble said in Vintage Restricted List Discussion:
Ramunap Excavator is a snake-person and therefore doesn't have legs.
You are my hero today
@DeaTh-ShiNoBi haha yeah, there are a lot of examples of cards with very different text, but this has to be one of the worst
@fsecco It's not really errata (well, I don't know, depends on how you define errata) The 4th edition (most recently printed) version of the card spells out that they're black. "Most-recent printing" seems to be the tiebreaker when versions dont' agree, I don't know if there are any exceptions to that.
I agree that it's super weird that the two versions are so different.
@Aaron-Patten said in Cards to unrestrict:
@fsecco It was restricted along with ponder and Merchant Scroll in order to address the Gush-bond engine.
It was restricted along with Ponder, Merchant Scroll, and Gush itself. (and for that matter, Flash, which also synergized with Brainstorm, Ponder, and Merchant Scroll)
Saying that Brainstorm/Ponder/Scroll were restricted in order to make Gush decks worse just doesn't make any sense. There was never supposed to be a time where Gush was unrestricted and Merchant Scroll wasn't. The decision to unrestrict Gush years later could not have been anticipated by the people making the restriction decision at that time.
@Hydra I ... like this plan.
Now I just need green creatures to sacrifice
As far as "people being terrible to you in an online game", MTGO has been pretty light for me compared to other games I've played. Still, as a rule I play with the chat window minimized unless I know my opponent personally (and even then I often keep it minimized anyway). I find MTGO chat just doesn't add to the experience to me in the same way that chatting with my an-person opponent might. I wouldn't recommend engaging with an opponent who talks that way.
Alternatively, start streaming so you can have your Twitch chat make fun of you instead.
@Islandswamp if you gotta take a break, you take a break. Vintage will be right here where you left it. That's one of the things that's great about it!