|
|
| Author |
Message |
NAC5JR
Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 5
|
 Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 8:02 pm Post subject: G/B/W Glare Please help Improve!!!! |
 |
|
// Lands
1 [7E] Plains (3)
2 [OD] Swamp (3)
5 [ON] Forest (3)
4 [RAV] Temple Garden
4 [RAV] Overgrown Tomb
4 [GP] Godless Shrine
// Creatures
4 [ST] Wood Elves
4 [RAV] Watchwolf
4 [RAV] Loxodon Hierarch
4 [CHK] Yosei, the Morning Star
2 [RAV] Grave-Shell Scarab
4 [RAV] Birds of Paradise
// Spells
3 [RAV] Putrefy
3 [GP] Mortify
4 [RAV] Faith's Fetters
4 [9E] Wrath of God
4 [RAV] Glare of Subdual |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Karma
Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 46
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vitu-ghazi? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Russell_Nash
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 694
Location: Burn Ward
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
drop 2 Yosei
drop 2 Grave-Shell Scarab
drop 1 glare
move 4 fetters into SB
add 3 Cord of calling
add 1 Nikko-Onna
add 1 Viridian Shaman
add 4 Selesnya Guildmage
add cranial in in SB
add spark seed to SB
also change up the main base a little:
Drop the swamp, drop godless shrines (a couble copies anyways)
add more plains
add Vitu-Ghazi, the City-Tree
id also suggest trying to find a way to work a North Tree in there too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr_Moo
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
Posts: 987
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't get it. You're accelerating into few fat creatures. Glare likes lots of creatures. Greater Good would make infinitely more sense here. It seems like you just mashed together Glare and BGW control, and it's not really a logical hybrid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Insanity
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 164
|
| Posted: Tue May 23, 2006 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I'd agree with Dr_Moo. You generally include black for removal and fairly large creatures. Those are two things that glare doesn't really need. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Russell_Nash
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 694
Location: Burn Ward
|
| Posted: Tue May 23, 2006 10:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I disagree; I believe its perfectly viable to splash back in glare. As long as you can get a single black source out it allows you to play such powerhouse cards as Mortify, Putrefy, and cranial. Also with glare is fairly easy to get a Black source between already main deck Birds and Wood Elves just by adding a SINGLE Overgrown Tomb it essentially makes 9 slots available to produce Black. Black doesn’t play a large part in the deck but because its so easy to get access to a single B I don’t see a reason why you shouldn’t splash for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr_Moo
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
Posts: 987
|
| Posted: Tue May 23, 2006 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Russell_Nash wrote: | | I disagree; I believe its perfectly viable to splash back in glare. |
If that were what he was doing, then maybe you'd be right. But it isn't. He isn't just splashing black in Glare, he's hybridizing two completely different decks that don't mesh well at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
