100th Deck & 1 Year Anniversar..

by tomathan88 on 29 November 2010

Main Deck (60 cards)

Sideboard (15 cards)

Instants (1)

Land (14)

Submit a list of cards below to bulk import them all into your sideboard. Post one card per line using a format like "4x Birds of Paradise" or "1 Blaze", you can even enter just the card name by itself like "Wrath of God" for single cards.


Deck Description

Legacy Lots of Lands deck with my budgety tweaking

sideboard not complete (abandoned is not actually in there)

Deck Tags

  • Combo

Deck at a Glance

Social Stats

9
Likes

This deck has been viewed 10,027 times.

Mana Curve

Mana Symbol Occurrence

000423

Card Legality

  • Not Legal in Standard
  • Not Legal in Modern
  • Legal in Vintage
  • Legal in Legacy

Deck discussion for 100th Deck & 1 Year Anniversary

Azusa, Lost but Seeking would be fun. i don't exactly see how this deck would win..... i think Rude Awakening might fix that problem. also, treetop vilage may help with early damage and killing white Weenies. hope i helped.

0
Posted 29 November 2010 at 23:56

Permalink

i dont get it.....

0
Posted 30 November 2010 at 00:41

Permalink

dagbaker has deleted this comment.

Posted 30 November 2010 at 01:17

Permalink

dagbaker has deleted this comment.

Posted 30 November 2010 at 20:38

Permalink

u guys are stupid. fuckin landfall is gay as hell and nobody plays it in legacy. this is a fuckin budget version of a tier 1 deck, so u people who barely understand standard can fuck off. sorry im in a bad mood today, but damn noobs. except for brian bell. he knows what he is talking about.

0
Posted 30 November 2010 at 17:59

Permalink

so you looked at it? anyway this deck needs a better win condition than deck out.. and there really is no point in the valakut's with 8 mountains, the most damage you could get is 12 which is highly unlikely even with the search cards and life from the loam; also i am no noob... been playing since scourge

0
Posted 30 November 2010 at 20:44

Permalink

uh... no... i can get fucken infinite by sacking it over and over again and bringing it back. you should look more at popular legacy decks dude. this is a famous deck, with, as i said, budget tweaking. sorry if i made u mad, but, cmon, dont just throw your "mine is better than yours" shit out there if u dont even noe the deck.

0
Posted 30 November 2010 at 23:27

Permalink

there are ONLY four cards that bring them back is all im saying

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 02:30

Permalink

crucible of worlds is good for this, more chance of getting the three mountains back
but seriously the mountain count should be at least ten, especially with it being your only win condition

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 02:38

Permalink

ok. gamble gets the life from the loam. so does mulch (sort of). you can bring it back from the grave infinite times, so it works fine. crucible is good in this deck, and quite a few people play it, but i don't like it. if u try playing with the deck getting the mountains is not much of a problem, but ill raise it by one just for u. forests are very crucial to the deck, and i didn't want to lower my chances of getting one, but u could be right.

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 17:46

Permalink

yeah i realised you also needed forest for it, i also forgot what dredge was till i read this comment hehe. now, i realised that the glacial chasm has cumulative upkeep, so i think they could really hurt you after a few turns(and i know you have the zuran orb).
i'm starting to understand how this works A LOT more by disecting it.
i think we got off on the wront foot.

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 23:42

Permalink

i agree sorry bout being mean. the thing about the chasm though, is that it is an infinite combo. with zuran orb, you never take a thing, and without, you can always sac it instead of paying, then get it back with life from the loam. the non budget version uses alot more better cards tho. tabernacle, maze of ith, and most importantly the radishan port and wasteland. with those, you manaskrew them in the begining, then when they get stuff you chasm and maze of ith them. eventually u win unless they are combo or pull something off. either with man lands or damage lands are normally how u win (or worm harvest), this deck was cultivating valakut. it is also budget, so i didnt add the other crazy cards.

0
Posted 03 December 2010 at 20:03

Permalink

dagbaker has deleted this comment.

Posted 05 December 2010 at 04:17

Permalink

Aaboy66 has deleted this comment.

Posted 02 December 2010 at 08:09

Permalink

Holy shit man, congrats on 100! Damn, and I thought 20 was a lot!

0
Posted 02 December 2010 at 08:11

Permalink

you should see dknight27. over 300 decks by the hommie

0
Posted 03 December 2010 at 19:55

Permalink

Im sorry if Im stupid, but I dont see how you win? Do you win by making the opponent have no cards left in library and just heal yourself/make yourself invurnable to the opponent?

0
Posted 23 September 2011 at 16:39

Permalink

Read every card in the deck... Valakut is the win con.

0
Posted 24 September 2011 at 01:05

Permalink

Hate to break it to you, but you can't have 14 Abandoned Outposts in a deck. Only Basic Lands can defy the 4-copy rule.

Congratulations on 100 decks, though.

0
Posted 24 September 2011 at 04:14

Permalink

Hey man, this is a really old deck. If you read the description, you'd know why there are 14 Abandoned Outposts there. Lmao.

0
Posted 25 September 2011 at 03:32

Permalink

thats not true Relentless Rats also can

0
Posted 25 September 2011 at 18:43

Permalink

Good point, didn't see that in the description.

0
Posted 26 September 2011 at 04:40

Permalink

how do you win with this deck? put some knight of the reliquary and soul's fire, you can really win with those cards!!!!

0
Posted 25 September 2011 at 18:33

Permalink




Read every card in the deck... Valakut is the win con.

0
Posted 25 September 2011 at 19:02

Permalink

In most XX-Lands decks my win condition is you scooping pretty much... If it's a judge asking you always say 'manlands, and decking them out', because most lists are more about not losing than anything.

0
Posted 25 September 2011 at 19:53

Permalink

ale96 has deleted this comment.

Posted 25 September 2011 at 20:12

Permalink

mhh..... in how many turns you can win?
yes it's a really nice deck but if you play with a deck wich gain very much life you can't win =| ..........
anyway i don't like this deck...................

0
Posted 25 September 2011 at 20:22

Permalink

To be fair to the deck it's VERY much a budget build, seeing as the average lands deck has another zero at the end of the tag... But admittedly this list is objectively shoddy.

0
Posted 25 September 2011 at 21:39

Permalink

You need to learn how to take criticism, buddy.

0
Posted 25 September 2011 at 21:16

Permalink

WhitePlama has deleted this comment.

Posted 25 September 2011 at 22:54

Permalink

Haha. I Memoricide your Life from the Loam Xp.

0
Posted 25 September 2011 at 22:55

Permalink

Majician has deleted this comment.

Posted 26 September 2011 at 01:24

Permalink

I completely understand the deck and your win-con, but by making it budgeted, it's become extremely weak. You seriously need Crucible of Worlds in here. Come on, at least one. Why the hell wouldn't you like it? I know they're expensive, but adding one or two would still keep it budget and would make it MUCH better.

I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, but in my experience Valakut decks often suck pretty hard unless you dump a bunch of money into them. I would try and have one other win-con in here in case Valakut doesn't pan out.

I have to ask, how many times have you randomly discarded the card that you Gambled for? Unless you're cheating, I'm sure it has happened quite a bit. It just doesn't seem consistent enough.

I don't mean to be negative - this deck isn't really bad by any means - it's just that the "budget" aspect shows, ya know?

1
Posted 26 September 2011 at 01:25

Permalink

Normally you gamble for Life from the Loam, so it doesn't matter as much if you discard it. I haven't played the deck, but looking at it that was obvious.

0
Posted 26 September 2011 at 13:41

Permalink

Shit, I forgot Life from the Loam had Dredge. Silly me! The rest of my comment still stands!

0
Posted 26 September 2011 at 23:46

Permalink

I forgot what dredge was originally, which is what you'll see in the first few comments.

0
Posted 27 September 2011 at 04:25

Permalink

darigaaz20 has deleted this comment.

Posted 26 September 2011 at 18:11

Permalink

clearly just a valakut deck with land recursion. I like it :D
I tried to make one a couple of weeks ago but Life from the Loam is pretty expensive. GW.

0
Posted 27 September 2011 at 02:32

Permalink

i understand you are trying to get land... but there is not perpose for the lands you should find a perpose like eldrazi, alot of low/semilow hexproofs, planeswalkers anything...

0
Posted 27 September 2011 at 07:19

Permalink

the purpose of the lands is to deal a bunch of damage with Valakut..

0
Posted 27 September 2011 at 09:57

Permalink

but I agree that there should be an alternate win condition, such as a powerful planeswalker/Eldrazi perhaps

0
Posted 27 September 2011 at 09:59

Permalink

An alternate win-con would definitely be required sideboard tech. While Glacial Chasm protects you from damage, you're pretty screwed if anyone stops you from casting your recursion spells or exiles your graveyard/hand/anything. I guess I would have to see it played, but it really doesn't seem as reliable as it could be. :/

0
Posted 27 September 2011 at 15:45

Permalink