Deckstats Forum
English-language Forums => General Magic => Topic started by: Konjiikhan on April 04, 2016, 07:11:50 am
-
made a mono black vamp deck for modern. wondering if i should splash / or add white or red to it. what is played more ?
-
White will give you access to Path to Exile (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Path+to+Exile) & Rebuff the Wicked (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Rebuff+the+Wicked), which are two of my favorite cards in Modern. Some people will probably say different, really comes down to personal preference.
-
Personally, I have found that when I splash, I end up putting in a few cards that really serve (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Serve) no purpose in my deck. Mono anything is hard to run. At least with my experience. I usually try and run at least 2 colors. Also because if you are running a mono color, there are quite a few card effects that cancel (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Cancel) out any damage or effect from a certain color. Example: Jareth, Leonine Titan (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Jareth%2C+Leonine+Titan). You run a mono color and every time you attack someone calls that color and your attacks, spells, enchantments and the like, do nothing.
-
Depends on the demands of your meta. Are there threats you're likely to faced that can't effectively be answered, or out paced, with mono-black?
-
Concerning Vamp decks there are actually three I'm brewing over at the moment: B/W, B/R, and Mardu (R/W/B).
1) The Black/Red deck has more synergy since for this set that's what the set pushes towards as far as this AGGRO tribal goes.
2) The White/Black deck I wanted to build because I would like to play Sorin in this block if I can. The Black has good stability and the White would offer more than enough life gain and protection.
3) The mardu (which would be you splashing red & white), it would incorporate elements from both the above.
When it comes down to it, as stated by drunk cynic, it depends on the meta for your area and what you need to do to your deck in order for it to run effectively, efficiently and hold its own against the other decks.
-
Most of the people I play are very diverse in their play styles. I have tried playing multiple times with a single color and got stomped every time. So for me, and the people I play with, Mono is bad. lol
-
Mono isn't all bad, but I see where you're coming from. In all of my decks I only have 1 mono-colored deck that I still use (mono-black).
-
Most of the mono-colored decks that I have I mainly use them for training purposes or just for nostalgia. I'm not going against Mono decks but they are lacking as far as strategy goes. A good way to change that would be to make the deck either TRIBAL or use a Mono-Colored Planeswalker to amp up the deck. It helps the deck go that much farther.
-
Most of the mono-colored decks that I have I mainly use them for training purposes or just for nostalgia. I'm not going against Mono decks but they are lacking as far as strategy goes. A good way to change that would be to make the deck either TRIBAL or use a Mono-Colored Planeswalker to amp up the deck. It helps the deck go that much farther.
The best response to that is Red Deck Wins. The entire intention is to outpace anything the other deck can do, and get the opponent to 0 before you run out of gas or they get settled.
-
@Drunk cynic, sadly that may be one of the only few exception to counter that statement. My only thing about red deck wins is that the only strategy is to BURN till you win. It may be simple (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Simple) and effective but it can be easily countered or face many negative match-ups. I'm not dissing it because if it wins then someone's doing something right. I just feel that the deck doesn't have much....personality to it. For example, any set that magic has ever released has a theme to it that makes these different decks fun and flavorful. Ravnica and its' guilds, Innistrad and its' tribes, Even Mirrodin has the whole Resistance vs. the Phyrexians. I mean does the deck even have any variants to it?
-
Alright. Would you agree that there is a difference between strategy and flavor/personality? I'll readily admit that I don't find RDW the most entertaining deck to play. Granted, it takes a large amount of skill, to strategically use your resource, but nothing 'clever' happens for me.
Beyond our personal assessments of the deck, it is still a persistent archetype.
-
ATM I only have two mono decks, Purphoros EDH & Modern Green Devotion (which I just realized isn't on this site for some reason). All my other mono decks rotated out of Standard and weren't strong enough to compete in Extended (man I miss that format) or Modern.
Heck, even the two decks I'm building for my first venture back into Standard in a long time (2+ years I think) are two colors.
-
are vamp decks used that much in big tournaments or we talking in metas? i will prolly add white. i have path's and sorin to play with. i mainly play green/red/splash white agrro. ill have to post that deck up tomorrow. it was green/red till i got more shock (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Shock) lands recently :) that 19 year gap in my playing magic has me at a card disadvantage. i sold all my stuff when i quit back then lol.
-
I think that with the release (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Release) of Shadows Over Innistrad, we will see alot more vampires used in tournaments. As far as until now goes, I haven't really heard much about vampire decks other than casual play.
-
Ever since I started playing MTG I've been collecting across all the sets and blocks, so I've got a pretty good inventory as far as deck types go. Vampires are aggressive and I can see them making some waves in this block. Either B/R or Mardu by splashing the W/B vampires from the recent BFZ set (such as cliffhaven vampire (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Cliffhaven+Vampire) or drana's emissary (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Drana%27s+Emissary)). It really just depends on the meta, kinda like a pecking order; The strongest deck sets the tone for what the other people's decks construct AGAINST, but it does not define their playing style.
Also to address Drunk Cynic; Yes I do believe that there is a difference between Strategy and Personality. For example, my first Rakdos deck I ever built had the PERSONALITY of a destroy everything burn everything in sight. Its unleash mechanic just spelled out AGGRO. However, when I re-designed the deck I gave it a more mid-ranged feel to it. Instead of focusing on the unleash to attack I mostly DIDN'T use the effect. Reason being is that as aggro as I like to be I actually like my life more than the thrill of combat. Instead of pumping up a hellhole flailer (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Hellhole+Flailer) to attack i'll make his strength incredibly high by playing titan's strength (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Titan%27s+Strength) and auger spree (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Auger+Spree) to boosts his attack power. Then later on I'll just play morgue burst (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Morgue+Burst) and bring it back to my hand AND deal damage (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Deal+Damage). So you see there are differences between the strategy behind a deck and the personality that is associated with it.