iMtG Server: Gathering

Delver's Pike 75 cards, 15 sideboard 9 {Island} 4 {Sulfur Falls} 9 {Mountain} 22 lands 3 {Stromkirk Noble} 4 {Snapcaster Mage} 4 {Delver of Secrets} 11 creatures 3 {Gut Shot} 4 {Vapor Snag} 4 {Mana Leak} 1 {Sword of Feast and Famine} 1 {Sword of War and Peace} 3 {Runechanter's Pike} 4 {Failthless Looting} 4 {Ponder} 3 {Incinerate} 27 other spells Sideboard 4 {Flashfreeze} 2 {Shatter} 2 {Slagstorm} 1 {Gut Shot} 2 {Dismember} 2 {Grafdigger's Cage} 2 {Ratchet Bomb} 15 sideboard cards

This deck looks incredibely strong, but what about adding a pike cutting {shock} and use {Galvanic Blast} instead. Blast as a one of and one more ponder.
So -3 shock
+1 {Runechanter's Pike}
+1 {Ponder}
For your sb you could be using {crush} instead of {shatter} to handle your needs unless Tempered steel is prevelant in your meta.

Besides the sideboard issues, I see nothing wrong with the mainboard except for the shocks, otherwise it is just like the net decks and needs no further improvements

Yeah dude, I'd replace the {Shock}s with {Galvanic Blast}s. You run artifacts so on the small chance that you are able to pull it off, you can hit for 4! I'm sure that's obvious though î,,

Will swap the shock out.  Does it really look like a net deck?  I didn't build it off one....

I don't know, I'm not sure what the latest net deck is. I think it's just because you used {Snapcaster Mage} and {Delver of Secrets}. But personally, I've never seen an iteration that looks quite like this. I can tell it's original, pretty much any time you make competitive Control it's going to seem like a net deck though. I've been brewing one up, and if I were to show it to someone I'm sure they'd think it was some form of a net deck they've seen before.

I'm a fan of {Blighted Agent}. In most decks it's a 1-hit-KO (or corruption).

Quote from: Prophylaxis on February 06, 2012, 11:31:10 PM
I'm a fan of {Blighted Agent}. In most decks it's a 1-hit-KO (or corruption).

In a delver aggro deck in which you have no other way to win with infect?

Quote from: Appleguru56 on February 07, 2012, 12:04:08 AM

Quote from: Prophylaxis on February 06, 2012, 11:31:10 PM
I'm a fan of {Blighted Agent}. In most decks it's a 1-hit-KO (or corruption).

In a delver aggro deck in which you have no other way to win with infect?

I agree. I would start running {Inkmoth Nexus} as well as it is brutal with equipment.

This comes from months of playtesting Grand Architect. I have found that {Blighted Agent} + {Silver-Inlaid Dagger} makes me win games I should lose.

Quote from: Prophylaxis on February 07, 2012, 12:07:04 AM

Quote from: Appleguru56 on February 07, 2012, 12:04:08 AM

Quote from: Prophylaxis on February 06, 2012, 11:31:10 PM
I'm a fan of {Blighted Agent}. In most decks it's a 1-hit-KO (or corruption).

In a delver aggro deck in which you have no other way to win with infect?

I agree. I would start running {Inkmoth Nexus} as well as it is brutal with equipment.

This comes from months of playtesting Grand Architect. I have found that {Blighted Agent} + {Silver-Inlaid Dagger} makes me win games I should lose.

Don't try to make this deck something it isn't going to be.... Inkmoth is great regardless of infect or not. Attempting to win with infect using only 4 copies of creatures and 4 lands that costs a lot of mana to activate, equipt, then swing, simply isn't realistic. Trying to splash some fancy infect is what my friends and I would like to call "a kiddie combo"

Quote from: Appleguru56 on February 07, 2012, 12:10:35 AM

Quote from: Prophylaxis on February 07, 2012, 12:07:04 AM

Quote from: Appleguru56 on February 07, 2012, 12:04:08 AM

Quote from: Prophylaxis on February 06, 2012, 11:31:10 PM
I'm a fan of {Blighted Agent}. In most decks it's a 1-hit-KO (or corruption).

In a delver aggro deck in which you have no other way to win with infect?

I agree. I would start running {Inkmoth Nexus} as well as it is brutal with equipment.

This comes from months of playtesting Grand Architect. I have found that {Blighted Agent} + {Silver-Inlaid Dagger} makes me win games I should lose.

Don't try to make this deck something it isn't going to be.... Inkmoth is great regardless of infect or not. Attempting to win with infect using only 4 copies of creatures and 4 lands that costs a lot of mana to activate, equipt, then swing, simply isn't realistic. Trying to splash some fancy infect is what my friends and I would like to call "a kiddie combo"

I used to be a firm believer of not splashing infect too ( I used to run {Thrummingbird}s) but this post convinced me:

"Blighted Agent: I love this card. Seriously, he's unbelivably awesome. He's an unblockable infect creature that gets pumped by Architect. Back in ye olde RoE/M12/NPH standard, half of our games were won off the back of an Inkmoth Nexus. When I realized that, I kicked Thrummingbird out of my personal Architect list and replaced him with this guy. I then posted about it here on MTGSalv and seemingly overnight everyone and their mother was running Agent. For good reason, too. He's a very quick clock that the opponent must be able to answer."

Then again, he might not be the best fit for this deck.

Are you promoting {Blighted Agent} in place of {Invisible Stalker}?

Quote from: Prophylaxis on February 07, 2012, 01:05:36 AM

Quote from: Appleguru56 on February 07, 2012, 12:10:35 AM

Quote from: Prophylaxis on February 07, 2012, 12:07:04 AM

Quote from: Appleguru56 on February 07, 2012, 12:04:08 AM

Quote from: Prophylaxis on February 06, 2012, 11:31:10 PM
I'm a fan of {Blighted Agent}. In most decks it's a 1-hit-KO (or corruption).

In a delver aggro deck in which you have no other way to win with infect?

I agree. I would start running {Inkmoth Nexus} as well as it is brutal with equipment.

This comes from months of playtesting Grand Architect. I have found that {Blighted Agent} + {Silver-Inlaid Dagger} makes me win games I should lose.

Don't try to make this deck something it isn't going to be.... Inkmoth is great regardless of infect or not. Attempting to win with infect using only 4 copies of creatures and 4 lands that costs a lot of mana to activate, equipt, then swing, simply isn't realistic. Trying to splash some fancy infect is what my friends and I would like to call "a kiddie combo"

I used to be a firm believer of not splashing infect too ( I used to run {Thrummingbird}s) but this post convinced me:

"Blighted Agent: I love this card. Seriously, he's unbelivably awesome. He's an unblockable infect creature that gets pumped by Architect. Back in ye olde RoE/M12/NPH standard, half of our games were won off the back of an Inkmoth Nexus. When I realized that, I kicked Thrummingbird out of my personal Architect list and replaced him with this guy. I then posted about it here on MTGSalv and seemingly overnight everyone and their mother was running Agent. For good reason, too. He's a very quick clock that the opponent must be able to answer."

Then again, he might not be the best fit for this deck.

He is a game finisher if your opponent does not deal with it, but it is horrible since they will deal with it and then you will be screwed since you have no other ways to deal infect besides the nexus. It may be appealing, it does not however contribute to your other means of winning, and running hybrid infect is not only slow, but incredibly unstable. Once your opponent deals with blighted agent, you are stuck for another way to infect finish. Thrumming bird at least proliferates everything else, whether that means a tumble magnet etc, you at least get value out of it, or at least be able to equipt and swing for substantial damage even without infect.
The forum shows appeal only because the people do not realize that speed doesn't outweigh stability.

Quote from: InfinitiveDivinity on February 07, 2012, 12:49:07 PM
Are you promoting {Blighted Agent} in place of {Invisible Stalker}?

It's certainty very strong, but the Stalker might be a better fit. I dunno. It works in my deck.

EDIT: 1000 posts!

Edited....took out stalker and put in {Stormkirk Noble}.  He is evasive, somewhat, and makes it a threat that they must deal with early.