|
LordSaturn posted:I bolded the question that he seems to be asking - why not play Sonic Seizure as a way to leverage dead cards? Because you're 2-for-1ing yourself. I mean, look at Lightning Bolt. You're paying R to have one card deal 3 damage. Sonic Seizure is paying R and two cards to deal 3 damage. R and 2 cards to deal 3 damage is not a very good deal when you can pay R and 1 card to deal 3 damage. It's not like you're lacking in ways to deal damage for one mana. Lightning Bolt, Chain Lightning, Lava Spike, Swiftspear, Goblin Guide, Lavamancer, Rift Bolt... Even excess lands can be fuel to Fireblasts. What the hell are we discarding to Sonic Seizure that we wouldn't rather be playing, and why are we playing that in the first place?
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 16:01 |
|
|
Yeah, that was part of my point - in an ideal scenario you would have zero dead cards. In reality, even with a great opening hand, the board can get gummed up (making more creatures useless), you've got 2-3 lands down already, etc. It seems like it's more likely that you will have dead cards in a matchup than an empty hand from playing everything. At that point you're turning dead cards into momentum. The point is that you'll never want to play it when the discard is truly random - you would always try to be sequencing it in a way that is advantageous to you. The scenario with two Sonic Bursts in hand at the same time are reason enough to not play it at all or play the lowest possible number of them. I can see why more than one can be a very bad idea, but what about exactly one?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
Emerson Cod posted:Yeah, that was part of my point - in an ideal scenario you would have zero dead cards. In reality, even with a great opening hand, the board can get gummed up (making more creatures useless), you've got 2-3 lands down already, etc. It seems like it's more likely that you will have dead cards in a matchup than an empty hand from playing everything. If you're playing a singleton bad card for topdecks play thunderous wrath because that is actually an amazing topdeck. We did the math already to shoot down sonic seizure and thunderous wrath in the legacy thread though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Because you're 2-for-1ing yourself. Yeah, I never even got into the subject of "Legacy has a million Bolt alternatives that don't 2-for-1 you". I kind of like Collateral damage, since Fireblast already chews up your excess Mountains, but there's no way it's actually necessary in Legacy, Emerson Cod posted:At that point you're turning dead cards into momentum. This is a mistake I made while I was learning Magic strategy. I was playing Tempered Steel and I was desperate to stop losing grindy games where the opponent stabilized with removal or sweepers, and so I kept putting in more and more 2-for-1 recursion sorceries - Grim Discovery and Remember the Fallen. And it just made my games worse and worse. Equipping yourself to win a game gone bad is only relevant if your deck is made of cards that can swing a game by themselves. If they've gained 8 life from Batterskull swings, Burn is pretty much flat dead no matter what, because none of your cards say "erase their board presence and draw three more gas cards to put you back in this game". Those dead mountains in your hand didn't become dead when you failed to build your deck with a card that turns them into damage, they became dead when you drew into them by letting the game go to turn 6. The bad board state when you actually lose isn't the board state that caused you to lose, and it takes a while to learn to see that instinctively. And here's another way to slice it: Sonic Seizure's best case scenario, going down to two cards so you can pitch a dead mountain for three damage? If that Sonic Seizure was a Lightning Strike, you could play the mountain, and then cast the Lightning Strike. You could ALSO play the Lightning Strike with 4 mountains in play and 2 Fireblast in hand, which is not true of Sonic Seizure. Basically, Sonic Seizure is worse than Lightning Strike in Legacy burn.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
For clarity's sake - I'm talking about Sonic Burst 1R Instant As an additional cost to cast this, discard a card at random. Deal 4 damage to target creature or player. If we were just talking about a bolt effect there are a ton of bad bolts that are better than Sonic Seizure. It's the 4 damage at instant speed that is even slightly appealing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
I was wondering about this; I went back and re-confirmed that you were talking about Sonic Seizure, and you definitely were, in your original post. Sonic Burst at least milks out an extra point of damage, but the downsides w.r.t. the random discard are still overwhelmingly important. You want the last card in your hand to be a Fireblast; Sonic Burst conflicts aggressively with that plan.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Emerson Cod posted:For clarity's sake - I'm talking about Sonic Burst Burn doesn't want to lose cards from the hand, since that slows down your clock.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
Emerson Cod posted:For clarity's sake - I'm talking about Sonic Burst Oh god so we're talking about a worse card than Sonic Seizure? Just play Flame Rift and Price of Progress, Christ. Being at instant speed isn't very important when you're leaving yourself without something to do at sorcery speed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:I was wondering about this; I went back and re-confirmed that you were talking about Sonic Seizure, and you definitely were, in your original post. I did mention them both originally, but considering how many other bolt effects are out there, I dropped Sonic Seizure from the discussion. My point is that when random discard isn't truly random, the additional cost doesn't really matter that much. If you're stuck with a Fireblast, Sonic Burst, and a land - just float the mana, sac the Mountains for Fireblast, and play Sonic Burst. People play Flame Rift, which has a fairly large drawback that's amplified by decks also playing Eidolon of the Great Revel. Is 6 life worth a card?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
Emerson Cod posted:I did mention them both originally, but considering how many other bolt effects are out there, I dropped Sonic Seizure from the discussion. Burn's game-plan is basically "It doesn't matter if I'm on an empty hand and board and at 1 life, if my opponent is at 0, I win". Considering you start with 20 life, and most of your stuff does more damage to the opponent than to you, card economy is more important than life economy. Not to say that survival is bad, and I'm sure that if there was a Flame Rift without a drawback, Burn would be playing it, just saying that the answer to "Is 6 life worth a card?" is pretty much "Apparently yes"
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Emerson Cod posted:People play Flame Rift, which has a fairly large drawback that's amplified by decks also playing Eidolon of the Great Revel. Is 6 life worth a card? Those aren't the same thing, though. 6 life is way softer than a random discard, particularly for Burn against a slower deck. Emerson Cod posted:My point is that when random discard isn't truly random, the additional cost doesn't really matter that much. The problem is that it's always random, because you don't have the time/mana to spend crafting a situation where Sonic Burst is alone in your hand with an irrelevant card. Emerson Cod posted:If you're stuck with a Fireblast, Sonic Burst, and a land - just float the mana, sac the Mountains for Fireblast, and play Sonic Burst. What if you don't get the Mountain? What if you sandbag the Fireblast as your only card in hand (a common line of play), and topdeck into your Sonic Burst? How is that better than topdecking into another Mountain or a Barbarian Ring? Try it this way: 1) ~ is a dead card if you topdeck it from hellbent. 2) ~ is a dead card unless you're holding an irrelevant card. 3) ~ can only be cast after you work yourself down to two cards in hand, and the other one is irrelevant. No card in the regular burn list has these problems. 1) Topdecking from hellbent is a regular situation in burn decks. You will do this constantly. 2 & 3) Burn plays almost no cards that aren't relevant to every situation, because the situation is always "burn the poo poo out of their face" This isn't even counting all the times where you need to force them to put instant-speed lifegain on the stack so you can beat it with another burn spell. Sonic Burst's onerous cost makes it worse at that than Searing Spear, extra point of damage or not. If you really want to hedge against land flood, run Barbarian Ring/Shard Volley/Fireblast. If you want to hedge against board stall, run Collateral Damage. Sonic Burst doesn't fix either of those problems, it's just a bad topdeck that needs another bad topdeck to function.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
The last time I got really engrossed in MTG du jour was at Theros launch, when the Standard format cycled back into the Red Deck Wins phase. I got really fixated on the proper employment of Hammer of Purphoros, for some reason. I found that a lot of people rejected it out of hand because it's use case was, obviously, to do some work on turn five or six, but conventional wisdom holds it that Red Deck just can't Win if the game goes that long. Anyway, I did a shitload of math on it and came to conclusion that the Hammer could extend the win lifespan of a deck with enough feasibility that you'd actually owe some wins to it, and the someone less obvious conclusion that it actually managed a really, really low opportunity cost because of the Haste effect and the very particular balance of burns, creatures, and speed in that very particular format. Everyone sideboarding it should have had one in the main deck. Okay yeah that's my card evaluation anecdote, hope you liked it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
i'm still listenin through this but the most recent so many insane plays podcast does a deep dive into git probe: http://www.eternalcentral.com/so-many-insane-plays-podcast-episode-43-gitaxian-probillard/
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 13:09
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:Not to say that survival is bad, and I'm sure that if there was a Flame Rift without a drawback, Burn would be playing it, just saying that the answer to "Is 6 life worth a card?" is pretty much "Apparently yes" Before anyone says "Tyrant's Choice", that does have a drawback: It opens you up to Wasteland.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 14:58
|
|
|
Kraus posted:Before anyone says "Tyrant's Choice", that does have a drawback: It opens you up to Wasteland. Yeah, needing to add a second colour of mana is a drawback in that deck. If the deck were to generally shift into RB for example, then Tyrant's Choice would have much less of a deckbuilding drawback (since they'd already be running black mana, not just for Tyrant's Choice)
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 15:18
|
|
|
But then you could play Bump In The Night! Only half serious - doesn't Modern burn do this, though? Not play Tyrant's Choice, but haven't some builds splashed for Bump? Of course Ghost Quarter and Tectonic Edge are nothing compared to the big W.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
Emerson Cod posted:But then you could play Bump In The Night! Also to play Bump you'd have to pick between weakening your fireblasts by having basic swamps or enabling Wasteland to work against you at all. Legacy Burn mana bases tend to be just mountains and fetches to enable Grim Lavamancer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Emerson Cod posted:But then you could play Bump In The Night! Modern Burn is pretty much all on the white splash now because Lightning Helix shores up the Fetch->Shock life cost and Boros Charm is functional in all forms with a minimum of 4 damage off the dome-them ability.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
I wanted to write a post about lands, but it was coming off terrible.  Anyone have any ideas?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2015 13:09
|
|
|
Lands.dec? Or just land cards in general?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:Lands.dec? Or just land cards in general? Lands and basic lands, not lands.dec in that regard. I was going to start with Wizards's statement that they weren't gonna print lands that are strictly better than basics. I had some ideas last night, but not much is coming.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
Once ever did we get a direct upgrade over basic lands - the original dual lands. Those still completely dominate every format they're legal in, hate or no hate, because they make it trivial to go to two colors. With fetchlands, they make it trivial to add a third color as well. So then we fall back to the various drawbacks. Life payments for color fixing are pretty universally recognized as the most powerful option, since your life total is easier to defend if you're casting more spells, which you can do if your mana's being fixed properly. Various taplands have been popular over time, but those depend strongly on their entire rules text - buddy lands, fast lands, scry lands, etc. Stays-tapped lands seem to very rarely be acceptable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:Once ever did we get a direct upgrade over basic lands - the original dual lands. Those still completely dominate every format they're legal in, hate or no hate, because they make it trivial to go to two colors. With fetchlands, they make it trivial to add a third color as well. Yeah. Actually, I can just do a writeup of the various types I guess? Comparing each to the basics?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
Lands: if they tap for multiple colours of mana the turn you play them they are probably good
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 13:25
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Lands: if they tap for multiple colours of mana the turn you play them they are probably good thalakos lowlands
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 13:28
|
|
|
The Eagle Has Landed So, LANDS! Wizards has gone out on record saying that they're unwilling to print lands which are  strictly better than basics. But, obviously, we can't live on basics alone. So why not run down the various non-basics that exist.The rule is, basically, mana. I won't be talking about Tabernacle or Dark Depths, since their primary function isn't mana. Basics have the inherent advantage of being basic, so you can have as many of them, which will be ignored (for obvious reasons), and once again we'll just talk deckbuilding in a vacuum (no Wasteland etc) Basics      Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, Forest. We all know and love them. Art is important, but not a part of their evaluation. Original Duals  Take one basic land type, add another basic land type, here you go. Strictly better than the basics, there's basically (  ) no circumstance when you'll have the option of a dual and not want it, it does what a basic can AND MORE.Sac Lands (Fallen Empires)  "[This] comes into play tapped. T: Add C to your mana pool. T, sacrifice [this]: Add CC to your mana pool." I was going to say that they were probably good for their time, but Fallen Empires had High Tide so... Not even that I guess? Entering tapped is the biggest bummer, but if they didn't, they'd be strictly better than basics. Storage Lands (Fallen Empires)  I can't imagine playing this, other than joke formats. There's better lands that do this kind of thing, and they're just so clunky. Depletion Lands (Ice Age, also done in an almost identical manner in Tempest and Champions of Kamigawa)  A huge disadvantage, but at least you can use them immediately. And then not use them the next turn.  Cool art though.Pain Lands (Ice Age had the Allied ones, Apocalypse had the enemy ones)  Now we're talking. Nice, simple, and they don't even hurt you if you want some colourless mana. Very solid, and a clean design. Triple Lands (Homelands)  Homelands. I can't imagine a reason to play them. Aysen Abbey kinda reminds me of the hotel I stayed in my first Judge Conference. Fetch Lands (Mirage. The bad ones)  Just like the fetches we know and love, but they come down tapped. Strictly worse than fetches. Karoo Lands (Visions. Technically the bad ones, the cycle was re-done in Ravnica Block)   Grand-daddies of the Ravnica Karoos, they're similarly good. Mono-coloured, making them worse than the Ravnica ones, and they only produce 1C rather than CC or something, but playable. Tap-Pain Lands (Tempest)  Strictly worse than the Ice Age/Apocalypse ones. Not much more to say. Some cool art, especially Salt Flats and Caldera Lake. Cycling Lands (Urza's Saga)   Come tapped, tap for 1 mana of their colour, you can cycle them. Soild, but un-inspiring. Again, the ETBT effect makes them an actual choice over basics, rather than the pure-upside that would be Cycling (a Good Mechanic). Manlands (Urza's Legacy, and Worldwake)  The inspiration for Splatoon. They are lands, they turn into mans. They are still solid, most notably Treetop Village. Worldwake had them able to produce more than one colour. Still good, especially Celestial Colonnade. Serperoth fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 10:23
|
|
|
You did not mention the worst lands of all. The Homelands Lands Like Aysen Abbey
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
Onmi posted:You did not mention the worst lands of all. The Homelands Lands I completely missed that, I was going set-by-set and missed the tri-lands. They are terrible, like you said.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 12:36
|
|
|
Onmi posted:You did not mention the worst lands of all. The Homelands Lands I once physically removed a Koskun Keep from a child's EDH deck. I bought him a Shimmering Grotto to replace it. That was a fun overview, but it kind of lacks in evaluation. I think the historical, overarching theme of mana-producing lands is that tempo = life. In nearly every case, if a land would be strictly better than a basic for a player who has infinite life, that land gets played. Lands whose drawback is tapping still get played, but only if they have other abilities, or if the tapping is conditional. Shocklands have the neat effect of being either type, depending on the situation. Mainly, I'm curious what are the worst mana-producing lands to see serious competitive play.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:That was a fun overview, but it kind of lacks in evaluation. I think the historical, overarching theme of mana-producing lands is that tempo = life. In nearly every case, if a land would be strictly better than a basic for a player who has infinite life, that land gets played. Lands whose drawback is tapping still get played, but only if they have other abilities, or if the tapping is conditional. Shocklands have the neat effect of being either type, depending on the situation. Yeah, and I'm not even done, I mostly posted it to get some talk going, see what lands there are, and how differently lands are evaluated compared to spells. And to revive the thread. VV: I'm going chronologically. 
Serperoth fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
you're also missing lands that come into play tapped unless you have a land of the appropriate type Like Clifftop Retreat from Innistrad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
hey what about the better cycle of cycling lands also vivid lands are the best
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
Might as well continue. Depletion Lands (Mercadian Masques)  Surprisingly for Masques, actually... tolerable? There's a limited amount of uses, but we've seen worse. And it adds CC, so there's combo potential. Storage Lands (Mercadian Masques)  And we're back to bad. Nielsen, Guay AND Cavotta art though, so I can't hate it. Sac Lands (Invasion)  Interesting, to say the least. ETBT and tapping for just one colour isn't optimal, but it's a good design. Taplands (Invasion)  Come tapped, tap for one of two allied colours. Don't seem too good in 2015, but the same drawback has proven playable in trilands. Lairs (Planeshift)  Definitely solid I'd say. No mana advantage like the Karoos, but it's a triland that comes down untapped. And the land you return doesn't need to be untapped. Sac Lands (Odyssey)  Tap for one, or sac for any. An interesting comparison with the Invasion Sac Lands, but not as good nowadays. Filter Lands (Odyssey)  Put 1 in, CD comes out. Pretty nice cards, much like the later Ravnica Signets, and they're free. Don't even enter tapped. Tainted Lands (Torment)  Finish the cycle, Wizards. Yeah these are pretty situational, but I like them a lot. Another interesting comparison, this time with the (later) checklands. Fetch Lands (Onslaught and later Zendikar, the good ones)  We know them, we love them, they're expensive. The original intent was, presumably, to have a card that could be either of the two lands, but the choice was final. Interact very well with basic-typed duals (DUH) Artifact Lands (Mirrodin)  Play these, play Affinity. They are good. Shock Lands (Ravnica Block)  OG Duals, with the types and all, but if you don't get shocked, they come down tapped. Strictly worse than the originals, but still great. If you don't have a spell that turn, you can just not pay. Strictly better than plain taplands too. Snow Taplands (Coldsnap)  Taplands... WITH SNOW. Please, contain your excitement. Worse than shocks, unless you have a reason to play Snow stuff. Storage Lands (Time Spiral)  Still storage lands. Still not very good. Calciform Pools hasn't been reprinted for some reason. Adding counters costs mana as well so that's sloooooooow. Filter Lands (Started in Future Sight, completed in Shadowmoor/Eventide)  Much like the older ones, only more versatile Drawback is that they need one of THEIR colours, not just colourless. The rest of this Future Sight cycle will be talked about later (since they haven't each gotten a cycle) Vivid Lands (Lorwyn)  Similar to depletion lands, only these ones can always make 'their' colour, and just have limited uses of their any colour. Slow, but potent. Panoramas (Shards of Alara)  Sorta-fetches, but not particularly good. At least they can produce a colourless on their own, but costing 1 to sac isn't particularly good. [bTrilands[/b] (Shards of Alara, cycle completed in Khans of Tarkir)  They come down tapped, and tap for one of three colours. Strictly better than taplands in general, and pretty solid fixing, if not particularly exciting. Check Lands (Magic 2010, cycle finished in Innistrad)  Taplands, unless you have one of their types in, then they just come in. Definitely good, and once more, better than taplands. Amusing to see that taplands are good, but there are so many variants on them. Refuge Lands (Zendikar, cycle completed in Khans of Tarkir)  Taplands that gain you a life when they come down. Again, strictly better than taplands. Uninspiring, but draft necessities apparently. Fastlands (Scars of Mirrodin)  If you play them without many lands, they come down untapped. Good if your curve is low, or are playing a land-light strategy for other reasons. Combo with Orcish Lumberjack. (someone do this in Cube please)Gates (Return to Ravnica Block)  Taplands, with a type of their own, that had some minor play in the set. Fun for their deck, pretty much draft fixing otherwise. Scrylands (Theros Block)  Taplands that scry 1 when they come down. Not very fast, but more than decent, good card fixing, good mana fixing. And that's about it. How many cycles did I miss? Serperoth fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
At the very least you're missing the legendary cycle from Legends(Tolaria, Urborg, Hammerheim, Karakas, whatever the green one was), and champions(Eiganjo, Minamo, Shizo, Shinka, Okina) Edit: Also if you're separating the ons cycling lands from the urza's cycling lands there's more justification to do that with the wwk manlands vs the ul manlands Elyv fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Elyv posted:At the very least you're missing the legendary cycle from Legends(Tolaria, Urborg, Hammerheim, Karakas, whatever the green one was), and champions(Eiganjo, Minamo, Shizo, Shinka, Okina) Those two are mostly for their secondary abilities, rather than any kind of fixing. And yeah, you're right about the cycling lands. Might as well just move the Sandbar picture, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:Those two are mostly for their secondary abilities, rather than any kind of fixing. And yeah, you're right about the cycling lands. Might as well just move the Sandbar picture, thanks. Sure, but you also have stuff like cycling or artifact lands which don't provide any fixing. By the way you're overestimating Odyssey filter lands by quite a bit, the fact that they didn't tap for mana on their own was a huge deal since sometimes you would open a hand with 2 of them and just want to kill yourself. Like, if you look at one of the dominant decks of the time, it only played one of those filter lands. Also you missed the future sight cycles(if you only want duals, Graven Cairns/Grove of the Burnwillows/Horizon Canopy/Nimbus Maze/River of Tears, if you also want lands that tap for a single color, New Benalia/Llanowar Reborn/Dakmor Salvage/Keldon Megaliths/Tolaria West)
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Also ravnica guild halls although only Vitu-Ghazi was really playable (unless we're not counting utility land cycles) also sunhome now and skarrg and maybe theres one more i can't think of. There's also the Zendikar utility land cycle which is different from the innistrad and ravnica ones by virtue of tapping for colors e.g. Valakut/Oran-Rief/Emeria/Crypt of Agadeem/Magosi Also zendikar and wwk each had a WUBRG cycle of common ETBT lands w/ ETB abilities Zoness fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
Also the hideaway cycle from Lorwyn.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Also ravnica guild halls although only Vitu-Ghazi was really playable (unless we're not counting utility land cycles) We're not. The cycles I posted are basically "This is a mana land", with my main criteria being "does this tap for mana?" and "are all parts of this cycle changed just in colour?" All the manlands, for example, which are the most fringe example, tap for mana and they all do the same thing, with different numbers/types/abilities. And I need to do the Future Sight "could be part of a cycle" ones (Grove of the Burnwillows etc). Hideaway was close for me, but opted not to, due to the different conditions for each.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 16:01 |
|
|
Zoness posted:Also ravnica guild halls although only Vitu-Ghazi was really playable (unless we're not counting utility land cycles) also sunhome now and skarrg and maybe theres one more i can't think of. Nephalia Drownyard, aka I_can't_think_of_a_win_condition_for_this_deck.land
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 18:39
|
|