iMtG Server: Gathering

B/R/G Zombies 75 cards, 15 sideboard 2 {Vault of the Archangel} 4 {Woodland Cemetery} 4 {Blood Crypt} 4 {Overgrown Tomb} 3 {Cavern of Souls} 4 {Dragonskull Summit} 3 {Isolated Chapel} 24 lands 2 {Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord} 4 {Gravecrawler} 2 {Lotleth Troll} 3 {Vexing Devil} 3 {Hellrider} 4 {Geralf's Messenger} 18 creatures 3 {Rancor} 4 {Pillar of Flame} 2 {Dreadbore} 3 {Sign in Blood} 2 {Abrupt Decay} 4 {Searing Spear} 18 other spells Sideboard 2 {Abrupt Decay} 3 {Slaughter Games} 2 {Sever the Bloodline} 4 {Oblivion Ring} 2 {Faith's Shield} 2 {Dreadbore} 15 sideboard cards

Finished list what ill be running Friday any thoughts or suggestions?

I would add another troll they are really helpful also dredge Mangler is always helpful

Quote from: Seth5000 on January 17, 2013, 12:20:20 PM
I would add another troll they are really helpful also dredge Mangler is always helpful

Deck is based off of a b/g zombie one I had that ran playsets of each had to cut something for the red lol

This either needs card draw are less land with less color intensive spells. I can garuntee to removal spells (mass or spot) would slow you down dramatically and with this ratio you're unlikely to draw more threats.

I would take out 1 searing spear and add one dreadboar or sever the bloodline

Drop down to 22 lands and add {Vampire Nighthawk}. I also agree with Kaleo. You need to be able to draw which is even more reason to run less lands. {Sign in Blood} or maybe better woulld be {Altar's Reap}. Swing with your crawler, they block, in response sac and draw two cards.

Quote from: Kaleo42 on January 17, 2013, 12:26:40 PM
This either needs card draw are less land with less color intensive spells. I can garuntee to removal spells (mass or spot) would slow you down dramatically and with this ratio you're unlikely to draw more threats.

Explain more please or give me an example of how I should change it to run properly

Quote from: Juggalonoke on January 17, 2013, 12:41:58 PM

Quote from: Kaleo42 on January 17, 2013, 12:26:40 PM
This either needs card draw are less land with less color intensive spells. I can garuntee to removal spells (mass or spot) would slow you down dramatically and with this ratio you're unlikely to draw more threats.

Explain more please or give me an example of how I should change it to run properly

Idk exactly what he means but one thing I suggest it less shock lands and add a couple regular lands

Updated to cut down to 24 lands not sure how to adjust to accommodate any basic lands at all moved sever the bloodline to sb for sign in blood. Not sure if I should go down more in lands or what... ( I'm really not good at deck building this has been my best attempt from useing someone else build at first. So +1 to you guys for really helping me out I'd like to make this a very competitive deck at my lgs FNM )

This looks a lot better now. However {vexing DEVIL} and {hellrider} (also a DEVIL} dont really fit in here and will clog up your play. I recommend 2 {grisley salvage} to dig for what you need and 4 {dreg mangler} in their place. This apears very midrange based on the land count, creature to spell ratio, and the fact it's tricolor, the devils dont midrange all that well.

Quote from: Kaleo42 on January 17, 2013, 04:22:23 PM
This looks a lot better now. However {vexing DEVIL} and {hellrider} (also a DEVIL} dont really fit in here and will clog up your play. I recommend 2 {grisley salvage} to dig for what you need and 4 {dreg mangler} in their place. This apears very midrange based on the land count, creature to spell ratio, and the fact it's tricolor, the devils dont midrange all that well.

Thank you for the input that's the way I did have it before I added red to the deck and it ran ok but seemed to lack on damage thought maybe the addition of red would help with faster damage and some more burn or spot removal

 {Underworld Connections} would help with card draw.

Quote from: Calebestes on January 18, 2013, 06:39:40 AM
{Underworld Connections} would help with card draw.

Youre thinking in a control mind set, connections is a bit expensive for how he wants to win. Mostly it just costs too much time.

This deck to me really looks like a strong early aggro deck that lost a couple matches in a row cause you didnt have answers. Then decided to add answers and ended up with some awkward mix of control and aggro that hasnt quite settled into a comfortable midrange yet cause you havent built something control or midrange that has performed well recently or ever. Is that a correct assumtion OP?

Quote from: Kaleo42 on January 18, 2013, 10:26:08 AM

Quote from: Calebestes on January 18, 2013, 06:39:40 AM
{Underworld Connections} would help with card draw.

Youre thinking in a control mind set, connections is a bit expensive for how he wants to win. Mostly it just costs too much time.

This deck to me really looks like a strong early aggro deck that lost a couple matches in a row cause you didnt have answers. Then decided to add answers and ended up with some awkward mix of control and aggro that hasnt quite settled into a comfortable midrange yet cause you havent built something control or midrange that has performed well recently or ever. Is that a correct assumtion OP?

Lol basicly in a nut shell

So how has it been running since the changes

Quote from: Kaleo42 on January 18, 2013, 11:07:22 AM
So how has it been running since the changes

Decently. Only tested on cockatrice a few times gonna put it together and run tonight at FNM.

So this deck just annoyed me to the point of dropping I'm gonna put it back to what it used to be and take out all red