It seems the general consensus is that Simulacrum is not worth it. I personally have had very good experiances with Simulacrum and Charon, which does the same thing accentially, against AI at least. I haven't played much human v. human, but I can image they are sugnificantly worse. With AI, it's always just been a huge deterant from attacking, cause they'll never kill the creature.
I made a willow deck for my wife that's pretty hard to deal with.
I use a mix of living shields (can lay them down cheap early on to claim land then switch them to lay a willow, and then you have an extra +30 hp in hand), counter amulets, petrify stones (anti-scroll) and Dovimikha (sp?) to protect.
We had one game where none of her creatures could be targetted because they were cait siths or protected by the domivikhas ( kill these ASAP).
In a willow deck, you *must* run upheavals (lay a creature anywhere then upgrade to red) and cait siths (in addition to other cheap early game creatures --a favorite of mine is phoenix). My wife's willow deck usually gets set up willow out and protected within 10-15 turns pretty reliably.
One thing you can do with two kelpies, willows, or a one of each combo, Is set up a safty zone. If you have them both set up well enough to easily absorb an invasion, the space in between them becomes a deadzone where your opponent can't reach without a spell. Using cards you don't particularly want your opponet to land on, like mad clown, dagon, or firelord, in between here and protecting them from spells, and your defenders get an extra 10-20, hp.
Post by jimulacrum on Jun 10, 2007 10:55:52 GMT -5
The real question to ask yourself about Old Willow and/or Kelpie is not "What other cards should I bring?" It is "Will Old Willow and/or Kelpie help me or hurt me in this match?"
The answer to that question is always going to depend on your opponent's style of play and the composition of his book. OW and Kelpie are only useful if your opponent's cards or playing tendencies include a flaw that you can exploit by forcing him to land on one of those creatures.
For example, Zagol has a massive exploitable flaw in his books. He carries no spells and no creatures with territory abilities; therefore, he is unable to undo land effects. Cast Simulacrum on a well-placed OW or Kelpie, and the match is pretty much over. The fact that Zagol will attack you almost every time he can doesn't matter, as long as your toll for the territory is at least three times the maximum damage he can deal to your creature.
Cepters who are not aggressive enough are also perfect victims for OW or Keplie. Mullyn is a perfect example. She will not invade any territory unless she knows she can win the battle, and she takes all of your available items into consideration. If you have a Diamond Armor and a Counter Amulet in your hand (along with enough G to use either), she will almost always pay the toll for any territory she lands on—without putting up a fight! She doesn't invade to get you to use up your items, and she doesn't attack creatures with the Simulacrum effect to cause you to lose G. Put a level 5 OW in her path (Simulacrum is nice, but optional), and she's toast.
Cepters who use a lot of damage and negative-effect spells, as well as those who invade a lot (except Zagol, as noted above) neutralize the advantage of OW or Kelpie. In fact, considering all the necessary backup cards and G expenditure required to set traps with these creatures, they become a liability against such a player, especially on a small map (where it can be difficult to get the land requirement handled to begin with). Try setting up OW or Kelpie against Zeneth on the Dunnan map, and you'll see what I mean.
So, the question of what supporting cards to bring is answered by the reason why you should bring OW or Kelpie to battle. If your opponent has a flaw in his game that you can exploit, that flaw will dictate which cards are necessary to set up a land-stopper trap.