The peer pressure is just to much, im going to do it... gulp, build a.. a... 60..card..deck...

23 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sigh...

....sigh....


damnit, ok, you got me... im going to TRY and build a 60 card deck, the peer pressure is just to much around here not to atleast try it...

I will post one as soon as I make one... Sigh... Facepalm...

sigh...

....

:/
Trust us, once you see how well they work, you'll have no desire to go back.
Well I just got finished building red and black colored 80 card deck, I just cant seem to make it any lower than 80, it just seems impossible..
If your running tutors, it's justifyable to run more than 60 cards to include situational utility cards

president obombya speaks anger prejudice and a time for US foreign air strike while the US worries about its rights

Let 'em burn [Frozen Parody]
Lets see the list, I can trim it to 60 no problem. The key is looking for those cards that are subpar, are too narrow in scope, aren't on theme, or have too much redundancy.
If you have too many cards you want to use, just split them up into 2 decks.
There are just so many good cards in the three drop bin

president obombya speaks anger prejudice and a time for US foreign air strike while the US worries about its rights

Let 'em burn [Frozen Parody]
8 3 drops  max if your running ramp.
Decks I play
Show
Legacy TezzFinityLegacy BurnModern Infect(need to break it) T2-dead
[sblock]
57307308 wrote:
Yes, but DOES HE PEE COLOURLESS MANA?
144543765 wrote:
144018173 wrote:
Serra Angel Serra Sphinx Serra Spider Though Vigilance is a poor fit for red, so I'm not sure if we'll ever see Serra Dragon. I could see Serra Demon, though.
Black Serra creature would have vigilance and fear. It would basically be Batman.
[//sblock]
Well I just got finished building red and black colored 80 card deck, I just cant seem to make it any lower than 80, it just seems impossible..



What's the deck built around?  Gut the deck of everything, yes EVERYTHING, except those cards.  If it's just a "red black" deck, then gut the deck of everything except the best/most reliable/most powerful cards you use.

The trick is to build a core of cards that make the deck what it is, and then support that core with utility cards.

and also, one of the hardest things to learn about deckbuilding is that no you can't beat every strategy in one deck.  What you CAN do is put support cards in there that will solve basic problems like dealing with potential blockers, or forcing discard of potential threats, etc.  What you CAN'T do is fill your deck with things like Sulfuric Vortex "just in case my opponent is playing lifegain" or something
Sounds like a psychological problem.  I can understand a 65 card deck but not an 80 card deck.  Change all the 4 drops to 3 drops and bam, 60 card deck that's identical to the first one.  It may seem like you have less of the cards you like, but you don't.  Your chance of drawing them remains the same.

Besides eliminating cards that are ok but not great, like people are suggesting, turn some others into 2 and 3 drops.  Anything that is good but not awesome, decrease the number.  This will effectively increase your chance of drawing the awesome ones.  Think of it as being like having more than 4 of the awesome ones, and only 4 of the good ones.  The end result is exactly the same.  The only difference is that what I suggested isn't against the rules.
Sounds like a psychological problem.  I can understand a 65 card deck but not an 80 card deck.  Change all the 4 drops to 3 drops and bam, 60 card deck that's identical to the first one.  It may seem like you have less of the cards you like, but you don't.  Your chance of drawing them remains the same.

Besides eliminating cards that are ok but not great, like people are suggesting, turn some others into 2 and 3 drops.  Anything that is good but not awesome, decrease the number.  This will effectively increase your chance of drawing the awesome ones.  Think of it as being like having more than 4 of the awesome ones, and only 4 of the good ones.  The end result is exactly the same.  The only difference is that what I suggested isn't against the rules.


You're getting your terminology mixed up, 4-drop means a card that costs 4 mana. A card that your deck contains 4 copies of is a "4-of."
Well if u could post your deck then we may be able to help u...

A typical   trying to get somewhere in the Multiverse, allons-y?

DOCTOR WHO OOOOOOOOEEOOOOOOOO OOOOOOEEOOOOOOO (I'm weird, cant help it)

Famous Quotes:

144543765 wrote:
I was browsing through some cards in gatherer and I noticed something really odd - the transforming cards from Innistrad like Mayor of Avabruck have separate comments and ratings for each side. Isn't that totally stupid? It feels as senseless as having two different pages for each side of a split card or having different pages for Nimble Mongoose with and without threshold.

56965528 wrote:
*mutters under his breath* Squinty's Wife: "What was that!?!?" Umm, I said.... umm..... ahhh.... *another smack upside the head* Squinty's Wife: "Care to try again?" *shakes head vigerously* Squinty's Wife: "That's better." ~SE++ *whimpering*

Current deck goals:

NON-AGGRO, NON-MONO RED deck (Not getting very far with it though)

Standard mono red deck for FNM next Friday

Sounds like a psychological problem.  I can understand a 65 card deck but not an 80 card deck.  Change all the 4 drops to 3 drops and bam, 60 card deck that's identical to the first one.  It may seem like you have less of the cards you like, but you don't.  Your chance of drawing them remains the same.

Besides eliminating cards that are ok but not great, like people are suggesting, turn some others into 2 and 3 drops.  Anything that is good but not awesome, decrease the number.  This will effectively increase your chance of drawing the awesome ones.  Think of it as being like having more than 4 of the awesome ones, and only 4 of the good ones.  The end result is exactly the same.  The only difference is that what I suggested isn't against the rules.



You assume they're using 4-ofs. It's possible that they could be looking at 80 singletons.
If you don't care about how powerful your deck is and you like having a different experience every time you play it then there's no reason to cut the deck down to 60 cards. Just make sure regardless of how many cards are in your deck that you have roughly 40% lands because it's not fun to be mana screwed all the time.

Have a look at 'Diversity Gamers' and 'Adrenaline Gamers' under the Timmy section www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.a...
Does that description match you?
8 3 drops  max if your running ramp.



even if your running step

8 2 dropd minimum

president obombya speaks anger prejudice and a time for US foreign air strike while the US worries about its rights

Let 'em burn [Frozen Parody]
How is this project turning out?
Sounds like a psychological problem.  I can understand a 65 card deck but not an 80 card deck.  Change all the 4 drops to 3 drops and bam, 60 card deck that's identical to the first one.  It may seem like you have less of the cards you like, but you don't.  Your chance of drawing them remains the same.

Besides eliminating cards that are ok but not great, like people are suggesting, turn some others into 2 and 3 drops.  Anything that is good but not awesome, decrease the number.  This will effectively increase your chance of drawing the awesome ones.  Think of it as being like having more than 4 of the awesome ones, and only 4 of the good ones.  The end result is exactly the same.  The only difference is that what I suggested isn't against the rules.


You're getting your terminology mixed up, 4-drop means a card that costs 4 mana. A card that your deck contains 4 copies of is a "4-of."



if your looking to combo,
    (like including cards that return cards to your hand and creatures that have enters into play abilities)
I recommend 6 of each combination piece.


president obombya speaks anger prejudice and a time for US foreign air strike while the US worries about its rights

Let 'em burn [Frozen Parody]
...yes. Cuz 6 of's are so legal
I think he means 4 of each combo piece plus at least 2 tutors
You never kno with Matt!
Trust us OP - usually, any deck can be cut down to 60 quite efficiently. Some decks tend to function fine slightly over, but the highest count I've ever seen from a pro's decklist was about 67. Typically, 60 or 61 is the nicest amount (technically, a non-60 value can sometimes be superior for land/nonland ratio finetuning).

If you're anything like me when I first started deckbuilding, when you tried cutting down a deck to 60 cards you had trouble as 'everything looked good'. Later on down the track if you ever looked back at those original lists, you might realise you had some sub-par cards in them that you were misevaluating at the time. For my own example, one of the first decks I wanted to build was a strong lifegain deck, and it was a 100 card decklist. There were a few lifegain only cards, including some number of Invincible Hymn. I didn't want to cut it when I tried trimming the prospective list down to 60 - it seemed too good. Now I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole for 99% of decks (with the other 1% being a potential singleton in certain decks).

Basically, long-story short - you may have cards in this 80 card deck which just aren't that good, and are easy cuts. Even if you don't, you're going to have a current mana curve which can be fine tuned, and some cards which are better than others. 
I'm all about super-control in MTG. If you're able to stop my shenanigans, then there aren't enough shenanigans. Lv 1 Judge Current Decklists Sweeping Beauty (Casual) A Vision of Clones (Casual) Coming soon... more decks! :-O
I had a 140 card deck once. The point was to cast Traumatize on myself and then retrace Worm Harvest. If the deck had 60 cards, that wouldn't have given me enough worms to kill someone.
Only run four copies of your best cards or cards that are key to the deck. Otherwise two copies are plenty in a 60 card deck. Plus you can have more variaty that way.