Vintage Madness Primer (Part 1 of 2)

[Matt The Great]

Quote (bebe @ Sep. 22 2003,21:16)Remember, if you are going the Berserk route, Bounty is six extra damage and a possible creature in the grave or Wurm.

Bounty is not a discard outlet. You have to remove the green card from the game.

[iLL_Dawg]

Don't have a lot of time right now (just stopped at a public computer to check my email, etc.).  I would just like to pop in and say that I loved the strip in the main that I was playing last Saturday, and half of the reason I loved it was the 2 maindeck riftstone portals.  They turn bazaars into a colored mana source, do the same to the strips, and make volcanic islands tap for anything except for black.  Riftstone portal is the only thing I know of that can improve your manabase by being thrown away to bazaar; I think that's reason enough to run them.

@Hyperion: for the love of god, update my decklist!!!! I almost cried when I looked at the list in your primer, it's so old.  If you could toss in the list from my last report, it would be most appreciated.  I'm still looking for a way to toss in anger#3 again, and I have been meaning to test out crop rotation, but on the whole the list is a lot more reflective of what I'm currently playing than what I saw when I reads your primer.

Also, logic belongs on the board, I'd run 4 of them before running a single REB after having tested them last weekend.  They were that good games 2 & 3.

Hope this helps

-=ADAM=-

[Hyperion]

Quote  Riftstone portal is the only thing I know of that can improve your manabase by being thrown away to bazaar; I think that's reason enough to run them

...and yet, it's another card that you rarely (if ever) want to see without Bazaar. There are plenty of such cards available already. The notion of playing mana sources that need to be discarded to improve the utility of other mana sources is not one that I agree with.

Quote @Hyperion: for the love of god, update my decklist!!!! I almost cried when I looked at the list in your primer, it's so old.  If you could toss in the list from my last report, it would be most appreciated.

You may not have noticed, but I was attempting to trace the evolution of the deck with time, with major advancements in it listed in chronological order. Thus, I used your version from last April, as opposed to a more recent list. However, I can add a link to your recent tournament report if it means that much to you. I would prefer to keep the April list in there for the reasons I've already mentioned, though.

Quote Also, logic belongs on the board, I'd run 4 of them before running a single REB after having tested them last weekend.  They were that good games 2 & 3.

It would take more than you saying "they worked well last weekend" to make for a very convincing argument, in my opinion. To the best of my knowledge this was the first time you used them in a sideboard. Moreover, I think I already expressed interest in how you used your sideboard with 4 Logics at those tournaments, but did not receive a reply yet.  I would still be interested in seeing a detailed analysis/ commentary. I think a case can be made for sideboarding Circular Logic and I would be more supportive of it if such an analysis were presented.

With that said, the issue I have with running Circular Logic over REB is that you really need a Bazaar or Wild Mongrel in play before you can use it effectively. When you consider that either of these cards (REB or Logic) would usually be brought in against control decks, and that resolving Wild Mongrel is going to be more difficult against these decks - assuming they recognize it as a must counter, which usually happens -  Circular Logic loses much of its appeal. I think REB is better against Hulk because of the potential to hit a resolved Tog every now and then, and better against Phid decks to hit resolved Phids, Control Magic, and Future Sight.

Furthermore, this conditionality makes it difficult to use effectively against combo decks as well. Often, you won't have the time to resolve Wild Mongrel with mana open for Logic. Also, it usually happens that combo decks run proactive disruption in the way of Duress, and in many cases Cabal Therapy as well. For this reason, more proactive disruption like Tormod's Crypt (and Chalice of the Void, after Mirrodin is legal) is preferable.\n\n

[SummenSaugen]

Quote ...and yet, it's another card that you rarely (if ever) want to see without Bazaar. There are plenty of such cards available already. The notion of playing mana sources that need to be discarded to improve the utility of other mana sources is not one that I agree with.

Au contraire, it's a card you don't want to see without a discard outlet, just like Arrogant Wurm or Roar of the Wurm.  But you run those, don't you?

Quote It would take more than you saying "they worked well last weekend" to make for a very convincing argument, in my opinion. To the best of my knowledge this was the first time you used them in a sideboard. Moreover, I think I already expressed interest in how you used your sideboard with 4 Logics at those tournaments, but did not receive a reply yet.  I would still be interested in seeing a detailed analysis/ commentary. I think a case can be made for sideboarding Circular Logic and I would be more supportive of it if such an analysis were presented.

My analysis, having tested with and against this deck many times, is that the Circ Logic is the call based on reasons Adam's already noted:  The fact it stops Deed and the fact it stops combo parts.  It's not awkward, especially in direct comparison to Red Elemental Blast:  Both are going to cost one mana, but one stops everything with a wee little bit of conditionality.  Another thing I don't believe Adam has said but I'd like to point out regardless is that if you have nothing in hand (a common occurance) and you tap bazaar in response to something that could end the game, you can potentially find Logic and stop whatever it is from doing its job.  Red Blast will fall to your yard and be a whole lot of useless.

Quote With that said, the issue I have with running Circular Logic over REB is that you really need a Bazaar or Wild Mongrel in play before you can use it effectively. When you consider that either of these cards (REB or Logic) would usually be brought in against control decks, and that resolving Wild Mongrel is going to be more difficult against these decks - assuming they recognize it as a must counter, which usually happens -  Circular Logic loses much of its appeal. I think REB is better against Hulk because of the potential to hit a resolved Tog every now and then, and better against Phid decks to hit resolved Phids, Control Magic, and Future Sight.

Much of the process of playing in a competitive environment is metagaming.  Nobody is playing UrPhid anymore, so the arguments about Phid based cards are pointless.  Even I have ditched that deck in search of something slightly less Parfaitesque in strength.
As far as Hulk, generally losing the ability to stop an already resolved tog to gain the ability to stop a deed conditionally is preferable.  We have discovered in testing (granted a majority has been on MWS considering the lack of a strong Tog presence in the area) that this is in most cases true.

Quote Furthermore, this conditionality makes it difficult to use effectively against combo decks as well. Often, you won't have the time to resolve Wild Mongrel with mana open for Logic. Also, it usually happens that combo decks run proactive disruption in the way of Duress, and in many cases Cabal Therapy as well. For this reason, more proactive disruption like Tormod's Crypt (and Chalice of the Void, after Mirrodin is legal) is preferable.

Obviously Crypt is still a bomb, and for that reason it remains a sideboard card indefinately.  However, it doesn't hurt to add Logic in to help out, as generally messing your opponent up is preferable to pooping out a dude and losing the following turn.  Your arguments that it won't help because it's too slow are illogical:  the deck is slower than logic.  If logic is too slow, the combo deck should never lose to you.  Thus, sideboard space would have to reserved for other, more 'beatable decks'.  Clearly this isn't the reality, as even the dreaded long.dec is not always going to goldfish turn one or two against you, and often will take till three or four, especially if strip mine shows up.

Considering a vast amount of Madness' mana base is 0 cost artifacts, Chalice may not be what the doctor ordered.  This I can admit to however I have not tested at all and am merely speculating.  I have no more to say on the subject.

[Hyperion]

Quote Au contraire, it's a card you don't want to see without a discard outlet, just like Arrogant Wurm or Roar of the Wurm.  But you run those, don't you?

The difference is that these are both effectively used with the other eight discard outlets (Lion's Eye Diamond and Careful Study), whereas Circular Logic is not.

Quote My analysis, having tested with and against this deck many times, is that the Circ Logic is the call based on reasons Adam's already noted:  The fact it stops Deed and the fact it stops combo parts.  It's not awkward, especially in direct comparison to Red Elemental Blast:  Both are going to cost one mana, but one stops everything with a wee little bit of conditionality.

It is true that it has its advantages over REB (I didn't say otherwise!). However, from my experience against Hulk, I think a resolved Psychatog is much more of a problem, because intelligent play allows the Madness player to avoid getting wrecked by Pernicious Deed. It comes back to the observation I made earlier that there are far fewer dependable discard outlets with which to use Circular Logic against control decks. In this case, that would be Bazaar, as I don't want to have to rely on resolving Wild Mongrel to be able to use Logic effectively.

Quote Obviously Crypt is still a bomb, and for that reason it remains a sideboard card indefinately.  However, it doesn't hurt to add Logic in to help out, as generally messing your opponent up is preferable to pooping out a dude and losing the following turn.

My concern with this strategy is that one would be siding in enough reactive cards to the point that the Madness deck can no longer function as it should. I rarely side in/out more than four cards at a time because it's such a tight deck and all the components work together to make it run smoothly.

Quote Your arguments that it won't help because it's too slow are illogical:  the deck is slower than logic.  If logic is too slow, the combo deck should never lose to you.  Thus, sideboard space would have to reserved for other, more 'beatable decks'.  Clearly this isn't the reality, as even the dreaded long.dec is not always going to goldfish turn one or two against you, and often will take till three or four, especially if strip mine shows up.

Considering a vast amount of Madness' mana base is 0 cost artifacts, Chalice may not be what the doctor ordered.  This I can admit to however I have not tested at all and am merely speculating.  I have no more to say on the subject.

To reiterate a point made in the matchup analysis against combo decks, I suggested that the optimal strategy is to resolve a Wurm (of either variety) ASAP, especially if you have a Crypt as well to shut off use of Academy Rector or Yawgmoth's Will. This is a little less relevant against Long.dec, but much more so against Tendrils decks because using life as a resource for Bargain is more central to the combo player's strategy here. In either case, the goal is to goldfish even with the consequence of slight card disadvantage result, and hope that 1) they stall out, or 2) you have a Crypt. A more reactive card like Circular Logic would not bode well with this strategy. A very proactive card like Chalice is excellent, however. Madness does run a lot of artifact mana but not enough to the point that it gets crippled by a Chalice for zero. Furthermore, as I also noted above, there's no reason why you can't just play it out first and then drop Chalice. It's been said many times in many threads here already, but Chalice is ridiculous and I will be running four in my sideboard when Mirrodin is legal. I honestly think Chalice of the Void's presence will bode very well for Madness in general, because in addition to having access to Chalice itself, the wacky converted mana costss on many of the madness/flashback cards make Madness almost invulnerable to Chalice on the opponent's side of the board.

[Thug]

Just a quick question - Have you ever considered Mana Crypt? When I tested the deck with 1 it looked pretty promising, nice work btw.

Koen

[Justin]

I run Crypt, and I find it invaluable.
The 2 colorless is very important in terms of reaching the madness cost for the Arrogant Wurm, and flashing Roar of the Wurm back. The 1.5 damage a turn is usually negligible once big bodies are on the board.
Not to mention the draw 7's, which you should have no problem playing first turn if you were to draw a crypt.

[Hyperion]

Re: Mana Crypt

This is probably a card that should be included in the analysis, so I'm glad you mentioned it. I have considered it, and I have seen other Madness players run it. While I think it is justifiable to use Mana Crypt - after all, Sol Ring is in there - there are a few reasons that I don't advocate it myself. I will use the mana base I presented for the "Virtual Insanity" decklist here as a reference.

-Assuming I kept the same number of mana sources, were I to make room for 1 Mana Crypt I would have to cut multilands, fetch lands, the lone Forest, or the artifact mana currently in the deck.

-I would be reluctant to cut multilands or fetchlands, because Madness needs as many colored mana sources as possible - between the maindeck and sideboard it is heavy in all three colors. In addition, Wastelands will put additional stress on this portion of the mana base, so additional redundancy is needed to overcome them. For that reason, I think this part of the mana base is untouchable, and that the configuration I present is the bare minimum you can get away with. Then you could make a case for cutting the Forest. I like having it in there as a more robust mana source in the primary color and as a way to avoid getting shut out of the game by Blood Moon, but this would be more feasible than cutting multilands/fetch lands, in my opinion.

It would obviously not be wise to cut the on-color Moxen, Lotus, or LEDs. So then it comes down to Sol Ring or Mana Crypt, and I would always go with Sol Ring because it's just less of a risk, and will do the same thing most of the time except for possible first-turn plays.

To summarize, if you were inclined to use Mana Crypt, I think it would just have to be in place of the Forest or the Sol Ring because there's nothing else that should be cut. It was essentially process of elimination that led me to that conclusion, and that doesn't even take into account the additional vulnerability to Null Rod, Powder Keg, Pernicious Deed, Sphere of Resistance, Chalice of the Void, and just randomly losing to Mana Crypt damage if you stall out because you won't have a way to get rid of it. In response to Justin's points, I would say that the damage is *not* negligible when 1) you run Deep Analysis, and 2) you aren't as fast as dedicated combo decks. I would consider running off-color Moxen before Mana Crypt.

I will add Berserk and Mana Crypt into the card-by-card analysis soon, and provide a link to iLL_dawg's current list, as per his request. Are there any other issues people have with any part of the primer?\n\n

[greedo]

I have not tested Madness too much, but I had a deck together for a while.  Is there a possibility that Manabond could be good?  At times it acted like another Lion's Eye Diamond.

Manabond

Color= Green  Type= Enchantment  Cost= G EX®  
Text (EX+errata): At the end of your turn, you may reveal your hand and put all land cards from it into play. If you do, discard your hand. [Oracle 2001/08/24]

The lands are put into play during the resolution of the ability. [Barclay 1998/06/10]
Putting a land into play does not count as playing a land. [Barclay 1998/06/10]
You discard all the cards still in your hand after you put the lands into play. [D'Angelo 2001/08/24]

I found this primer a good read, by the way, good job.

Jason

[pernicious dude]

Quote  effectively used with the other eight discard outlets (Lion's Eye Diamond and Careful Study), whereas Circular Logic is not.

How does Circular Logic not work with LED?

[Matt The Great]

Manabond isn't used pretty much because it is not better than any of the madness outlets that ARE used. It doesn't draw you cards, it doesn't attack, it doesn't give you mana.

When he said Logic doesn't work with LED, he meant the following situation:

Opponent: Spell.
Madness: Sac LED, Logic it. Burn for two.

Not a lot of places to sink UU at instant speed.

[Hyperion]

Re: Manabond

Matt:TG summed it up pretty well. Here's part of what I said on it in a thread in the Unregistered forum:

Quote It may be good in an opening hand, but obviously much less so in the mid- to late game when you don't have extra lands in hand and Manabond 's effect is basically "G: Discard your hand." Granted, sometimes that's all you need to get rolling, but at that point any number of Madness outlets would do the job and you'd be able to get other uses out of them...the arguments I've seen in favor of it basically can be summarized by saying that it will occasionally give you broken opening hands, and after that serve as another medium to discard madness/flashback/ Incarnation spells while being otherwise useless. To me, that's not a strong enough argument for running it.

Quote How does Circular Logic not work with LED?

It works - I said it wasn't used effectively with LED. Perhaps that was unclear from the way I said it. In addition, there is an obvious lack of synergy between the two, in that playing reactive spells that will sit in hand for a couple turns don't work well with the proactive nature of Lion's Eye Diamond. That is the more important point I was trying to make in my previous argument, and I probably could have done it better. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[iLL_Dawg]

Run logic on the board.  There are plenty of places to sink UU at instant speed if you need to sac an LED for logic.  You have no idea how many times I have sacced an LED in the past couple of weeks to play a logic and an arrogant wurm in response to someone's messed up junk.  Even if they have a counter in hand, they have to decide between letting the wurm resolve or letting the logic resolve.  If they have double counter backup, and they use it, you just won the game because you will bazaar into more stupidity next turn if you are playing the deck even close to right.  

Or, alternately, do not run logic in the board.  Don't run the strip, either.  Don't run the riftstone portals in the main.  Don't even run bazaars if you feel like it.  I would love it if everyone else who played the deck played very bad cards and lost a lot.  It would just make it easier for me to win with good cards.  

Just for the record, the technical reason why I am putting logics over REBs in the board is because of the statistical breakdown of my deck pre- and post-sideboard in the most common matchups.  Often, I find myself siding out tempers (misdirection exists, togs don't care) against control.  Now, my build runs 28 cards that do good things for you when you throw them away.  That means you should see 1.5 of them, roughly, every time you draw a card and then turn a bazaar sideways.  If you side out stuff that works when you throw it away and side in stuff that doesn't, you dilute that.  You end up seeing stuff fall uselessly into the yard that shouldn't.  That isn't cool.  You want to abuse bazaars, right? You want it to be card advantage, not card disadvantage, right?  Well, you do that by boarding in stuff that has synergy with bazaar whenever you board out stuff that has synergy with bazaar.  My only exception to this rule is throwing in pillars over anals in any aggro matchup.  That’s just common sense, though.  C’mon, people, think about it.  Also, if you are being a good player and waiting to resolve that wurm, that’s burning a hole in your pocket EOT against the control player, you have 3 mana open to hardcast logic if you have to.  It happens, it’s not that hard.

My thoughts on stuff that might change in the deck: I played 2 studies over the wheel and the twister (windfall turned into a walk a while ago).  I came in third, I was not impressed.  The only person I lost to all day was Andy Stokinger playing Hulk.  Hulk was the match that was supposed to improve when you put in studies in place of wheel and twister.  I beat hulk by resolving a wheel last week.  Twister owns hulk all day long.  I still don’t like paying 3 mana to win the game, sometimes, though.  I am considering trying crop rotation in one3 of those 2 slots, and then tossing one of the draw-7’s back in the other slot.  Also, I am thinking of throwing pillars into the maindeck over the deep annals, because the annals seem to be too slow and they get pulled for the pillars A LOT, I mean almost every matchup.  They seem to own most aggro, combo, and control.  That’s not bad.  My only problem with the switch is diluting the deck’s synergy with BoB and wild mongrel.  LMK if you have done any testing with any of these ideas, and how they have been working for you.

Hope this helps

-=ADAM=-

[BillTheDuck]

Ben, the primer was obviously helpful because that other guy read it and made a few metagame choices based on it. He also did VERY well in a HUGE tournament.

Just because Hyperion didnt create the deck doesnt mean he cant write a primer and try to be helpful to people. Why bash his efforts whether you like them or not.

Also, taking out a careful study doesn't signify that they are bad. I would argue that 3 is probably the right number anyway.

[wuaffiliate]

I guess madness running careful study will never place well in a fully powered metagame full of top tier decks. boohoohoo.

[Rico Suave]

Quote (iLL_Dawg @ Sep. 29 2003,03:57)Run logic on the board.  There are plenty of places to sink UU at instant speed if you need to sac an LED for logic.  You have no idea how many times I have sacced an LED in the past couple of weeks to play a logic and an arrogant wurm in response to someone's messed up junk.  Even if they have a counter in hand, they have to decide between letting the wurm resolve or letting the logic resolve.  If they have double counter backup, and they use it, you just won the game because you will bazaar into more stupidity next turn if you are playing the deck even close to right.  

We can take Bazaar out of this because it wins regardless of REB or Logic.  In fact, the more important aspect is when the deck doesn't have Bazaar on the board, and how the two cards perform in that instance.  REB would always be useful in that situation, whereas Logic could very easily have no outlet and be dead.  

I will admit Logic seemed very attractive at first, but the reason I didn't like it after testing is because Logic is more conditional and it takes longer to set-up.  The early game is more important than ever nowadays, and having cards to support that early game is the key to win with any deck.  

Quote Just for the record, the technical reason why I am putting logics over REBs in the board is because of the statistical breakdown of my deck pre- and post-sideboard in the most common matchups.  Often, I find myself siding out tempers (misdirection exists, togs don't care) against control.  Now, my build runs 28 cards that do good things for you when you throw them away.  That means you should see 1.5 of them, roughly, every time you draw a card and then turn a bazaar sideways.  If you side out stuff that works when you throw it away and side in stuff that doesn't, you dilute that.  You end up seeing stuff fall uselessly into the yard that shouldn't.  That isn't cool.  You want to abuse bazaars, right? You want it to be card advantage, not card disadvantage, right?  Well, you do that by boarding in stuff that has synergy with bazaar whenever you board out stuff that has synergy with bazaar.  My only exception to this rule is throwing in pillars over anals in any aggro matchup.  That’s just common sense, though.  C’mon, people, think about it.

That's nice, but Bazaar still wins even with four missing cards.

I also find it funny that you have an exception because of "common sense."  I'm curious as to where your common sense was when you decided to use Logic, when REB is far superior against the entire reason for that SB slot, Tog.

Quote Also, if you are being a good player and waiting to resolve that wurm, that’s burning a hole in your pocket EOT against the control player, you have 3 mana open to hardcast logic if you have to.  It happens, it’s not that hard.

REB does that same thing, only better.

Quote My thoughts on stuff that might change in the deck: I played 2 studies over the wheel and the twister (windfall turned into a walk a while ago).  I came in third, I was not impressed.  The only person I lost to all day was Andy Stokinger playing Hulk.  Hulk was the match that was supposed to improve when you put in studies in place of wheel and twister.  I beat hulk by resolving a wheel last week.  Twister owns hulk all day long.  I still don’t like paying 3 mana to win the game, sometimes, though.  I am considering trying crop rotation in one3 of those 2 slots, and then tossing one of the draw-7’s back in the other slot.  Also, I am thinking of throwing pillars into the maindeck over the deep annals, because the annals seem to be too slow and they get pulled for the pillars A LOT, I mean almost every matchup.  They seem to own most aggro, combo, and control.  That’s not bad.  My only problem with the switch is diluting the deck’s synergy with BoB and wild mongrel.  LMK if you have done any testing with any of these ideas, and how they have been working for you.

I tried taking out Deep Anals for a bit, but I wasn't really satisfied because they are great mid-game boosts without sacrificing early tempo.  It's easy to simply pitch them and save them for later, whereas things like Pillar, although powerful, not only eat up precious early game mana, but also don't provide nearly as much mid-game boost.

Crop Rotation is interesting.  I haven't tried it.  I do have my reservations though, considering the card it would replace, Careful Study, also finds Bazaar, but is additionally a madness outlet, a card drawer, and doesn't require sacrificing a land to increase mana screw.

The Careful Study issue has been rehashed over and over again.  I don't want to go too much into detail, but I will try and provide a different perspective.  I remember talking with Andy (Hyperion) about how the draw-7's were what this deck wants, and then I had to tell him over the course of several days and lots of games that I never actually cast the draw-7's (and won).  I found that I could always do something better, because draw-7's are slow and clunky.  Careful Study changes that because of it's mana cost, which is IMO the deciding factor.  That relates back to my statement at the beginning of this post, where I stress the importance of the early game.  If draw-7's cost only 1 mana, I'd use them even if I only got 1/3 of the effect.  To quote Matt The Great, Careful Study is exactly that, and one-sided to boot.

[Matt The Great]

It seems to me that madness is in a uniquely good position come November. It has three huge things going in its favor:

1. Its ability to run FOUR Artifact Mutations between main and side (as dictated by the local metagame) is a huge selling point, with Workshop decks being the pile du jour.

2. It's a good deck to begin with. This distinguishes Madness from mere R/G hate decks, as regards comment #1.

3. Its near-invulnerability to Chalice of the Void. All the threats cost different amounts of mana, and it's not hugely dependent on its zero-cost artifacts (though it does use and abuse them).

Dare we hope for an aggro deck to thrive this winter?\n\n

[wuaffiliate]

TESTIFY!

cant argue with aggro that can be as fast as combo at times.

madness may not be the only aggro deck to thrive, sui will survive and be better than it is in the current metagame. i think with chalice and some shifts such as other aggro dying off will give sui a good foothold in the aggro category. plus post mirrodin i think sui now has a good chance of taking madness .\n\n

[Smmenen]

God I hope they restricte Lion's Eye Diamond.

Steve

[Hyperion]

Re: Crop Rotation

It is something I have tried before, and I believe others have as well. The point that Rico made on it that I think is important is that it is simply extraneous in that any cards it would replace are usually just better, in that they are less conditional or accomplish a similar end (i.e. making it more likely for you to draw Bazaar). Plus, Crop Rotation is a card you really wouldn't want to see unless you're mana flooded, because losing a mana source to get a Bazaar would otherwise result in considerable tempo loss.

Re: # of Careful Studies

While I have not achieved any correspondence with Serge Metz, I can only speculate that he dropped a Careful Study because it's the easiest and most tempting slot to cut in the maindeck. Were I in a position where I needed to find room for maindeck hate like he thought he did, I would probably have made a similar transformation, and as was noted in the primer, a Careful Study or two is often fine to cut post-SB against artifact prison decks anyway. However, I feel very strongly about running the full complement of Careful Studies in the maindeck barring any other metagame adaptations, because it really *is* as important as we've stressed. Careful Study is basically Ancestral Recall #2-5 in Madness- don't misconstrue this point to think I'm saying it's as good as Ancestral Recall, but the point to take away is that it provides the same functionality and often results in a similar effect in terms of net card advantage.

Matt: Those are all points I agree with, and that I hope will encourage more people to play Madness. In addition to the third observation you made, I think it is important to note that not only does Chalice have much less of an effect on Madness relative to other decks, but it also has a significant effect on Madness' more difficult matchups, as well as being accessible to Madness itself.

Wu: maybe I missed something here. What led you to the conclusion that Madness' matchup against Suicide Black would be more difficult?

Smmenen: does your remark have anything to do with Madness? If so, would you mind elaborating, or did you just find this thread a convenient place to express your opinions regarding LED?

[Ric_Flair]

Andy what happens if LED becomes restricted?  Will Madness be a collateral death to Long.dec or can the deck survive without the massive speed boost.  I seem to remember a third turn win powered by at least one if not two LEDs.  I personally think they should restrict Burning Wish, as that will only kill Long, but given WotC's inaccurate aim in the past (Dark Ritual and Mana Vault but not NECRO?!?!) I dont' see that happening.

[Ric_Flair]

Quote The restrict led stuff or some other card is off topic and should eb killed by a mod. Still, as long as it's here I'll chime in.

How exactly is this off topic?  I cast the question in light of the survival of Madness, which, if I am not mistaken is the topic of this thread.  The removal of a key element of a deck is certainly on topic in a primer thread of the deck.  If you are going to criticize my post please LEARN TO SPELL FIRST.

[wuaffiliate]

tsabos web, chalice for zero will no doubt help some. im just testing web for dragon since it will be the best post mirr combo, but i see alot of landstill and fish so it will help.

also long doesnt lose much with only 1 wish i believe mons tested that. i could be wrong :}.

also necro was right to be restricted, maybe not for the right reasons, but right now unrestricted necro would fuck the format up(untill chalice).\n\n

[mrieff]

With chalice around to kill Long, There's actually a good chanche that LED will be around.
Although chalice will damage a few aggro decks, it will compensate for the fact that it is boosting aggro-madness

[wuaffiliate]

in the end aggro will adapt, everything will adapt or die. like sui isnt hurt alot by chalice unless is played off drain or shop, but it can use it as its own weapon. everything should will follow suit, and the format will be nice and slow again(turn 3-4 is pretty damn slow).

i really think chalice will just be delt with through the same way people deal with drain. use a god damn mana curve.\n\n

[Justin]

Quote Re: Crop Rotation

It is something I have tried before, and I believe others have as well. The point that Rico made on it that I think is important is that it is simply extraneous in that any cards it would replace are usually just better, in that they are less conditional or accomplish a similar end (i.e. making it more likely for you to draw Bazaar). Plus, Crop Rotation is a card you really wouldn't want to see unless you're mana flooded, because losing a mana source to get a Bazaar would otherwise result in considerable tempo loss.

Its a minor point but one worth noting -It can fetch a maindecked Volcanic to activate either Anger or Wonder.

Im still testing it, but Im finding it to be dead or overkill too often. The deck seems to function just fine without it, but right now Im having trouble letting go of it for some reason.

It sure as hell isn't the artwork \n\n

[Hyperion]

Quote Andy what happens if LED becomes restricted?  Will Madness be a collateral death to Long.dec or can the deck survive without the massive speed boost.  I seem to remember a third turn win powered by at least one if not two LEDs.  I personally think they should restrict Burning Wish, as that will only kill Long, but given WotC's inaccurate aim in the past (Dark Ritual and Mana Vault but not NECRO?!?!) I dont' see that happening.

I won't offer my opinion on whether it should be restricted or not here because there are plenty of these discussions elsewhere on TMD. I haven't playtested Madness with just 1 LED yet, nor do I intend to unless it does get restricted; I am a little reluctant to resort to mere speculation but that's the best I can do at the moment.

I think Madness could survive its restriction, and still potentially be a viable deck, though it would be analagous to comparing the strength/playability of 1-Gush GAT to 4-Gush GAT (i.e. 1-LED Madness to 4-LED Madness). Extra discard outlets would have to be incorporated into the deck, but it would be impossible to just replace LED with those outlets because of LED's dual function in Madness as a mana source and discard outlet. Thus, whatever comes out of the maindeck to make room for these extra outlets would compromise the raw power of the deck, and potentially the potency of Bazaar as well.

It would in large part depend on the metagame at that point as well as to how viable Madness still is, were LED restricted. For example, the Madness player cannot abuse LED against control decks to the extent it can against other decks because of the risk of getting a key spell countered after dumping his/her hand and running out of steam. So, I would say that the restriction is much less of an issue in that case. Conversely, if combo and prison decks continue to dominate, the restriction would be much more painful.

[brianb]

Madness in some forms would certainly survive the restriction of Lion's Eye Diamond.  I've played something similar to Rubini's version in the original thread (with force of wills, squees, cunning wishes, and maindeck circular logic), and liked it fairly well.  It plays much less aggressively, and probably isn't quite as strong overall, but it would be an ok choice.