2/28/2012 SF: "Stitched in the Middle with You"

29 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's Serious Fun, which goes live Tuesday morning on magicthegathering.com.
What's going on with that third poll option?
Am I seeing things or does he think Archdemon of Unx makes the non-horde players have to sacrifice?
For bonus points (and my greatest admiration), how many will be added if there is a second Paradox Haze in play?

# of paradox haze -> increase in zombies
1 -> 5/4
2 -> 19/8
3 -> 65/16
4 -> 211/32

The formula is (1.5) ^ (p + 1) - 1, rounded down, where p is the number of parazox hazes you control

What if there are also multiple Endless ranks of the dead?  Each will trigger for each paradox haze.

The formula will then be (1.5) ^ ((p + 1)*e) - 1, rounded down, where p is the number of paradox hazes and e is the number of endless ranks of the dead you control.
. . . Okay, I'm seriously thinking there's a language barrier between me and other people who describe themselves as "casual players."


I'm always saying that good gaming experiences are those that are challenging, but beatable. Adam said something similar . . . but I don't see how casting An-Zerrin Ruins against a tribal deck can provide anything like the definition of "challenge" in the English language.

He comments his decks lean towards "wacky"er than many of the fans like . . . but I see the same pool of power cards you get in competitive games, and in the "casual" forums on places like MTG Salvation (which are more pro-competitive than its competitive forums).

The guy with his Newspeak signature is awfully relevant. I've never felt on the same page as casual players on the internet, and it doesn't look like that's about to change any time soon.
I really want to see a Human horde deck. It could have Unruly Mob and Angry Mob, for example. I think it would also be interesting to play that deck against the Zombie horde deck. "Would you like to play a game?"

Am I seeing things or does he think Archdemon of Unx makes the non-horde players have to sacrifice?


I think he does, even though it doesn't. I don't see how the Archdemon helps this deck at all.
woot!  I've been mentioned!  (misspelled, but mentioned)

So, yeah, casual really does describe our group.  We have a few people who play standard or modern decks that are close to tourny level, but overall, we play things like my new Bronze Bombshell/Endless Whispers deck, or my all commons/all four-of (yes, even including basic lands)/five color deck.  Or my Marsh Viper/Hermetic Study deck, or my tribal ogre (playing four Heartless Hidetsugus.

I love the idea of the waves, if we can convince people to try it again, totally trying this.
I really want to see a Human horde deck. It could have Unruly Mob and Angry Mob, for example. I think it would also be interesting to play that deck against the Zombie horde deck. "Would you like to play a game?"

Am I seeing things or does he think Archdemon of Unx makes the non-horde players have to sacrifice?


I think he does, even though it doesn't. I don't see how the Archdemon helps this deck at all.


I've definitely been reading it as "at the beginning of each upkeep, that player" instead of what it really says. (Also doesn't help that it's always been one of the cards that gets milled away by Surivors. I'm not sure the Demon has ever hit play against us!)
Adam Styborski Writer for Serious Fun Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/the_stybs
What's going on with that third poll option?


It should be an option to see cube through Sealed. Hopefully this can be fixed soon!
Adam Styborski Writer for Serious Fun Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/the_stybs
I've recieved an email about the "(5/4)X" added regarding Endless Ranks of the Dead and Paradox Haze. To be clear:

  1. I'm talking about the number of tokens added by the two triggers, not the net number of tokens you end with.

  2. I want to see the general solution for having a third trigger resolve.

I recreated my algebra for solving the example in the article, and checked it by feeding in 4 an 7 tokens in play at the start of the turn respectively. Take a look and tell me if you believe it to be wrong! Thanks!
Adam Styborski Writer for Serious Fun Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/the_stybs
What, no Rochester Draft? I think that would be the most awesome option.
IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/0a90721d221e50e5755af156c179fe51.jpg?v=90000)
Unfortunately the 5x/4 formula does not work in all cases; this is due to the fact that the effect rounds down.  Values this doesn't work for belong to the set { 1 + 4N, N = 0,1,2....}.  For example, 5 Zombies gives 5*5/4 = 6 additional zombies, whereas you actually receive 2 + 3 (=5)  zombies. (5/2 = 2, 7/2 = 3)

The number of zombies you can actually get varies from (9x-5)/4 to (9x/4), depending on whether your starting value was odd or even and whether the number after the first upkeep is odd or even.
Now I wish I had shared my own variant last week.

I had the same "Archenemy" problem as the article mentioned. Also, the rules for scaling the horde with the number of players are TERRIBLE. The more players there are, the more HP they have? That makes sense flavourfully but is the opposite of balanced. And the horde has some more cards, which means a few more late-game turns after the situation has stabilized and the horde has no hope of winning. Yay balance!

Here's how we play:



  • The life total for the team is 40, regardless of the number of players. Adjust as appropriate for the power level of your decks and your horde.

  • The horde's deck has 25 cards per players. Adjust as appropriate for the power level of your decks and your horde.

  • The humans play first (and draw).

  • No 3-turns immunity. If the horde gets a turn 1 Thraximundar you deal with it the hard way.

  • On its first turn, the horde plays the top card of its library. On the next turn, it plays the top two cards (in order), then the top three cards and so on. Doesn't matter if they're tokens or not.


So now you'll have it relatively easy in the early game, but you'd better deal with the horde *quickly* or it'll grow to unmanageable levels. It's dangerous to play too defensively, even if you do have very tough blockers. If you aren't agressive enough, the horde will start casting eight or nine spells each turn, which may well be enough to break through your defenses. There's a feel of "holding the barricades" until they break, or until the horde's frantic assault exhausts its library and you can (hopefully) wrap it up with a wrath. This also means there's a point to make the horde bigger for more players.

This variant is significantly harder. I made a fairly strong horde deck, and we lose to it about 50% of the time. Which is just how we like it: a real challenge.

(Edit: oh, and Footbottom Feast works nicely in this variant.)
. . . Okay, I'm seriously thinking there's a language barrier between me and other people who describe themselves as "casual players."

I'm always saying that good gaming experiences are those that are challenging, but beatable. Adam said something similar . . . but I don't see how casting An-Zerrin Ruins against a tribal deck can provide anything like the definition of "challenge" in the English language.

He comments his decks lean towards "wacky"er than many of the fans like . . . but I see the same pool of power cards you get in competitive games, and in the "casual" forums on places like MTG Salvation (which are more pro-competitive than its competitive forums).

The guy with his Newspeak signature is awfully relevant. I've never felt on the same page as casual players on the internet, and it doesn't look like that's about to change any time soon.


"Competitive casual" in general is fine - for an example of this, look in the archives for previous authors of this column, Anthony Alongi and The Ferrett.  The two more recent authors, Kelly Diggs and Adam Styborski, are more what I would call "wacky casual," which is also fine (although not to my taste), with Adam building decks with a higher power level/monetary cost than Kelly did.

However, I think deliberately including An-Zerrin Ruins in a deck meant to fight the horde is neither particularly competitive nor wacky - just a mistake.  Why not go all the way and put in Moat or Light of Day?  Of course it's possible to build your deck to hose a known opponent who follows a very linear line of attack - so what?  The excitement of battling zombies doesn't come when you go hunting zombies - it comes from zombies hunting you!


Adam, use one of the decks you built for taking on other human players, and see how well the ability you included in that deck to "deal with anything" copes with a surprise invasion of zombies.  Also, do a little better at giving the zombies a chance to deal with anything, even if that just means including Quagmire Druid in the deck.  It's okay for the humans to be able to win, even the majority of the time, but they should never get to feel complacent.

Thanks to everyone who helped with the design of the plane of Golamo in the Great Designer Search 2!
My Decks
These are the decks I have assembled at the moment:
Tournament Decks (4)
Kicker Aggro (Invasion Block) Sunforger/Izzet Guildmage Midrange (Ravnica/Time Spiral/Xth Standard) Dragonstorm Combo (Time Spiral/Lorwyn/Xth Standard) Bant Midrange (Lorwyn/Shards/M10 Standard)
Casual Multiplayer Decks (50)
Angel Resurrection Casual Soul Sisters Sindbad's Adventures with Djinn of Wishes Sphinx-Bone Wand Buyback Morph (No Instants or Sorceries) Cabal Coffers Control Zombie Aggro Hungry, Hungry Greater Gargadon/War Elemental Flashfires/Boil/Ruination - Boom! Call of the Wild Teysa, Orzhov Scion with Twilight Drover, Sun Titan, and Hivestone Slivers Rebels Cairn Wanderer Knights Only Gold and () Spells Captain Sisay Toolbox Spellweaver Helix Combo Merfolk Wizards Izzet Guildmage/The Unspeakable Arcane Combo Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind and his Wizards Creatureless Wild Research/Reins of Power Madness Creatureless Pyromancer Ascension Anarchist Living Death Anvil of Bogardan Madness Shamen with Goblin Game/Wound Reflection Combo Mass damage Quest for Pure Flame Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle/Clear the Land with 40+ Lands Doubling Season Thallids Juniper Order Ranger Graft/Tokens Elf Archer Druids Equilibrium/Aluren Combo Experiment Kraj Combo Reap Combo False Cure/Kavu Predator Combo Savra, Queen of the Golgari Sacrifice/Dredge Elf Warriors Eight-Post Sneak Attack Where Ancients Tread Zur the Enchanter with Opal creatures Tamanoa/Kavu Predator/Collapsing Borders Esper Aggro Mishra, Artificer Prodigy and his Darksteel Reactor Theft and Control Unearth Aggro Soul's Fire Vampires Devour Tokens Phytohydra with Powerstone Minefield Treefolk Friendly? Questing Phelddagrif Slivers Dragon Arch Fun I'm probably forgetting a few...

I think Adam may have missed the point in the Footbottom Feast suggestion. He said:


"What benefit would (Footbottom Feast and its reprints) have for the shamblers?"


Uh, how about gaining all their life back! If the Horde deck is killed by being milled, then Footbottom Feast is a Blessed Wind for the Horde. That's pretty scary... it's like the Horde as a whole suddenly became Undying, resetting to its starting life total without losing its board position.


Sure, it means that future Zombie Apocalypses or Unbreathing Hordes are less useful, but if you haven't had them already, you won't be getting to them for a little while anyway.

Yeah, I understand why my suggestion threw you for a loop. There were two things underlying it:

-The library is the Horde's life total. Restocking this life total was a good way of helping the Horde play well even when it was casting more than one spell each turn, which was another suggestion. After all, if you let the Horde cast three spells per turn, that also means that it's going to go through its library three times as fast (barring damage, of course).
-In my mind, I also let the Horde put the tokens on top of its own library. Now, I know that tokens disappear when they die, but we're thinking up our own Magic rules anyway, so why not just add that as well?

The main problem with this is that it still doesn't let the Horde overcome an overpowering opponent (it mainly makes the game go longer). I like the waves/multiple spells/adding all-around answers (I still like adding cards that deal with enchantments/artifacts to the Zombie Horde, even if they're not flavourful) suggestions that were also in the forums last week. The main thing my suggestion does is that it lets the Horde cast loads of spells each turn without becoming very weak because it goes through its library too fast.

Also, and I can't believe I didn't think of this last week, add Grave Defiler.

Edit: Quagmire Druid suggestion is really good, as it is even in-flavour. Love it. Also, I'm happy to see alextfish saw my point as well.
76125763 wrote:
Zindaras' meta is like a fossil, ancient and its secrets yet to be uncovered. Only men of yore, long dead, knew of it.
I use a Sutured Ghoul in my variant.  Definitely adds to the excitement if you don't have removal in hand.
Is there a max hand size for the Horde? and whether there is or not, I think Death Denied would work really well
Just wanted to throw in my two cents on the horde Ive been working with for a while now. The biggest trouble in the deck are one All is Dust, and two Insurrection. We used to use four of Phyrexian Rebirth, but that got a bit out of hand. It definitely helps beat down the survivors. The other things we work against, we started using Mass of Ghouls as zombie tokens, as well as Black Cats. Oh and quite a few Demons and demon tokens. Our horde has managed to thwomp a force of four players every now and then.

Wow, I can't believe I missed last week's article! Now that my focus has shifted from drafting to casual play, Horde Magic has really caught my interest.


Has anyone else had a problem with battle cry totally wrecking the Horde?  Some in my group have suggested ignoring battle cry or having it only apply to the creatures of the player who controls the battle crier, but I feel it’s important for the cards to do what they say they do.  Maybe I just need to add more board sweepers to the Horde deck?
 
One thing I'd like to see is some sort of template that can be used to create new Hordes—a recommended number of lords, sweepers, etc.

It felt similar to the problems we've had with archenemy - either the heroes get rolling and never have a problem, or the archenemy gets rolling and never feals any threat.


Ah, so I'm not the only one who's had this problem? I can't remember any instance in my playgroup where the archenemy has won a game. It could be because I only have the default Bring About the Undead Apocalypse deck.

As for Horde Magic, I find that the biggest problem is that the Horde's strength is completely random. Sometimes the Horde opens with one or two tokens and a Walking Corpse. Other times it opens with Damnation followed by Call to the Grave, essentially negating the setup turns and making it difficult for the Survivors to keep any creatures on the board. The Horde's opening is crucial, because a weak opening will allow the Survivors to go on the offensive and mill away the Horde's power cards before it gets a chance to use them. This being the case, here are two suggestions for strengthening the Horde: 1) the Horde starts with certain cards (lords or key enchantments) already in play, or 2) when certain cards would be milled for damage, the Horde casts them instead.

Instead of playing with Constructed decks, construct a cube specifically for fighting against the horde, choose N cards randomly from it, and build sealed decks from them. Ideally, the cube would contain lots of cards that are powerful against the horde, but nothing that comes close to winning the game by itself.


I'm too lazy to pull something like this off, but I like this idea even better than creating dedicated Survivor decks designed to faceoff with the Horde. It feels more flavorful to fight off the zombies with whatever happens to be lying around instead of, as Styborski put it, "a loaded gun full of silver bullets."

The excitement of battling zombies doesn't come when you go hunting zombies - it comes from zombies hunting you!


Actually, hunting zombies sounds like an interesting idea. Suppose you constructed a Horde deck that wasn't necessarily meant to be a challenge, but instead to be hunted for sport? You could make it a competition—keep separate graveyards for zombies defeated by each player (from the battlefield or the library), and the player with the largest personal graveyard wins. It's entirely different from the spirit of the original idea, but I don't think it's without merit.

One thing I thought of to increase the power of the horde deck as stated in the article is to allow the horde to play x/2 non-token cards per turn (where x is the number of players) except when there is only one person, but we shall ignore that for now because this is a multiplayer format...This way the horde deck has a way to deal with the increased size of the survivor battlefield even if it has more cards in its deck, because if it doesn't play cards at the same rate, it doesn't really matter how many cards are in the deck because it just can't keep up.


I like this idea for scaling the difficulty for different amounts of players better than changing the deck size. To me, it doesn't make sense flavor-wise for the zombies to say, "Wait, there's only one of them? Well, we better allocate only 25% of our resources towards dealing with him." Changing the spawn rate suggests to me that the zombies are becoming more aggressive because they sense more flesh. Plus, I don't have to count out the deck total when the Horde gets less than 100 cards. (I may have mentioned that I'm lazy.)

So, against two players, the Horde gets one spell per turn. Against four players, it'd get two spells. Against one player you could flip a coin each turn to see if the Horde gets one spell or none, and against three players you could flip a coin each turn to see if it gets one spell or two.

The problem I had come to identify with Horde decks was that it was unable to make a "comeback" once you stabilized the board. So I devised something I call "waves."

Waves work like this: after you've finished flipping tokens into your first Zombie spell, you flip up 5 additional cards, regardless of whether they're tokens or not, and cast them as well. That's it. A wave occurs every third Horde turn, with the first wave occurring on the Horde's first turn.



I like this idea! Giving the Horde a wave on the first turn should guarantee it at least has a decent start.  I wonder if having the waves occur on a set schedule creates the right feeling of tension, though?  It’s also questionable to me flavor-wise—again, I’m imagining the zombies checking their wristwatches and saying, “It’s three o’clock, time for another wave!”  I might suggest something like this: roll a die each turn, and the Horde gets a wave on a 6—add an extra die after each turn without a wave, and reset to one die after each turn with a wave.  Then and again, I was complaining about the randomness of the Horde’s strength earlier, so maybe the set schedule is best.  I’ll certainly playtest it that way first.

I think Adam may have missed the point in the Footbottom Feast suggestion...If the Horde deck is killed by being milled, then Footbottom Feast is a Blessed Wind for the Horde. That's pretty scary... it's like the Horde as a whole suddenly became Undying, resetting to its starting life total without losing its board position.


I think the problem with the Horde using Footbottom Feast is that it would put a group of non-token cards together.  That being the case, the Horde would get several turns in a row were all it did was cast one spell, with no tokens as backup (unless you’re playing with an alternate rule for the Horde to cast spells).  Of course, this depends on whether you treat Horde tokens as regular tokens (which can’t come back from the graveyard) or as creature cards with converted mana cost zero—is there any consensus on how to treat them?

Of course, as Zindaras pointed out, restocking the library is really just going to extend the length of the game rather than make it more challenging.

I think Adam may have missed the point in the Footbottom Feast suggestion...If the Horde deck is killed by being milled, then Footbottom Feast is a Blessed Wind for the Horde. That's pretty scary... it's like the Horde as a whole suddenly became Undying, resetting to its starting life total without losing its board position.



I think the problem with the Horde using Footbottom Feast is that it would put a group of non-token cards together.  That being the case, the Horde would get several turns in a row were all it did was cast one spell, with no tokens as backup (unless you’re playing with an alternate rule for the Horde to cast spells).  Of course, this depends on whether you treat Horde tokens as regular tokens (which can’t come back from the graveyard) or as creature cards with converted mana cost zero—is there any consensus on how to treat them?


Of course, as Zindaras pointed out, restocking the library is really just going to extend the length of the game rather than make it more challenging.




Well, I think there's slightly more to it. I haven't played any Horde games, but if the Horde has any way of eking through damage (evasion and the like, or stuff like Vengeful Dead in this deck, which is another must-have in my opinion, allowing the deck to force through damage where it would otherwise not be possible), simply prolonging the game would also be an effective way of making it scarier. But, as I said, I made the suggestion with the idea of letting the tokens go back on top as well. I would also be curious to see if the Horde deck ever runs out of cards before it wins. If it is almost out of cards, Footbottom Feast is a pretty good card to have up your sleeve.

A variant on this would be to do automatic reshuffling of the library. Horde cards (including tokens) go to the graveyard. When the Horde's library is exhausted, reshuffle the pile and start again. Only cards removed by dealing damage directly to the Horde's face get to disappear forever. That would make the game less about surviving and more about attacking through a massive horde, but it's a possible variant.
76125763 wrote:
Zindaras' meta is like a fossil, ancient and its secrets yet to be uncovered. Only men of yore, long dead, knew of it.
It felt similar to the problems we've had with archenemy - either the heroes get rolling and never have a problem, or the archenemy gets rolling and never feals any threat.

 

Ah, so I'm not the only one who's had this problem? I can't remember any instance in my playgroup where the archenemy has won a game. It could be because I only have the default Bring About the Undead Apocalypse deck.



Archenemy can be a great format, but it does require attention to deck strengths. The key principle which should be flashed in large letters in front of any group considering playing Archenemy is:

The Archenemy scheme decks are balanced for three heroes. 

This means that if you just  have two heroes, the scheme deck will be extremely strong; in this case you need to make sure that the heroes' decks are significantly stronger than the archenemy's. On the other hand, if you have 4+ heroes, the scheme deck won't be strong enough; you need to make sure that the archenemy's deck is significantly stronger than the heroes' decks.

These effects vary somewhat with the strength of the cards you're using; I've played Cube Archenemy and there the power of the individual cards is high enough that the schemes are a bit less significant. OTOH, with something like Sealed Deck Archenemy the schemes would be a stronger component of the Archenemy's resources than with typical casual decks.

The mistake we make is trying to use Archenemy as a default option when we have 3 players, because 3-player chaos is a horrible political drawn-out mess. If you let everyone have roughly equal decks, the Archenemy just wipes the floor with the heroes without the heroes ever feeling they had a chance. You need to remember the schemes are balanced for three heroes and scale the decks' power levels accordingly.
Due to the fact that I was using more enthusiasm than attention when reading the hoard article originally. The better mistakes are listed below:
The Hoard goes first. This is flavorful because people like living their little lives in blissful ignorance: circumstances dictate that those people will either adapt or succumb to the pressure of the hoard.
Seperate the life totals: that way if a player runs out of life he is removed from the game. That player gone will mean more zombies for everyone else...nom.
Whenever the hoard would draw a card from an effect it acts the same as the turns draw step; i.e exile cards until you get a non-token card put that card then put onto the battlefield with all the exiled tokens: this turns simple card drawing into a swarm of zombies. Think like a wave but a little more randmized and removable...

on an unrelated note my zombie hoard does not have any rares or sweepers, but it does have enough card drawing and recursion to sneak in some games with undying and death effects to be annoying.

On a final note: do not play hoard without tokens; it is way too slow. I tried it, and need tokens for the second hoard deck I made...
Of course, this depends on whether you treat Horde tokens as regular tokens (which can’t come back from the graveyard) or as creature cards with converted mana cost zero—is there any consensus on how to treat them?


Well, if you literally treat Horde tokens as regular tokens, then they cease to exist immediately since they start the game in the library.  I would treat them as creature cards.

As I mentioned in a previous thread, the tokens don't even have to be actual tokens - they could just be some distinguished subset of creatures (e. g., all common creatures).  It's probably easier to find a bunch of Scathe Zombies than it is to find a bunch of Zombie token cards anyway.
I think I have the formula for the total number of tokens.  I can't think of a cleaner way to calculate this because of the rounding, though.

Let f(x) = [(3x) - (x mod 2)]/2

(That gets us 3/2 of the original zombies, and subtracts out the extras.)

For each Paradox Haze, you'll need to run the function on itself again.

1 Haze =
f(f(x))

2 Hazes =
f(f(f(x)))

...and so on.

That gets you total Zombies, so you just subtract x at the end to get total tokens added.

Example with 5 Zombies.

No Haze:
f(5) - 5  =  [(15 - 1)/2] - 5 = 7 - 5  = 2 tokens

One Haze:
f(f(5)) - 5  = f(7)  - 5 =  (21 - 1)/2  - 5  =  10 - 5  = 5 tokens

Two Hazes:
f(f(f(x))) - 5  = f(10) - 5 = (30 - 0)/2  -5   = 15  - 5  =  10 tokens
If you want to get rid of the rounding you can replace the (x mod 2) with a variety of periodic functions - sin²(x*PI/2) is one, (1 - (-1)^x)/2 is another. 

So, for example, f(x) = (6x - 1 + (-1)^x)/4 will work as the number of zombies after the first upkeep.  If you like you can keep replacing x by that formula, but it starts to get complex very quickly!
My play group came up with a horde format that we think could function as a "boss" horde. Appropriate for anyone who wants to have a horde that can only be defeated by a team of people explicitly designing their decks and working together to bring down the monstrosity. I realize this is a lot of rules but my mates and I played a couple games and really enjoyed it once we got rid of some stupid loopholes. The idea is that everyone can go ahead and put in those moats and engineered plagues and whatever else- the horde will still wreck you if you don't really give it your all and get a little lucky.

Rules:
This first set is basic rules/symantics.
-Survivor decks are EDH. 
-Horde deck doesn't vary at all, 120 cards, 40 2/2 zombie tokens, 14 5/5 zombie tokens, and the 66 below listed cards. 
-The horde goes first and there is no three turn get-ready period.
-Tokens are treated as vanilla creature cards with zero mana cost. 
- The horde sustains damage in the same way as originally described.
-The horde loses when it has no cards in deck and no cards in play. This is the only way for the horde to lose and the only way for the survivors to win.
-The provided list of cards leads the horde to make choices- these choices are made optimally unless the horde is deciding which player to target with an effect, this is done randomly.
-Horde uses method of playing cards previously described in this forum in which one card is played on the first turn, two on the second, three on third...
This is facilitated by the horde drawing the requisite number of cards each turn and having infinite mana to play them with. The horde must play,cycle, or discard all the cards it draws in a turn. Horde may discard any card it chooses to.
- The horde's creatures do not have haste but must attack each turn if able. Survivors share blockers as in two-headed giant. The horde cannot block.
-Player's share a starting life total that is equal to 20*number of survivors.
-The horde contains cards with activated abilities, any one ability may be used one time per human survivor per turn. So boneknitter can regenerate six zombies per turn if there are six survivors, and withered wretch can also remove six cards per turn if there are six survivors. 
-The horde's graveyard has hexproof.
This is where it gets interesting...
- If at the end of the horde's turn the horde has no permanents in play, the survivors each gain ten life and may each draw a card.
- On the fourth turn the horde plays a free copy of Relentless Assault. On the eight turn it plays two copies of Relentless Assault, the second being played during the 3rd main phase. On the 12th turn it plays 3 copies, the third copy being played during the 4th main phase....this pattern continues.
- On the fifth turn the horde plays a free copy of Vindicate. On the tenth turn it plays two copies of Vindicate, on the fifteenth turn it plays 3 copies of Vindicate...
That's the game; in our experience you end up building a team in much the same way you would in a WoW party that's taking down a specific boss...gotta have someone with lots of fogs, and nevermore effects...helps to have some fighters with lots of creatures and removal. Etc.
Finally, here's the list of cards we used for our 66...sorry I don't have MTGO and I'm not tech-savvy enough to link all of these!










































































































Unholy GrottoGloomdrifterDawn of the DeadDance of Shadows
GravecrawlerInfectious HorrorQuagmire DruidWoebearer
BoneKnitterSoulless OneGravepurgeAphetto Vulture
Nim DeathmantleUndead WarchiefFootbottom FeastDeathbringer Thoctar
Grave TitanCabal ConditioningSmokespew InvokerGempalm Polluter
PlaguebearerVengeful DeadUnbreathing HordeGeth, Lord of the Vault
Rotting RatsCall to the GraveZombie MasterGravespawn Sovereign
Shepherd of RotCruel RevivalPatriarch's BiddingHelldozer
Withered WretchGolgari RotwurmCackling Fiend Mikaeus, the Unhallowed
AnethamancerGrimgrin, corpse-bornEndless Ranks of the DeadNefashu
Death BaronHavengul LichDiregraf CaptainBlack Cat
Zombie ApocalypseCoat of ArmsTwilight's CallSedris, the Traitor King
Fleshbag MarauderLightning ReaverDelerium SkeinsLim-Dul the Necromancer
Cemetary ReaperNoxious GhoulHypnoxPhage, the Untouchable
Dark TriumphSyphon FleshDevouring StrossusThraximundar
Phyrexian crusaderVengeful PharoahBaneful OmenArmy of the Damned
Wit's EndOverwhelming Forces
My play group came up with a horde format that we think could function as a "boss" horde. Appropriate for anyone who wants to have a horde that can only be defeated by a team of people explicitly designing their decks and working together to bring down the monstrosity.

Interesting. Seems that the horde has a lot of tricky decisions to make though (best Vindicate targets, for one thing). It would be hard to make those decisions by commitee and against your interests. Your rules seem more suited to a sort of Archenemy variant, with one player actually controlling the horde.
My play group came up with a horde format that we think could function as a "boss" horde. Appropriate for anyone who wants to have a horde that can only be defeated by a team of people explicitly designing their decks and working together to bring down the monstrosity.

Interesting. Seems that the horde has a lot of tricky decisions to make though (best Vindicate targets, for one thing). It would be hard to make those decisions by commitee and against your interests. Your rules seem more suited to a sort of Archenemy variant, with one player actually controlling the horde.



Yeah, that would probably be fun as well- I really like the appeal of everyone being on the same side though.