TheManaDrain.com
April 25, 2019, 05:30:59 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: Fire//ice vs electrolyze  (Read 1176 times)
xouman
Basic User
**
Posts: 1082


View Profile Email
« on: January 04, 2016, 08:02:40 am »

Imagine a Uwr deck around auriok salvagers, with spirit of the labyrinth and without thirsts, no tutors other than SDT, full acceleration. Would you play a single fire//ice or an electrolyze? Main targets would be revokers and pyromancers, but also mentors, notion thief, delvers.

If the cheaper cost of fire and the versatility of ice worth over draing a card?
Logged
MaximumCDawg
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 2172


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2016, 11:16:15 am »

Logged
TheWhiteDragon
Basic User
**
Posts: 1644


ericdm69@hotmail.com MrMiller2033 ericdm696969
View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2016, 12:06:06 pm »

F/I all day long.  If you need to cast it on your turn and have a spirit out, you still won't draw and cost 1 more mana.  Tapping something is no joke (i.e. blightsteel, workshop, bazaar, golem). The 2 mana vs 3 mana is huge. Think about an opponent resolving a mentor that you counter war over on turn 1 (their turn 2 with a mox). You can play a mana and blast it for 2cmc, or you can wait a turn to electrolyze while they are untapped and have 5 monks now. Time is everything in vintage, and time often = available mana to respond.
Logged

"I know to whom I owe the most loyalty, and I see him in the mirror every day." - Starke of Rath
MaximumCDawg
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 2172


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2016, 12:32:48 pm »

F/I all day long.  If you need to cast it on your turn and have a spirit out, you still won't draw and cost 1 more mana.  Tapping something is no joke (i.e. blightsteel, workshop, bazaar, golem). The 2 mana vs 3 mana is huge. Think about an opponent resolving a mentor that you counter war over on turn 1 (their turn 2 with a mox). You can play a mana and blast it for 2cmc, or you can wait a turn to electrolyze while they are untapped and have 5 monks now. Time is everything in vintage, and time often = available mana to respond.

That's more words that I felt necessary to answer the question.

Put another way: Electrolyze and Fire // Ice are both very old cards, both been around for years.  Fire // Ice has seen pretty regular play in Vintage, Electrolyze has not.  I think that answers the question pretty convincingly.
Logged
xouman
Basic User
**
Posts: 1082


View Profile Email
« Reply #4 on: January 05, 2016, 05:42:00 am »

Thank you for your answers. Still I'm not sold, I don't think pros and cons have been considered fairly.

Being a 1 of in a full accelerated deck means that you'll likely play this spell (any of them) with at least 3 mana in play. There are thousands of exceptions, right.

Quote
Time is everything in vintage
Well, I had heard that card advantage was everything in vintage. I think a mix of both could do, along with card quality and other aspects. Otherwise cards as preordain, standstill, thirst... would not be played. I'm not saying tempo is not important: often is crucial. But drawing an extra card for the same effect seems huge. Imagine mystical tutor for 1U that would draw the card itself. Imagine lightning bolt for 1R drawing a card. And if 1 mana was so important, forked bolt would replace fire//ice

You are right, one extra mana can mean one extra turn or even more. If you want to answer a revoker having land + mox in battlefield fire is way better: you tap in response, wait until revoker is in battlefield, and then fry it. With electrolyze, wait at least 2 turns to have 3 mana to fry it, and good luck with wastes and spheres. However in the blue matchup CA is often more important. It's all about WHEN and AGAINST WHAT you want the card.

About Ice, I think it's a cute effect, but not that much useful nowadays: they can tap bazaar in response; with MWS it can sometimes avoid an imminent threat, but you are also not playing anything this turn; against golem it's nice to avoid 5 damage, but you need often to get rid of golem; BSC is not common nowadays; griselbrand can be tapped but player is ahead with it in play; mentor is going to be fired, not iced...

I suspect that fire//ice is better overall, but I expected at least some credit for electrolyze...
Logged
Wagner
Basic User
**
Posts: 820


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: January 05, 2016, 08:44:20 am »

Put another way: Electrolyze and Fire // Ice are both very old cards, both been around for years.  Fire // Ice has seen pretty regular play in Vintage, Electrolyze has not.  I think that answers the question pretty convincingly.

That is not a convincing argument though. Metagames change and cards can replace other cards. Some cards take quite a while to be discovered as useful too. For example, Mystic Remora had been around for years before it finally saw some play.
Logged
Aaron Patten
Basic User
**
Posts: 132


Mox Dragon of the Lotus


View Profile Email
« Reply #6 on: January 05, 2016, 12:29:19 pm »

Put another way: Electrolyze and Fire // Ice are both very old cards, both been around for years.  Fire // Ice has seen pretty regular play in Vintage, Electrolyze has not.  I think that answers the question pretty convincingly.

That is not a convincing argument though. Metagames change and cards can replace other cards. Some cards take quite a while to be discovered as useful too. For example, Mystic Remora had been around for years before it finally saw some play.
I remember people playing Mystic Remora as soon as it was released. 
Logged

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqvKjsIxT_8

University is just another one of those pyramid schemes like chain letters, the Freemason Society, Scientology, and... hmm... what's that really famous one? Oh yeah, Capitalism.
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 0.055 seconds with 20 queries.