Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

MadAdaM
This is my low-budget version of the Ill-Feyted deck (credit goes to the original creator of the deck):

[ Jungle ]
4x mantid (together with pack attack and hunt should help making razosaurs and piranha effective)
4x razosaurs
4x piranha
4x savage kobo (get ambush)
4x pack attack
4x ambush (combo with nobbling trickster)

[ Forest ]
4x faerie enchantress (get pack attack)
4x nobbling trickster (combo with ambush)
4x horde of animals (minion/card advantage)
4x hunt

As usual, I would be happy to get your comments about it. Being low-budget, the deck lacks of the big guys, but it should be quick enough to manage with the opponent's ones. Beside Mantid, everything else costs less than three power points, which thing would allow for multiple draws. What do you think?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

Quintivarium
A good pack attack deck -- and yours appears to be good -- is a nice addition to almost anyone's repetoir.  But every pack attack deck I've seen or tried (including yours) has been dreadfully inconsistent.  When it works, it seems invincible.  But then it fizzles so badly that the opponent is probably unaware he dodged a bullet.  There are three problems that may be insurmountable (at least with present factions).  The first is drawing enough pack attack quickly enoungh that the opponent can't load lanes with dominant minions before pack attack makes much difference.  Faerie enchantress (which forces a forest faction component) is absolutely necessary to give drawing multiple pack attack a reasonable probability, but it is not always sufficient.  The second problem is drawing and maintaining more minions than one's opponent.  While one can often deploy cheap minions quickly, it is hard to prevent an opponent from destroying them just as quickly.  And there are few counters to high health or regenerative enemies before pack attack really kicks in.  And finally, there is no stopping aura destruction cards (especially calm seas) given one is tied to jungle and forest factions.

The original ill-feyted deck used giant constrictors and deepwood ash in part because they made a formidable deck even without pack attack.  Your deck gives this up.  On the other hand, your deck has more potential to make pack attack work in the first place -- hunt could be just the card to remove cheap opposition (like kobos).  And the savage kobos to draw ambush may also be a good idea.  Certainly your deck is also faster without time-consuming cost 5 cards.

I am a bit worried that almost all your minions have only 1 health -- you are very vulnerable to mass effects like stormship or fire rain.  

And I have a couple specific suggestions.  First, I've found piranhas pretty ineffective -- they trigger before the pack attack so pack attack does not allow their special unless they survive to the following turn (which is rare).  I would suggest toxipedes instead -- both for the health and the poison (which is fast enough to be actually useful).  And you might find that dactyl hatchlings are nearly as effective as the razorsaurs, but at lower cost.  (I've found with decks containing mainly weak units that it is rare to play a razorsaur opposite a previously damaged minion.  Unfortunately, I think the razorsaur triggers before the ambush.)  
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

MadAdaM
I agree with you concerning Piranhas, while I like Razosaurs pretty much. Even if they trigger before Ambush, I believe most likely they still would face an already damaged minion (possibly finishing it off and attacking on the now empty lane).
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

Quintivarium
You may be right, I haven't actually tried the deck, which might change my perception (although I'm not sure I trust the AI as an opponent here).  My thinking on the razorsaurs is as follows.  I would use them over dactyl hatchlings only under one of the following conditions:
A.  I can insure a razorsaur lands in a favorable lane while I cannot insure the hatchling will.  This requires at least 2 unfavorable open lanes and at least 1 favorable lane.  My guess is that this will be infrequent.  (My guess could be wrong.)
B.  There is a partially damaged enemy in an open lane, and I prefer to inflict 1 point of health damage on it over attacking in a different lane.  Given the composition of the deck, a partially damaged enemy will almost always be due to pack attack (only mantids have much likelihood of hurting an enemy, and if that enemy clears the lane of my mantid, my razorsaur wont make much dent in it and won't survive to assist with pack attack).  Moreover, I would still not play a razorsaur vs. a strength 4 and probably not a strength 3 enemy unless I could kill it outright.  And vs. strength 0, 1, or 2, I would generally not prefer the razorsaur over the hatchling unless it killed the unit with its special and got an open attack.  I judge (perhaps in error) that wanting a razorsaur in this case will happen rarely.

Conversely, I only want a hatchling over a razorsaur if I can meaningfully use one extra power point on the turn.  Since the deck, not counting the razorsaurs, has 4 cost 3 cards, 20 cost 2 cards and 12 cost 0 cards, I would only be able to use hatchlings over razorsaurs if I combine playing one with itself or with a mantid in a single turn.  This will also be infrequent unless further deck changes are made.  Sometimes, nothing beats testing.  Regardless, the choice of card there will not make or break the deck.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

MadAdaM
After a few testing agains AI, I think I would play the following list:

[Forest ]
4x forest dragon
4x grizzlies
4x faerie enchantress (get pack attack)
4x nobbling trickster (combo with ambush)
4x horde of animals (minion/card advantage)
4x hunt

[ Jungle ]
4x saberine
4x savage kobo (get ambush)
4x pack attack
4x ambush (combo with nobbling trickster)

I removed Razosaurs and Piranhas (both of which I must admit are not effective) as well as Mantids (which were there just because of Razosaurs and Piranhas). I added Forest Dragons (i'm afraid some strength 4 big guys must be there) and Grizzlies (more forest minions to make hunt worth it). Last four slots were to be taken either by Giant Constrictors or by Hungry Crocodiles (both used by the original inventor of the deck) or by Saberines. In the end, I opted for the Saberines because I needed cost 3 minions and I believe this is a better choice than Hungry Crocodiles, which are less effective against small minions (they do not move to chase them and keep my minions advantage), barriers (strenght one if they are not played opposite a minion) and the opponent (same as for barriers). Saberines' only drawback is they have toughness 2 instead of 3, but I can stand that. And as you can see, I'm still keeping the deck far more "affordable" than the original version, using Grizzlies and Saberines instead of Deepwood Ashes and Giant Constrictors. What do you think? Would it work?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

Quintivarium
I have not had, and probably will not have a lot of time to test these ideas as I'm in the middle of a major Spellcraft project.  But I'll share my untested thoughts on your ideas.

I'm sorry the razorsaurs did not work -- I thought a little quickness was a nice innovation that might be very helpful to the deck concept.

Saberines are also an interesting idea -- I have never liked saberines because of their tendency to get pulled away from a critical defensive duty, but it may be more important to eliminate errant enemy minions than to maintain ideal defenses.

I am also torn on the loss of the hungry crocodiles -- there is a significant difference between 3/3 crocodiles and say 3/2 grizzlies.  Not only can a croc withstand a flamespike or ambush, it also stands 2 rounds played opposite a strength 4 creature while the grizzlies (due to the need to attack in turn), only last one defensive round.  On the other hand, there are times when one really needs to play a minion with a pack attack deck, and one can't always wait for an unopposed enemy minion to play the crocodile opposite.

If I'm looking for a strength 4 minion, unless faction is a limitation, I would probably choose jungle dragon over forest dragon -- the advantage of being able to immediately eliminate an opposing undead giant, giant constrictor, or aerovore is probably of more value in this deck than the additional health of the forest dragon.  And the jungle dragon won't get drawn off its defensive job to chase after an aeromancer better handled by grizzlies.

I respect the desire to make a cheaper version of the deck -- the original is very inaccessible to players who have not accumulated a lot of cards.  But your cheaper version is lacking something important that the original deck had -- a back-up win strategy.  Pack attack decks are highly effective if one can obtain dominant numbers of minions while 2 or more pack attack are in play -- it is very hard to equalize minion numbers while also losing 2 or more health automatically every round.  Unfortunately, due to poor draws (or good opponent play), sometimes the opponent is able to match you minion for minion -- often with superior minions.  All your deck has to handle these cases is ambush (which may require playing over an existing minion), or the hope that your minions are stronger (which is not the design of the deck).  What was nice about the original deck is that both constrictors and ash have the ability to break deadlocked lanes -- often with perfect timeing to also trigger pack attack.  Basically, there is a second way to win if the initial pack attack rush fails.  I would look for ways to achieve something comperable at less cost.

One last thought: "cheap" is somewhat a function of cards one already owns: it is probably not worthwile to go buy a saberine if one already has a hungry crocodile -- the two are pretty interchangable.  But that also means one can probably reduce deck cost by taking smaller quantities of more cards as a certain number may naturally arise out of booster packs one buys for a basic collection.  A player should probably not consider a pack attack deck until they have already purchased 5 or 6 forty card boosters in both jungle and forest -- and by that time, they likely own one copy of constrictors, ash, forest dragon, and jungle dragon.  A deck using 2 of each may require no more actual single card purchases than a deck with 4 forest dragons -- even though it uses twice as many rare cards.  A good pack attack deck definitely needs 4 pack attacks and 4 faerie enchantresses.  Most of the other cards are very interchangable.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

MadAdaM
Ok then, I'm pretty sure I would include the following cards in the deck:

[ Jungle ] 4x giant constrictor
[ Jungle ] 4x savage kobo
[ Jungle ] 4x pack attack
[ Jungle ] 4x ambush
[ Forest ] 4x faerie enchantress
[ Forest ] 4x nobbling trickster
[ Forest ] 4x horde of animals

This means I need to choose twelve more cards and I feel most of them should cost three power points. Therefore the candidates are:

[ Jungle ] hungry crocodile (tested): it could be a good option;
[ Jungle ] mantid (not tested): good strength (3), poor thoughness (1), two nice abilities (especially elusive, considering giant constrictors, savage kobo, faerie enchantress and nobbling trickster also have it);
[ Jungle ] razosaurs (tested): unworthy;
[ Jungle ] saberine (tested): it could be an option, but its ability proved negative in some situations;
[ Jungle ] savage blood-drinkers (not tested): I belive I need strength 3 minions rather than this;
[ Forest ] dragonfly (not tested): beside elusive, I do not find anything positive in this card;
[ Forest ] grizzlies (tested): it could be an option, but it has no abilities.

What would you say? Another card I could consider is the following:

[ Forest ] deepwood spider (not tested): good strength (3), good toughness (3), elusive and can remove elusive from the enemy so it would be synergic with giant constrictor. It costs 4 power points though, which means I wouldn't be able to play anything else in the same turn (beside cost 0 cards, which I could have played anyway together with a cost 5 card like deepwood ash, forest dragon or jungle dragon).

The question should be: would it make sense to play as many elusive minions as possible? I wonder if anyone as already the answer to this...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

Quintivarium
I think your judgment in wanting cost 3 cards is correct.  You definitely do not want cost 2 cards unless you prefer them to all available cost 3 cards -- regardless of price.  Likewise, you don't want cost 4 cards unless you prefer them (regardless of price) to cost 5 cards.  More cost two cards, and any cost 4 cards will almost certainly waste power points.  It is not entirely unreasonable to go with cost 1 or cost 5 cards (power point utilization could still be good).  And while you don't want auras (they mess up summoning pack attack), it is not inconceivable to have a few more spells or traps.  What the deck needs most is minion removal cards, but neither forest or jungle offers much here.  (I think that is why I like the deepwood ash in the original deck.)

The only card I question of those you definitely want to include is ambush -- I find pack attacks frequently are in the way of placing an effective ambush.  I do like ambush in that it is the only real minion removal card the deck has, but are you sure you want 4?  Something like poison darts (which is not lane specific) might work nearly as well.  Scavagers might be interesting in this deck, too (although multiple copies would be expensive).

Of the cards you suggest, grizzlies I'm sure are preferable to dragonflies, and I think hungry crocodiles are preferable to saberines, mantids, and razorsaurs.  I would not write off savage blood drinkers too quickly -- especially in PVP, I think they might draw attention away from the faerie enchantress, and they do have health to stand in for a turn against a stronger enemy.

I also think you should consider cost 5 cards (what ever dragons you own might be good). and cost 1 deepwood fey, fey spirit, and chanting druids all have some appeal (as well as elusive if you like that trait).
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

MadAdaM
What's Scavagers?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

SteveGoblin
Scavengers, Jungle, Trap: "Triggered by enemy minion being destroyed. You place a 1/1 Raptid minion in each free friendly slot"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

Hellspawn_destroyer
Mad, I tested that deck you made and Iv had extremely good luck against the AI. It came relatively easy due to it being like my play style. I will have to admit it was a good build, yes the combos were great as well, I wouldn't change it for the AI as it is now. Iv played about 3 dozen games vs the AI and have yet to test it against any multiplayer games.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

Quintivarium
In reply to this post by MadAdaM
Scavengers is an unlockable card -- you get the first copy by winning 20 games playing jungle versus human opponents.  After that, copies cost 200 gold and are unavailable except by direct purchase.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ill-Feyted deck (credit to its inventor)

MadAdaM
In reply to this post by Hellspawn_destroyer
This is the decklist I'm playtesting at the moment (still versus AI only):

[ FOREST ] 2x forest dragon
[ FOREST ] 4x deepwood spider (synergic with giant constrictor)
[ FOREST ] 4x fey enchantress (get pack attack)
[ FOREST ] 4x nobbling trickster (combo with both ambush and hunt)
[ FOREST ] 2x chanting druids
[ FOREST ] 4x deepwood fey (trying these instead of horde of animals)
[ FOREST ] 4x hunt (combo with nobbling trickster)

[ JUNGLE ] 4x giant constrictor
[ JUNGLE ] 4x savage kobo (get ambush)
[ JUNGLE ] 4x pack attack
[ JUNGLE ] 4x ambush (combo with nobbling trickster)

I'm sure you noticed there isn't any cost 3 card, but the deck seems to perform nevertheless. I'm trying to play as many elusive minions as possible. In fact, each one I included in the deck has elusive, with the only exception of the two forest dragons (which I'm playing just because I have them and I needed a couple of big guys). Let me know what you think.