Discussion Forum

My new 300card Multiplayer deck

Hey guys


Here's my newest attempt at a big deck. I've been playing 60 card decks again for the last 6 months and I was getting tired of the concept. 60 card decks in multiplayer run out of answers quickly, they run out of cards and they get boring as games get predictable. 60 cards is better suited for one on one games.

My new build packs 300 cards. I know many of you will laugh at such a build but you have to experience such a deck first hand to know how fun it is to play. It's difficult to build a 300 card deck that works but I do have a few years of EDH deck building experience which helps and I've attempted buillding such big decks before so I do have a good feeling for making them. Still it will take many months perfecting this deck to make it really good.
I have to friends (brilliant deck builders) who play huge decks (one plays a 450 card deck and the other a 1700 card deck) to help me test.

Basically the deck is just a lot of card draw, a lot of removal and answers to problems and deck manipulation to get to them. As for creatures I aim at critters that bring me some sort of card advantage or double use, Etched oracle for instance serves as card draw and beatstick. Broodmate Dragon is 2 for 1. Kagemaro, First to Suffer is a beatstick and mass removal. etc...

Version 2, 300 card Multiplayer Control

old version: http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=190343

A lot of the numbers started out as 4 offs then went down as I wanted to limit the deck to 300 cards and wanted to fit in other cards as well. For the landbase I basically took what was available in my map. Some of my duals and fetchland are in my legacy tournament decks so I didn't have all 40 fetch and all 40 duals available.
Still I think the landbase is fine unless my opponent plays land hate, then the deck dies. It's a shortcomming that is hard to get around in such a big 5 color deck. Then again it's for casual play, not for a legacy tournament. It's fun to be greedy fior a change :)

suggestions are welcome

cheers

Seth
Posted 30 May 2011 at 07:12

Permalink

9 replies

so the meta you've been playing this in is 3 player games where everyone has a bloated 300+ card monstrosity?

i think it might work only because everyone else is in the same condition...i play a lot of 3-8 player games and everyone runs 60-65 card decks...and I don't see your deck standing the slightest chance in that type of environment

do you routinely mulligan a bunch of times before you get a decent starting hand?

i'll take your word that "you have to play it to get it"...because this just seems like you grabbed a shit ton of cards of every colour and archetype and just smushed them together.
0
Posted 30 May 2011 at 19:43

Permalink

If you would look at the deck you might actually learn something. Then again you wouldn't get it if I explained it to you card by card.

Stay out of my posts man, I don't bother you, is it to much to ask for the same courtesy?
0
Posted 31 May 2011 at 07:16

Permalink

sorry if my use of colourful language put you on the defensive, my questions were serious attempts at starting to wrap my head around something you yourself mentioned was hard to get without playing it yourself.

and for the record, i've seen you slam dozens of ppl's posts and decks on this site over the last few years, including mine, where was this courtesy then?.
0
Posted 31 May 2011 at 14:13

Permalink

I can't even remember you ever posting a deck and if I did give feedback to one of your decks I doubt I said anything that wasn't justified.
0
Posted 31 May 2011 at 14:35

Permalink

ah so when you do it, it's justified; if others do it, it's lacking in courtesy.. got it.
0
Posted 31 May 2011 at 14:39

Permalink

Actually there is a difference. I don't trash anything I don't fully understand. If I don't get it I'll ask for someone to explain it to me before making observations of any kind. You don't understand this deck, you just see to many cards for your brain to handle so automatically it's bad.

I know where you are comming from, I didn't believe a deck like this could be any good 5 years ago when I first saw someone play a 200 card deck. Then that person beat me every single time, any deck I could make. So I got interested. Yes 60 cards will always be more powerfull and focussed is a one on one game, but multiplayer is a different game and that theory doesn't hold.

Also I know you always get back to the old "the more cards = less chance of getting to the card you need" right?

What deck has the best chance of fetching 2 lands

Deck A: plays 60 cards and 4 Kodama's reach
Deck B: plays 80 cards and 4 kodama's reach + 4 Cultivate

get it?

now look at my deck again with that in mind and look at card functionality instead of trying to find 4 ofs.
0
Posted 31 May 2011 at 14:51

Permalink

[QUOTE=Seth] Yes 60 cards will always be more powerfull and focussed is a one on one game, but multiplayer is a different game and that theory doesn't hold.[/QUOTE]

as i stated i play a lot of multiplayer(more than duels actually) and everyone is playing 60ish card decks, which is why i asked about your meta.

just because i don't agree with your conclusions doesn't make me too feeble-minded to "handle all those cards" nor does it mean i didn't actually look at all your cards.

i understand fetching and tutoring just fine...but i'm also used to a MP meta where there's often a Mindlock Orb on the table.
0
Posted 31 May 2011 at 15:06

Permalink

that does suck for fetchland but aside from that I don't actually tutor much at all. I have maybe 2 tutors in there. I rely more on the likes of Wordly counsil, Impulse, Telling time... cards that dig nto my deck and get me solutions that way. I do rely heavily on land fix like fetch and utility creatures like wood elves and the likes so no searching hurts, a lot. depending on when it is played.
I do play a fair bit of all round removal that can get rid of problem permanents of any kind.

lately our meta has progressed heavily towards counter magic and creature based kills, so I might be going easy on the need for all round permanent destruction. If a card like mindlock orb would see play I would play more vindicate/maelstrom pulse/beast within/bant charm... The only deck search disrupton currently played in our group is Aven Mindcensor which is easier to get rid of.

I won't claim the deck is all that good at the moment but I intend to work on it for many months to come so that it does become an all round, well balanced, answers to everything kind of fun deck. It will never be tournament worthy but that doesn't mean it can't become quite broken good in multiplayer given enough time to develop it.
0
Posted 31 May 2011 at 16:21

Permalink

I did a heavy update of the deck

http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=191805

A lot of the early game creatures are gone. The Specters for instance. The concept of specter disruption + the option of Stoneforge mystic and swords seemed nice but in such a big deck it won't be a strategy I can rely on.
So I opted for more mid and late game power.

I also added 3 bant charm for more removal, 1 more beat within, 1 more reccuring nightmare as it al;ways turns out to be one of the most powerful things you can do. The Beacons of Unrest are gone. Again in such a big deck the chance of drawing in to them again and again is small.

Maybe I should sacrifice creatures like Cold Eyed Selkie for Wrath of God. They seem nice with swords but are very vulnerable at the same time and the less creatures I play the more heat they will take.

Should I try to fit in 4 wrath of God and 4 damnation and what to drop? I prefer dropping creatures over spells.

The mana curve suffered a lot since the change and although I have more lifegain I'll have a difficult time surviving heavy aggro strategies. I'll look into that after some real playtesting.
0
Posted 01 June 2011 at 07:07

Permalink