bramblecrush
Standard forum
Posted on April 13, 2014, 9:49 a.m. by Sagi007
simply put your thoughts on Bramblecrush in a controlshell.
capable of destroying plainswalkers Detention Sphere pretty much anthing that issnt a creature, land with Underworld Connections on them. even Mutavault if your opponent is tappedout.
but on the downside it cost 4mana and its a sorcery.
so what do you guys think?
There may be an argument for it over Naturalize or Fade into Antiquity in Mono-Green, but that's not Control, that's Midrange.
Honestly, I can't see it in control. Mutavault can be dealt with with the spells you usually use to deal with creatures, and no other lands are worth hitting (unless they have Underworld Connections on them). Revoke Existence is a better option if you only need to hit enchantments and artifacts. And the decks that mainly run planeswalkers are other control decks, so you probably won't be able to get Bramblecrush to resolve anyway.
April 13, 2014 10:24 a.m.
@raithe000 G/R monsters can have Domri, Xenagos, and/or Garruk.... Bant walkers has every walker in those colors... mono U has Jace... Orzhov midrange has elspeth.... I think it's safe to say that the decks mainly running planeswalkers aren't just control decks. Even if it were, how can you say you probably won't be able to get Bramblecrush to resolve anyways as if that were a good reason to not include it. Using that logic, then you probably shouldn't include creatures in your deck or any other spell, because chances are if it's useful your probably not gonna get it to resolve anyways.
Now having said that, it's still really slow and a sorcery which really makes it tough to play in a competitive setting. But, aside from combat damage G doesn't have much in the way of being able to deal with planeswalkers so it's obvious where the intrigue in the card comes from. You mentioned you were looking to add it into a control shell so the best advise we can probably give you is to find your answers to Non-Creature permanents in your other colors because regardless of what color(s) they are, they'll have effective and more efficient answers.
April 13, 2014 11:55 a.m.
@abenz419 Good catch on G/R and Mono-U. I'd consider the Bant Walkers deck to be more controll-ish, and I haven't seen Orhzov Midrange anywhere, so I didn't know about it.
It would help to know what colors you intend to run, besides green (obviously). I've been assuming Bant, but a RUG or BUG build might not have better options.
April 13, 2014 12:01 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #6
kanofudo it is an uncommon, so not good for pauper. Costs just a little too much for me. It is on the bubble of being playable. If only it cost one less.
April 13, 2014 12:58 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #7
I just look at my go to card for greed kill. Beast Within One less, instant, and can hit creatures. Unfortunately this card does not come close. That 3/3 is no big deal either.
April 13, 2014 1:01 p.m.
Control's biggest problems come from creatures, which Bramblecrush can't hit. If you're playing Black in your control deck (which you should; Azorius Control is a joke compared to Esper), then you already have Hero's Downfall , which kills just about everything you want to kill (and at Instant speed).
April 13, 2014 1:35 p.m.
I ran it in 4-color slivers a while back. The fact that you could have the mana to play it on turn two was awesome, and it dealt with a lot of the problem cards for the deck. I wouldn't suggest playing it more than a two-of, though.
April 13, 2014 6:39 p.m.
ChrisHansonBiomancin says... #10
I have used it on my sideboard in past creature-based decks and it was very good (tho it was replaced by Unravel the Aether once BNG came out in my GU Monsters deck). However, it doesn't seem necessary for Bant control since you have counterspells and a similar but better removal option with Detention Sphere . I would only use it if the colors you're playing are otherwise lacking in good removal, and only on the side.
kanofudo says... #2
that it's a 4-mana sorcery :P
in all seriousness it's just a little too mana-costly to be good in standard, but it's not bad in edh, and you can always put it in pauper
April 13, 2014 9:59 a.m.