Magic-League.com Forum Index Magic-League.com
Forums of Magic-League: Free Online tcg playing; casual or tournament play.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

UR Runeflare combo deck


Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Standard (T2) Decks
Author Message
OldBear



Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 1840

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think this is a fair point but I am also confidant that the deck can come up with some sort of sb stratergy for beating jund, I'll be trying to come up with one as soon as its out on modo. Possible transformational sb, or taking a more controling approach after the board.
Back to top
penpen



Joined: 14 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know this sounds awful but you know... Burning Inquiry triggers Runeflare Trap too ^^.
Back to top
GoneBananas
Level 1 Judge


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 329

PostPosted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

heres a better list i came up with
2x battle of wits
2x island
4x misty rainforest
5x forest
200x scute mob?
seems powerful, thoughts?
Back to top
OldBear



Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 1840

PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay I got the shell of the list made on modo started out with Veldoforners list minus the sac lands I do not have them yet.

Testing has been mixed though I have not really been able to test any of the match ups I want to. But these are my inital findings.

1. 23 land is not enough I am up to 25 this maybe an exclusively modo problem but its still a problem.

2. Trapmakers Snare is not a 4 off, a few reasons firstly it gives the game away game 1 alot of people will have you on mill or something else game 1 and most of the time when I could cast it I found myself not wanting to for this reason. Plus Twin cast is just more efficent and versatile spell as well so I am down to 2 snares.

3. Unsummon is better than peel reality, I started out with a 2/2 split but quickly found the extra card never mattered.

4. A third fabricate may be necessary I have not added one yet but the mines are so important.
Back to top
Vedrfolner



Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 2325

PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trotsky1 wrote:
Okay I got the shell of the list made on modo started out with Veldoforners list minus the sac lands I do not have them yet.

Testing has been mixed though I have not really been able to test any of the match ups I want to. But these are my inital findings.

1. 23 land is not enough I am up to 25 this maybe an exclusively modo problem but its still a problem.

2. Trapmakers Snare is not a 4 off, a few reasons firstly it gives the game away game 1 alot of people will have you on mill or something else game 1 and most of the time when I could cast it I found myself not wanting to for this reason. Plus Twin cast is just more efficent and versatile spell as well so I am down to 2 snares.

3. Unsummon is better than peel reality, I started out with a 2/2 split but quickly found the extra card never mattered.

4. A third fabricate may be necessary I have not added one yet but the mines are so important.


4 - I found that the Fabricates were way too slow. But going up in the numbers of possible Mines/Fonts can be useful in some circumstances of course. May help against mulls.

3 - Call to Heel is there because it can activate Runeflare with only one Howling Mine. Other than that it is obviously worse than Unsummon. I play 2 Call to Heel, 2 Unsummon and 2 Negate atm.

2 - I found the surprise issue to not matter at all, actually. Most decks are helpless against Runeflare if you managed to untap with 2x Mine or a Font and they are at 5 or more cards. Maindeck anyways. I find myself mulling if I don't have Howling Mine or Ponder in hand - especially if I am on the draw. If I am on the play, I may hold a hand with Font if I have some sort of stall plus at least one Trap or Snare. Since there is a need of multiple Flares to win, maximizing the chance of that happening is essential. Although 4 may not be correct, of course.

1 - This may be one of the reasons I mull. I often want Mine in hand to draw into what I need, including land. +1 or +2 lands may help.
Back to top
OldBear



Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 1840

PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think this may be somewhat down to different testing most my testing so far has been versus control decks, so having mine in your openeing hand is not all that important. I have mostly beaten aggro but I find 4 flare plus 2 snare with 4 twin cast in more than enough, to consistntly go off.
Back to top
Vedrfolner



Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 2325

PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, in the games I played today, with -1 Snare +1 Mountain, I felt the need for aggressive mulling diminished somewhat.

Call to Heel over Fabricate... it all depends on the meta.

Mono red, decks playing artifact destruction main (Maelstrom Pulse, Oblivion Ring, Quasali Pridemage) and decks with counterspells are the toughest matchups.

Non-red Aggro, midrange/control decks without counterspells and decks with creature removal as only type of instants are the easy matchups.
Back to top
OldBear



Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 1840

PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I managed to squeeze some more playtest hours in tonight. I was having alot of consistancy issues to start with, so I ended up revamping the deck to make it as consistant as possible.

Which basically ended up with a shell off

4 Howling mine
4 Trap Makers Snare
4 Twincast
4 Fabricate
4 Font of Mythos
4 Runeflare Trap
4 Lightning bolt (im including bolt all though it does not really contribute to the combo here as i can not see any sane person arguging with it not being a 4 off.)

With 4 Pyroclasm and 3 into the roil as my meta options. Im really disliking pyroclasm I am not seeing much it is good against. There is no horde of token decks anymore really.

Ponder felt unnecessary with the 25 lands and max amount of search plus I just find the card a little weak.

Ive opted to include into the roil as it can protect mines and fonts and bounce any non land permanant which has helped alot.

Will prob test out, a version running, 4 into the roil over pyroclasm and 3 negates.

Possibly also a version with 4 ponder and 4 into the roil less a land just as the ultimate pure combo version with as little card space as possible dedicated to meta gaming, Often this can be the right call with combo. Or even 4 ponder 3 negates.

Also added archieve trap to sb as i think decking is a legitmate tatic vs control, I managed to deck MBC earlier after I pulled of a twincast on his haunting echoes and followed up with double font double mine, even with out the trap.
Back to top
Vedrfolner



Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 2325

PostPosted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yes the negates are more useful than Pyroclasm right now. I made the deck while weenie decks were still roaming the meta.
Back to top
OldBear



Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 1840

PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Testing has been going very well, so Im going to take the deck to the next stage and start playing competative games. Will keep you posted its def a meta deck ready to sweep in when ever sbs are empty of certain cards. Sadly I do not have my finger on the pulse of the constucted meta these days so im just gonna hope.

4 Howling mine
4 Trap Makers Snare
4 Twincast
4 Fabricate
4 Font of Mythos
4 Runeflare Trap
4 Lightning bolt
3 negate
3 into the roil
1 peel reality
13 island
11 mountain

sb
4 flashfreeze
3 archive trap
3 pyroclasm
1 negate
4 swerve
Back to top
kaamos



Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 320

PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had an idea with something similar to this deck, one combo I liked was Burning Inquiry+Runeflare Trap

2 mana, 7 damage?
Back to top
Pillsburry



Joined: 17 Oct 2009
Posts: 112

PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kaamos wrote:
I had an idea with something similar to this deck, one combo I liked was Burning Inquiry+Runeflare Trap

2 mana, 7 damage?


The problem is , what if u discard the trap at random ?
Back to top
AdinTheDark



Joined: 31 Mar 2009
Posts: 14

PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have been working on a list for a week or so...

// Deck file for Magic Workstation (http://www.magicworkstation.com)

// Lands
13 [ZEN] Island (1)
7 [ZEN] Mountain (4)
4 [ZEN] Scalding Tarn

// Spells
3 [M10] Howling Mine
3 [ZEN] Burst Lightning
3 [M10] Lightning Bolt
3 [M10] Ponder
3 [M10] Jace Beleren
4 [M10] Time Warp
4 [ZEN] Runeflare Trap
4 [M10] Twincast
3 [CNF] Font of Mythos
3 [M10] Pyroclasm
3 [ZEN] Pyromancer Ascension

// Sideboard
SB: 3 [ARB] Double Negative
SB: 3 [ALA] Magma Spray
SB: 3 [ALA] Swerve
SB: 3 [ZEN] Archive Trap
SB: 3 [M10] Negate

I think pyromancer ascension adds a extra kick to it. If I have it in play with 2 counters I will hold back the twin cast for counters or anything that might fly my way I can twin cast. Very Happy i haven't had a issue with the 3 ofs like I thought I would. I think it is pretty solid. The only thing that game me issues was a mono red with font and howling mine in play they draw right into what they need to finsh you.
Back to top
Vedrfolner



Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 2325

PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 8:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would say that a Pyromancer Ascension deck and a Runeflare Trap deck are two different things and the cards working with either combo won't necessarily help the other in the same deck?

I.E Time Warp does nothing to help you win with Runeflare Trap.

And 3-ofs are bad with Pyromancer's Ascension.

So I think that Jace and Time Warp, although good in their own right, shouldn't be in this deck. It is better to maximize the chance of drawing the combo pieces and win with an ascended Runeflare Trap when the opponent draws three cards. Or eventually just finish him off with an ascended twincasted Lightning Bolt.
Back to top
AdinTheDark



Joined: 31 Mar 2009
Posts: 14

PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Time warp with the font out has given me a extra turn to topdeck what I need a few times with those extra turns you can cast Runeflare on my turn with twincast/pyro ascension it is a easy kill. I think maybe that jace can be replaced with trapmarkers snare. And yeah the 3 ofs are bad with ascension. Like I said though I haven't had any issue with it.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Standard (T2) Decks All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 4 of 6

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

All content on this page may not be reproduced without consent of Magic-League Directors.
Magic the Gathering is TM and copyright Wizards of the Coast, Inc, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc. All rights reserved.


About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy