TheManaDrain.com
February 04, 2026, 07:31:28 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: rack and ruin vs crash  (Read 851 times)
twn_domn
Basic User
**
Posts: 32


View Profile
« on: July 08, 2004, 11:20:22 pm »

Many builds in T1 have rack and ruin in the SB.  One example would be the Gay Fish deck.  However, I have found that rack and ruin does not really generate the artifact hate I would like to happen when I side it in.  

Face it, the most dominant deck that uses artifact is workshop varients, which involves tangle wire and smokestack most of time.  Too often, I run into the siutation of holding rack and ruin in my hand, can't get to the 4 mana because of sphere of resistance.  However, crash provides a nice way to deal with the resistance problem.  Tap the mt, sac the mt, and then destory the smokestack/sphere/tangle wire or whatever artifact that you hate while resistance is in play, that's a huge plus.  

Ok, granted, crash does not provide any additional benefits if 3sphere or welder is out.  However, so is rack and ruin.  Strictly speaking in term of just these 2 cards, I believe crash's alternative casting cost is actually better than rack and ruin's X2 artifact destruction.  

Am I missing something important?  Feedback is welcomed.
Logged

Ten principle of Type One by Steve, suitable for all ages and all level of playing, recommend before opening new thread:
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/expandnews.php?Article=5227
Kowal
My name is not Brian.
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 2497


Reanimate your feet!


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: July 08, 2004, 11:30:30 pm »

You have demonstrated a most fantastic ability in breaking TMD's rule number four, "Blatant Ignorance."  Congratulations![/color]
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.026 seconds with 17 queries.