30 Creatures - Because I Can

[darkfrogger]

I recommend using Steel Golem instead of Lava, Less cost, and bring some stability to deck.
Also is the combo hard to pull off, as that's the image I see from a quick view of it.
Anyways will check back into it sooner or later.

That's a good idea too. As to the combo itself, it's usually easy to pull off because auto-mulligan ensures that you have a one or two damselflies every draw. but sometimes you can get stuck with no fireflies or only gemfinders which sucks.

[headshrinker]

What will happen if use  Mark and take some Precognition make the deck thiner?

[darkfrogger]

Then you won't be able to get fireflies out as quickly and it won't have 30 creatures.

[Conchobear]

Looks interesting but the Damselflies might be too necessary.

[omegareaper7]

Looks interesting but the Damselflies might be too necessary.

Without damselflies it wouldn't work. 

[Conchobear]

Looks interesting but the Damselflies might be too necessary.

Without damselflies it wouldn't work. 

Exactly so it seems like if you don't start off with them in your hand your gonna have a tough time getting things going.

[omegareaper7]

Looks interesting but the Damselflies might be too necessary.

Without damselflies it wouldn't work. 

Exactly so it seems like if you don't start off with them in your hand your gonna have a tough time getting things going.

Note: it should have fire mark, so it wouldn't be hard to get started at all.
Also, the deck has essentially ten pillars (the costless creatures) so you will likely always start with at least one damselfly on hand.

[Conchobear]

Looks interesting but the Damselflies might be too necessary.

Without damselflies it wouldn't work. 

Exactly so it seems like if you don't start off with them in your hand your gonna have a tough time getting things going.

Note: it should have fire mark, so it wouldn't be hard to get started at all.
Also, the deck has essentially ten pillars (the costless creatures) so you will likely always start with at least one damselfly on hand.

Right I see now. Thanks!

[blacob]

i'm using the deck in pvp to mess with people.  it's a fun little mess around deck.  One matchup that i kept running into was the aggro on aggro matchup and i would sometimes barely win just because i won the coin toss.  I thought that this could be a much easier matchup for this deck so i tried running Vanadium wardens in place of the lava golems and they are great!  they buy you the one or two turns that you need to outrace other aggro decks.  they also stop problem creatures for the deck like otyughs, maxwell's demons and mind flayers. 



Love,



Blake

[Conchobear]

i'm using the deck in pvp to mess with people.  it's a fun little mess around deck.  One matchup that i kept running into was the aggro on aggro matchup and i would sometimes barely win just because i won the coin toss.  I thought that this could be a much easier matchup for this deck so i tried running Vanadium wardens in place of the lava golems and they are great!  they buy you the one or two turns that you need to outrace other aggro decks.  they also stop problem creatures for the deck like otyughs, maxwell's demons and mind flayers. 

Ah so that's the change you were talking about. We just faced each other, My IGN is Zer0de.

[TribalTrouble]

Just wondering, is it possible to make an unupped variation that works well?(Obviously can't use fire but...)

[Aves]

Nope. All the unupped versions cost 1 quanta. So unless you feel like playing 6 creatures off your mark so that they can generate the quanta necessary for 6 more creatures which generate the quanta for 6-12 more creatures which generate the quanta for the rest... then no.
Oh, and then there's auto-mulligan, which doesn't work because all of your cards have a cost.