Comments on: 100%: Sept. Installment pt.3 – Foreclosure of a Dream

By: Travis R. Chance

Travis R. Chance — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 13:35:42 +0000

Spoiler alert: me and Kool will be arguing soon.

By: ChrisKool

ChrisKool — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 01:51:47 +0000

Spoiler alerts are not allowed.

By: Travis R. Chance

Travis R. Chance — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 01:01:57 +0000

SPOILER ALERT: This month’s final submission is of me playing in a PE! Hang tight for the brutality that ensues!

By: Robin Russell (RoninX)

Robin Russell (RoninX) — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 20:54:19 +0000

So – where do you go from here? Do you feel comfortable running this (presumably with a few tweeks) the next time a weekend challenge event fires, or do you feel like this is mainly a “have fun bashing heads in the casual room” level of deck?

By: Travis R. Chance

Travis R. Chance — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:31:06 +0000

The critics have amassed! Indeed, I have been playing a little loose, esp. in these vids. This deck is pretty out of my comfort range, as it is almost entirely a “rip and hope” kinda build. It’s fun, but, honestly, it’s so straightforward at times, and, considering the overhauls, I get baffled in game. Do forgive my raw-doggage! Thanks for the pointers, home fires!

By: hanabito

hanabito — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:14:17 +0000

match 1 you had lethal the turn after he played panglacial wurm if you had swung out and firebolted him twice

By: Robin Russell (RoninX)

Robin Russell (RoninX) — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 17:06:49 +0000

Match 1 (against the GW deck) Game 2 – You had lethal if you cast tinstreet instead of farseek and used Sarkhan’s +1 ability. He has to block the Kavu and you deal 10.

All in all I think I would be really tempted to drop the lavalanche. Its blowout potential is big, but in the late game it is basically a falter effect (since the game ends when you attack) and it is too unwieldly in the “early” game to stem a flood.