iMtG Server: Gathering

Decks (Magic The Gathering) => Commander => Topic started by: Spencer Addington on March 18, 2015, 08:56:34 PM

Title: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 18, 2015, 08:56:34 PM
So a lot of you know I'm making a sliver EDH, and I'm having a hard time deciding between temples({temple of enlightenment} for reference) and checklands({sunpetal grove} for reference). I like temples because scry, but I like the checklands because I'm running all the shock lands and the come in untapped a lot of the time(definitely not all the time though). What would you guys run? I can't do any other land types because I'm on a budget(had the shocks already) and these two types are for trade all the time, so they seem like a great choice.
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: MuggyWuggy on March 18, 2015, 09:06:25 PM
All is dust + colorless sliver
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 18, 2015, 09:10:17 PM
All is dust too spensive!!!
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: Thetrufflehunter on March 18, 2015, 09:12:58 PM
Terminus. Bones tokens (well, all wipes do), will destroy auras, and can be miracled.
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: MuggyWuggy on March 18, 2015, 10:42:03 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on March 18, 2015, 09:10:17 PM
All is dust too spensive!!!

Not really
You're running mana slivers, mana echoes, bathsalt monolith and ashnod altar
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 18, 2015, 10:51:41 PM
I'm not running monolith or alter..
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: MuggyWuggy on March 18, 2015, 11:13:42 PM
Altar + queen = unlimited combo
Hearthstone makes it even better
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 18, 2015, 11:16:59 PM
Quote from: MuggyWuggy on March 18, 2015, 11:13:42 PM
Altar + queen = unlimited combo
Hearthstone makes it even better
I'll see about adding them :)
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: MuggyWuggy on March 18, 2015, 11:18:14 PM
I have sliver premium hearthstone
Ill check my sliver section for you
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 18, 2015, 11:19:42 PM
I have a {vigor}, {xenagos God of revels} and {eidelon of countless battles} off your needs ;)
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: MuggyWuggy on March 18, 2015, 11:26:36 PM
Foil xenagos/eidolon ?
Only need foils
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 18, 2015, 11:34:08 PM
Quote from: MuggyWuggy on March 18, 2015, 11:26:36 PM
Foil xenagos/eidolon ?
Only need foils
Not foil.. You still need vigor?
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: MuggyWuggy on March 19, 2015, 12:02:11 AM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on March 18, 2015, 11:34:08 PM
Quote from: MuggyWuggy on March 18, 2015, 11:26:36 PM
Foil xenagos/eidolon ?
Only need foils
Not foil.. You still need vigor?
Ya
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: Codester1991 on March 19, 2015, 10:54:26 AM
{Martial Coup} bro for the tokens lol
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 19, 2015, 11:08:20 AM
Quote from: Codester1991 on March 19, 2015, 10:54:26 AM
{Martial Coup} bro for the tokens lol
Tribal sliver bro
Title: Re: Board wipe?
Post by: LinkCelestrial on March 19, 2015, 11:15:50 AM
{Terminus}. Catches indestructible which is very relevant in commander.
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 23, 2015, 11:34:27 PM
Bump
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 12:35:54 AM
One word.

Both.

Unless {Blood Moon} but the solution to that is to exile the player with with your fists of righteousness fury.

But seriously why not both? It's commander so I'd kinda lean temples if just one.
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Skullguy725 on March 24, 2015, 12:15:36 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 11:51:13 AM
Don't run lands that will enter tapped if at all possible.  If it hits tapped, that slows you down by a turn, which is bad.

Yeah but temples are useful late game
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 12:33:31 PM
Quote from: Skullguy725 on March 24, 2015, 12:15:36 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 11:51:13 AM
Don't run lands that will enter tapped if at all possible.  If it hits tapped, that slows you down by a turn, which is bad.

Yeah but temples are useful late game

The problem with the "don't use tap lands" philosophy is that unless you're using all your mana every turn /it doesn't matter/. If you have a perfect curve where you're tapping out every turn then I advocate not running tap lands and wanna see your list.
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 24, 2015, 12:37:39 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 12:35:24 PM
If you're to the point where you are just hoping to top deck something good, you've already lost. You did your thing and it just wasn't good enough, so you're trying to pull something out of your butt. :P
You just described my whole life
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 12:40:28 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 12:35:24 PM
If you're to the point where you are just hoping to top deck something good, you've already lost. You did your thing and it just wasn't good enough, so you're trying to pull something out of your butt. :P

Not entirely true. You could be on a stable board waiting for a combo piece. You could be hoping to answer a threat so you can break stalemate. You could be waiting for a burn spell as your opponent sits at one life.

If you really think you should never be top decking then every deck you ever run ought to have a hella good draw engine.
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Munchlax on March 24, 2015, 12:57:46 PM
Quote from: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 12:40:28 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 12:35:24 PM
If you're to the point where you are just hoping to top deck something good, you've already lost. You did your thing and it just wasn't good enough, so you're trying to pull something out of your butt. :P

Not entirely true. You could be on a stable board waiting for a combo piece. You could be hoping to answer a threat so you can break stalemate. You could be waiting for a burn spell as your opponent sits at one life.

If you really think you should never be top decking then every deck you ever run ought to have a hella good draw engine.
Did you forget you were talking to Taysby, the commander combo king on this site?
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 01:01:31 PM
Quote from: Munchlax on March 24, 2015, 12:57:46 PM
Quote from: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 12:40:28 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 12:35:24 PM
If you're to the point where you are just hoping to top deck something good, you've already lost. You did your thing and it just wasn't good enough, so you're trying to pull something out of your butt. :P

Not entirely true. You could be on a stable board waiting for a combo piece. You could be hoping to answer a threat so you can break stalemate. You could be waiting for a burn spell as your opponent sits at one life.

If you really think you should never be top decking then every deck you ever run ought to have a hella good draw engine.
Did you forget you were talking to Taysby, the commander combo king on this site?

No. What would make you think that?
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 01:02:57 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 12:37:35 PM
Quote from: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 12:33:31 PM
Quote from: Skullguy725 on March 24, 2015, 12:15:36 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 11:51:13 AM
Don't run lands that will enter tapped if at all possible.  If it hits tapped, that slows you down by a turn, which is bad.

Yeah but temples are useful late game

The problem with the "don't use tap lands" philosophy is that unless you're using all your mana every turn /it doesn't matter/. If you have a perfect curve where you're tapping out every turn then I advocate not running tap lands and wanna see your list.

Regardless if you could squeeze it in, if it comes at an innoportune time, you're slowed down by a turn.   

Say you have a three land hand and they all enter tapped. Then you're screwed.

Since when was commander a T3 format? I know your Narset deck and somebody's Animar deck are in the ballpark but that's not what most people are playing against.
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Munchlax on March 24, 2015, 01:03:56 PM
Quote from: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 01:02:57 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 12:37:35 PM
Quote from: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 12:33:31 PM
Quote from: Skullguy725 on March 24, 2015, 12:15:36 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 11:51:13 AM
Don't run lands that will enter tapped if at all possible.  If it hits tapped, that slows you down by a turn, which is bad.

Yeah but temples are useful late game

The problem with the "don't use tap lands" philosophy is that unless you're using all your mana every turn /it doesn't matter/. If you have a perfect curve where you're tapping out every turn then I advocate not running tap lands and wanna see your list.

Regardless if you could squeeze it in, if it comes at an innoportune time, you're slowed down by a turn.   

Say you have a three land hand and they all enter tapped. Then you're screwed.

Since when was commander a T3 format? I know your Narset deck and somebody's Animar deck are in the ballpark but that's not what most people are playing against.
Ahoy there you mentioned me
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Munchlax on March 24, 2015, 01:05:05 PM
Quote from: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 12:40:28 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 12:35:24 PM
If you're to the point where you are just hoping to top deck something good, you've already lost. You did your thing and it just wasn't good enough, so you're trying to pull something out of your butt. :P

Not entirely true. You could be on a stable board waiting for a combo piece. You could be hoping to answer a threat so you can break stalemate. You could be waiting for a burn spell as your opponent sits at one life.

If you really think you should never be top decking then every deck you ever run ought to have a hella good draw engine.
Also, with Slivers you shouldn't be waiting for a combo piece. He should be tutoring for a way to win
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 24, 2015, 01:06:58 PM
Keep in mind this is a creatideck that doesn't use animar... So t3 win is all but impossible.... I'll run 1/2 and 1/2.
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 02:04:25 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 01:35:13 PM
Quote from: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 01:02:57 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 12:37:35 PM
Quote from: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 12:33:31 PM
Quote from: Skullguy725 on March 24, 2015, 12:15:36 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 11:51:13 AM
Don't run lands that will enter tapped if at all possible.  If it hits tapped, that slows you down by a turn, which is bad.

Yeah but temples are useful late game

The problem with the "don't use tap lands" philosophy is that unless you're using all your mana every turn /it doesn't matter/. If you have a perfect curve where you're tapping out every turn then I advocate not running tap lands and wanna see your list.

Regardless if you could squeeze it in, if it comes at an innoportune time, you're slowed down by a turn.   

Say you have a three land hand and they all enter tapped. Then you're screwed.

Since when was commander a T3 format? I know your Narset deck and somebody's Animar deck are in the ballpark but that's not what most people are playing against.

I wasn't saying turn 3. Just took an average hand. If in that situation all of your lands enter tapped, you will be seriously behind.

Really? Cause in my games of commander nothing really interesting happens until T3+ unless somebody is playing an inexpensive commander.
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 02:43:38 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 02:28:49 PM
Then that isn't competitive commander.

Apparently. Regardless the odds of drawing enough tapped lands in a 99 card deck to significantly slow you down is hardly worth the fuss. Besides, if you draw three check lands in your starting hand you've still got the same problem. 
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Munchlax on March 24, 2015, 03:13:57 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 02:28:49 PM
Then that isn't competitive commander.
Competitive commander is French commander. Multiplayer commander should be a friendly environment to play. Not t3 win. Animar isn't even my multiplayer deck. Animar is my French deck. The list that's on here isn't even my real list. Every game doesn't have to be competitive. But every game should be fun
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: LinkCelestrial on March 24, 2015, 05:32:36 PM
Quote from: Munchlax on March 24, 2015, 03:13:57 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 02:28:49 PM
Then that isn't competitive commander.
Competitive commander is French commander. Multiplayer commander should be a friendly environment to play. Not t3 win. Animar isn't even my multiplayer deck. Animar is my French deck. The list that's on here isn't even my real list. Every game doesn't have to be competitive. But every game should be fun

This.
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Spencer Addington on March 24, 2015, 05:53:06 PM
Quote from: Munchlax on March 24, 2015, 03:13:57 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 02:28:49 PM
Then that isn't competitive commander.
Competitive commander is French commander. Multiplayer commander should be a friendly environment to play. Not t3 win. Animar isn't even my multiplayer deck. Animar is my French deck. The list that's on here isn't even my real list. Every game doesn't have to be competitive. But every game should be fun
That's what my sliver deck is supposed to be.
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: Munchlax on March 24, 2015, 06:16:14 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on March 24, 2015, 05:53:06 PM
Quote from: Munchlax on March 24, 2015, 03:13:57 PM
Quote from: Taysby on March 24, 2015, 02:28:49 PM
Then that isn't competitive commander.
Competitive commander is French commander. Multiplayer commander should be a friendly environment to play. Not t3 win. Animar isn't even my multiplayer deck. Animar is my French deck. The list that's on here isn't even my real list. Every game doesn't have to be competitive. But every game should be fun
That's what my sliver deck is supposed to be.
Thelon is my multiplayer decl
Title: Re: New question!! Temples vs. Checklands
Post by: MuggyWuggy on March 24, 2015, 08:09:20 PM
I run vivid lands

Prismatic omen is pretty good also, especially if you're super nuts and run blood moon also

Descendants path t3 and a sliver on board is all you need to win w slivers