Magic 2014 "Hunter's Strength" Decklist and Strategies

737 posts / 0 new
Last post
In some screenshots, you can clearly see at least 1 Nature's Lore, Prey Upon and Garruk's Companion.  Also in the shot that showed the Staff of the Wild Magus, there are 2 Oakenform, not 1 (because why not include 2 enchantments with the same cost as Blanchwood Armor but that are substantially worse?  Mediocrity seems to rule the day for 2014).
This is my list so far (11/35 cards, 4/?? creatures, 7/?? others):


>=1x Prey Upon


>=1x Gloomwidow


>=1x Bramblecrush


>=2x Staff of the Wild Magus


>=1x Sacred Wolf


>=2x Oakenform


>=1x Kalonian Tusker


>=1x Garruk’s Companion


>=1x Nature’s Lore


 
i suppose this is where someone says oakform looks better than armor in a sealed deck that splashes green....like chandras land grabber in a deck with a red splash XD
Yeah, it's certainly possible they gimped the rest of the game to accomodate sealed.  Which is very disappointing if true.
Yeah, it's certainly possible they gimped the rest of the game to accomodate sealed.  Which is very disappointing if true.


One of those "Careful what you wish for"s.
As long as they don't completly mess up the balance, I don't mind them scaling back the powel level a bit. Especially if it means being able to make my own sealed decks (with virtual booster opening and all) and play them against others online.
Oakenform does seem like a better sealed card, but the "downgrade" could just be an attempt to scale back the power a bit in a healthier manner. I don't know, but I never really cared for Blanchwood Armor and the type of gameplay it promoted. Obviously, being an aura isn't great in a hostile environment, but if it sticks it can make the game very lopsided. Slapping them on Companions felt fair (even if BoF players hated me for doing so), but it's when you start getting things like Dungrove Elder + Armor. Felt a lot like the Troll+Armor/Hammer days of '09 and honestly, I just think it leads to poor gameplay for a Duels game.
I never minded playing against Blanchwood Armor.  The Elder or a Primal Huntbeast + the armor is annoying to deal with for certain decks, but it's not a consistent enough combo to be game breaking, most decks do have ways to deal with it (or outrace it), and it doesn't grant trample so even if you're playing one of the few decks that can't deal (AoW and RG), they can still chump it while they set up other plays.  And the fact that those decks don't have answers is more of a problem with those decks than it is with the armor itself.
I think Auras should me more powerful as a rule (Blanchwood Armor is very powerful when you think about it) to get past the inherent "2-for-1" fear. I really think that hexproof is broken overall and that shroud is the keyword that should see more print. An Aura should be good enough to be worth its single-turn effect (like a sorcery) with an added bonus of sticking around if the opponent is unable to remove the creature.

I hate hexproof.
Yeah, so long as they can't toss Blanch on anything with Hexproof AND Trample, I think it's perfectly fine. Not to mention if it has Trample but not Hexproof they run the risk of instant speed 2 for 1 versus untapped mana.

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

Yeah, so long as they can't toss Blanch on anything with Hexproof AND Trample, I think it's perfectly fine. Not to mention if it has Trample but not Hexproof they run the risk of instant speed 2 for 1 versus untapped mana.



But that's the kind of interaction that makes skilled players win against unskilled players; the skilled guy knows when to pick his spots. The unskilled guy runs hexproof dudes and just tramples on in unabated. I prefer a skill-based game with luck as minor element to keep things interesting.
I like the strategy considerations; you can go turn 2 Companion, turn 3 Blanch, and start running in with the quick trample damange, or you can b patient and do the turn 3/4 Huntbeast and have the safer Aura target, but then lack the trample. Each is good in different matchups, so the flexibility is neat and it's your own fault if you choose the wrong one to use in particular game (given both are available as options.) Gloomwidow and that 3/3 for 2 just don't live up. One can't block and the other doesn't trample and we haven't seen a Hexproof yet and in any case we're seeing 2 Oakenform instead of Blanchwood so far. So far this deck isn't even PI, and PI wasn't as good as Forest's Fury, IMO. Aggro PI is faster but Ramp PI is as faster or slower and has a lot fewer control options compared to FF.

I really hope every unlock is awesome for these decks and that they didn't drag the constructed decks down to Sealed level for some bizarre reason. The only legitimate one I could think of is if you can "save" a sealed deck you got a particularly nice pull on and use it against the normal decks in multiplayer or something. Even then, I don't know about you, but I'd keep playing Sealed pools against the AI unti I got a pull much better than these lists. But maybe that's the point. I really doubt they put that much effort in though. These are the same people who CBA to fix bugs after the first expansion release. 

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

looks top tier lol
jk
So far it does seem a little weaker and more bland than 2013's version but still better than what has been shown in Chandra's deck so far in my opinion.

Eye kneed teh speelchequer bach!

I keep hearing those stories about Garruk's Companions enchanteds by Blanchwood Armors and how 3 toughness is not that important aside from some burn spells and I keep asking myself: Am I the only one playing against GG? Am I the only one playing against OD?

Bottom line, the new kid (or beast) on the block is better than Companion most of the time.

Also, vanilla does not means bad. Leatherback Baloth is better than 90% of the creatures at his mana cost. And don't forget Tarmogoyf and Wild Nacatl are virtual vanillas...

Still not impressed with the deck (only a little happy to see Master of the Wild Hunt. I loke this card), but those were just some comments that came to my mind...

WotC doesn't care about flavor. Their forum is the only place where an ORC can kill a troll...

Lost around 120 posts in the forum migration

Post #1000 on Feb 02, 2013

Post #2000 on Sep 04, 2013

I keep hearing those stories about Garruk's Companions enchanteds by Blanchwood Armors and how 3 toughness is not that important aside from some burn spells and I keep asking myself: Am I the only one playing against GG? Am I the only one playing against OD?

Bottom line, the new kid (or beast) on the block is better than Companion most of the time.

Also, vanilla does not means bad. Leatherback Baloth is better than 90% of the creatures at his mana cost. And don't forget Tarmogoyf and Wild Nacatl are virtual vanillas...

Still not impressed with the deck (only a little happy to see Master of the Wild Hunt. I loke this card), but those were just some comments that came to my mind...



ANyone running Last Kiss main deck is bad anyway.  

Leatherback isn't vanilla.  3 cost 3/3 is vanilla.  2 cost 2/2 are vanilla.  3 cost (even if all green) for a 4/5 is aggressively costed...as such..not vanilla.  If you intend vanilla to mean no special abilities, consider the Bears and Centaur as Generic Vanilla made with artificial vanilla, and Leatherback Baloth as Breyer's All Natural Extra Creamy Vanilla, on sale, and you have a coupon to boot. 
I keep hearing those stories about Garruk's Companions enchanteds by Blanchwood Armors and how 3 toughness is not that important aside from some burn spells and I keep asking myself: Am I the only one playing against GG? Am I the only one playing against OD?

Bottom line, the new kid (or beast) on the block is better than Companion most of the time.

Also, vanilla does not means bad. Leatherback Baloth is better than 90% of the creatures at his mana cost. And don't forget Tarmogoyf and Wild Nacatl are virtual vanillas...

Still not impressed with the deck (only a little happy to see Master of the Wild Hunt. I loke this card), but those were just some comments that came to my mind...



ANyone running Last Kiss main deck is bad anyway.  

Leatherback isn't vanilla.  3 cost 3/3 is vanilla.  2 cost 2/2 are vanilla.  3 cost (even if all green) for a 4/5 is aggressively costed...as such..not vanilla.  If you intend vanilla to mean no special abilities, consider the Bears and Centaur as Generic Vanilla made with artificial vanilla, and Leatherback Baloth as Breyer's All Natural Extra Creamy Vanilla, on sale, and you have a coupon to boot. 



Do you know that vanilla is an official term (well, not official in the means of a document or something, but official as used by R&D members) to refer to creatures without abilities? No matter how aggressiely costed our Baloth friend is, he's still a vanilla dude.

Also, it's vanilla if it gets boosted by Muraganda Petroglyphs. Thanks for making me remember one of my favorite cards

And Last Kiss is not a big problem, but replace every Companion in PI with one of those new beasts and you basically can't lose to GG. Considering GG's fame, that's an impressive feat.

WotC doesn't care about flavor. Their forum is the only place where an ORC can kill a troll...

Lost around 120 posts in the forum migration

Post #1000 on Feb 02, 2013

Post #2000 on Sep 04, 2013

replace every Companion in PI with one of those new beasts and you basically can't lose to GG. Considering GG's fame, that's an impressive feat.


Why replace them? I'd love to see a 4-pack of both making for an actually good mono green deck.
Hi! I run a YouTube channel at YouTube.com/user/NemosChannel. I upload Duels of the Planeswalkers gameplay, deckbuilds, and even Tier List videos. It's the best place for strategy and silly humor. Drop by and see!
Vanilla usually means bad though.  And we're not exactly criticizing this deck because of its abundance of Leatherback Baloths.

The tusker will slow GG more than the companion will, but it's not like GG has a deficit in other options.  Saying you can't lose with it...that's quite the exaggeration.
Vanilla usually means bad though.  And we're not exactly criticizing this deck because of its abundance of Leatherback Baloths.

The tusker will slow GG more than the companion will, but it's not like GG has a deficit in other options.  Saying you can't lose with it...that's quite the exaggeration.



They can't remove the Tusker with Shock, and Gempalm Incinerator will require a lot of setup. Meanwhile, many goblins can trade with Companion, but can't attack into Tusker without the help of Goblin Chieftain. And even than, the Chieftain has to stay back because he can't trade with Tusker. That one point of toughness IS a big deal.

Criticize that deck as you wish. As I said, I don't like it too. But don't criticize a good card that was spoiled with it just to prove your point. Actually, I don't remember if it was you doing it, so, my apologies if it wasn't. But I'm pretty sure I read this somewhere in the forum today.

WotC doesn't care about flavor. Their forum is the only place where an ORC can kill a troll...

Lost around 120 posts in the forum migration

Post #1000 on Feb 02, 2013

Post #2000 on Sep 04, 2013

I criticized the Tusker in comparison to Garruk's Companion - it's a weaker card.  In most circumstances I still think the Companion is better.  You have a good point about the Tusker being better against goblins (though it is not even close to 'can't lose' with it).  Against almost every other deck, I'd prefer the Companiion.  
I criticized the Tusker in comparison to Garruk's Companion - it's a weaker card.  In most circumstances I still think the Companion is better.  You have a good point about the Tusker being better against goblins (though it is not even close to 'can't lose' with it).  Against almost every other deck, I'd prefer the Companiion.  



Since we won't convince each other about it and we have both in the deck, I don't think this is a big deal

WotC doesn't care about flavor. Their forum is the only place where an ORC can kill a troll...

Lost around 120 posts in the forum migration

Post #1000 on Feb 02, 2013

Post #2000 on Sep 04, 2013

I feel it's the other way around for me. Trample felt largely irrelevant on Companion unless you actually have the pumps. Otherwise, it felt like it traded way too easily with other cards. This is where I feel three toughness on such an early creature will be huge making me appreciate the Tusker a bit more.

Addition: Also, three toughness looks nice when fighting early too.
Garruk (to me) is about surviving early with undercosted creatures, then beating them down with bomb after bomb later game. Tusker into Baloth pretty much shuts down any deck for a few turns. Companion either chumps and dies, or attacks and dies while carrying 1 damage over, without dropping a pump spell on him, but there are usually better options in these decks.
Vanilla usually means bad though.


"Vanilla" is a creature with no abilities. nothing more.

People treat vanilla as bad when they are overcosted or not especially efficient.
6 for a vanilla 6/4 is bad.
3 for a vanilla 4/5 is good.
3 for a vanilla 2/2 is bad.
1 for a vanilla 2/2 is good. 

etc.
I tend to agree that the Tusker would generally have been slightly more powerful in Pack Instinct than the Companion.  He's a better tempo generator because he doesn't trade with most other early drops, at the same time that he's a better defensive creature (which is something I think PI needs more of in the 2- and 3-drop spot).  Also combos way better with Ulvenwald Tracker and Prey Upon.  Ultimately I think that would outweigh the Companion's combat trick potential (and I don't like Blanchwood Armor in such a removal-heavy format).  If I could have both in PI, I'd probably try running 3 Tuskers and 2 Companions.

I suspect Tusker will probably be better for this deck than Companion would be, too.  Now, if those depressing Oakenforms were Boar Umbras instead, I might feel differently.

I think Companion is a slightly more powerful card in a straight aggro deck with a low curve and a focus on value creatures and combat tricks.
Friends don't let friends run Oakenform. There was no excuse for this. Elephant Guide, Boar Umbra, Moldervine Cloak, heck, Vulshok Morningstar, pick any of those. That's just off the top of my head, and not including cards that actually do much other than increase size. Not to mention all those work just as well in multicolour Green. Mono-Green has Blanchwood Armor. Some of those cards had better be in the unlocks if they're going to waste deck space on bloody Oakenform.

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

Vanilla usually means bad though.



According to whom?

'Vanilla', used as a slang term, almost exclusively means 'basic' or 'ordinary'.
Some people may consider the ordinary to be strictly inferior to the extraordinary, but that's a matter of opinion.
I love that Muraganda Petroglyphs.  That would rock in something like PI.  Start out with Tuskers and Baloths, get them pumped up, then bring in the big tramples (if you haven't won already).  I hate the set-up on that set of cards the Petroglyph is in.  Not sure what set it is...but it looks like crap.

To find a helpful Magic the Gathering DotP community that cares, go to: http://www.nogoblinsallowed.com/viewforum.php?f=38

Join my Tournament Notification Group for announcements involving upcoming tournaments!

Steam Profile Name: Nebula

Vanilla usually means bad though.



According to whom?

'Vanilla', used as a slang term, almost exclusively means 'basic' or 'ordinary'.
Some people may consider the ordinary to be strictly inferior to the extraordinary, but that's a matter of opinion.



In the context of this game ordinary is inferior when every other card is better.  "Bad" definitionally is a matter of opinion.
That would be future sight, the distorted frame was meant to represent that you were getting a glimpse of possible themes in the future of magic the gathering.. Yeah, it was a weird set
Vanilla usually means bad though.


"Vanilla" is a creature with no abilities. nothing more.

People treat vanilla as bad when they are overcosted or not especially efficient.
6 for a vanilla 6/4 is bad.
3 for a vanilla 4/5 is good.
3 for a vanilla 2/2 is bad.
1 for a vanilla 2/2 is good. 

etc.



Obviously.
Vanilla usually means bad though.


"Vanilla" is a creature with no abilities. nothing more.

People treat vanilla as bad when they are overcosted or not especially efficient.
6 for a vanilla 6/4 is bad.
3 for a vanilla 4/5 is good.
3 for a vanilla 2/2 is bad.
1 for a vanilla 2/2 is good. 

etc.



Obviously.


Yeah, so... 2 for a Vanilla 3/3 isn't bad.
New video. In this one we can see at around 6:50 that's there's 3 Prey Upon's in the main deck, and no other 1-cost cards. The card on the side that's half covered up is a Kalonian Tusker, this is nothing new. Neither is the Master of the Wild Hunt being the first unlock.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CXxkkaab6g
Hi! I run a YouTube channel at YouTube.com/user/NemosChannel. I upload Duels of the Planeswalkers gameplay, deckbuilds, and even Tier List videos. It's the best place for strategy and silly humor. Drop by and see!
7:34 into that video = promo unlocks = possibly more than 30 unlocks like 2013. They may just not have them revealed to us in the game like last time. If so, we can't complain about deck strength yet as seen earlier.
Also, right at the end of the video, we see that there's at least one Sentinel Spider in the deck.

"People are like sausages: it's what's under the skin that's important... so poke them with a fork periodically."

"Lif is too short."

He also has 2 Kalonian Tuskers in his opening hand, so there is at least two of that card in the main deck.

Still think the deck seems fine. 
Still think the deck seems fine. 


The deck seems to be about on par with it's 2013 version. With a little more removal and/or aggro creatures (hopefully a full play set of Tuskers and Companions) it could be very decent.

I don't like that Garruk's deck is always focused on beasts because I think it takes away from what could be a more interesting green deck (like Forest's Fury in 2012), but I do hope the deck will be a good one.
Hi! I run a YouTube channel at YouTube.com/user/NemosChannel. I upload Duels of the Planeswalkers gameplay, deckbuilds, and even Tier List videos. It's the best place for strategy and silly humor. Drop by and see!
Still think the deck seems fine. 


The deck seems to be about on par with it's 2013 version. With a little more removal and/or aggro creatures (hopefully a full play set of Tuskers and Companions) it could be very decent.

I don't like that Garruk's deck is always focused on beasts because I think it takes away from what could be a more interesting green deck (like Forest's Fury in 2012), but I do hope the deck will be a good one.


THat's why Yeva was in 2013.
Still think the deck seems fine. 


The deck seems to be about on par with it's 2013 version. With a little more removal and/or aggro creatures (hopefully a full play set of Tuskers and Companions) it could be very decent.

I don't like that Garruk's deck is always focused on beasts because I think it takes away from what could be a more interesting green deck (like Forest's Fury in 2012), but I do hope the deck will be a good one.



Well mono green beatdown is pretty much a magic archtype, so having a deck dedicated to it makes sense in dotp and Garruk fits that archtype. Doesn't mean we can't have another "more interesting" mono green deck