[SCG Article] Playing Control or Combo in Legacy

[Lukas Preuss]

Just in case anyone missed it: http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/12726.html

Matthieu Durand aka Toad wrote an article about Combo (obviously Aluren) and Control (two different builds of Loam confinement and one Psychatog deck) in the Legacy format...

[Evil Roopey]

Warned for openly flaming someone promoting the format, as well as another site. ~Nightmare

[Parcher]

From the interactions I have seen on TMD, Toad is one of the most egotisical, derogatory, and most often, delusional of those who post on those boards. I don't know what Roopy posted, but I have seen Toad openly attack many on the both SCG and TMD boards who dared disagree with him, or question his results.

Having led with that, I have to compliment him highly on this article. It well written, and shows a decent insight into the Legacy metagame. It is also the first I have seen to not only feature these decks,(Loam/Confinement, Tog, Slide, and Aluren) but to give explanations of both the functions of the decks, and their matchups.

I think is a wonderful introduction of much less popular decks to those outside the Legacy community, and can only help with the interest for control players who don't want to deal with an purely Aggro format.

And I must give a personal thanks to Toad for encouraging as many players as possible to play Aluren. I hope everyone plays it. Really.

[Anusien]

From the interactions I have seen on TMD, Toad is one of the most egotisical, derogatory, and most often, delusional of those who post on those boards. I don't know what Roopy posted, but I have seen Toad openly attack many on the both SCG and TMD boards who dared disagree with him, or question his results.
But we do have to make allowances for Frenchies. After all, the UN seems to do it.

But I like the article a lot. For one thing, he pimps Slide, and that's NEVER wrong. But the decks that he posted are very very strong, and if you adjust for his tendency to abuse Wish->Singleton and adjust for Coldsnap, these are very very strong strategies. You have to understand that he's absolutely convinced that these decks are head and shoulders above Rifter, MWC, GWB Control (Thunder-Bluff v2.0, Truffle Shuffle, Frogboy's Mom's Sphincter, whatever we're calling that pile today), and Landstill.

Plus he's Meandeck. Not putting Brainstorm into that Slide list must have physically hurt him.

[Evil Roopey]

And I must give a personal thanks to Toad for encouraging as many players as possible to play Aluren. I hope everyone plays it. Really.

Me too, that way I would always win tournaments.

[scrumdogg]

Cut him some slack, the article was not written in an inflammatory or condescending way. The conclusions were off but the lists were well explained, as were the match ups - with some glaring exceptions, like his apparent non-testing vs. IGGy & his belief that they had no outs to a Confinement Game 1. Many of the builds I have seen have access to Game 1 Echoing Truth, not a guarantee but he wasn't showing much clock either. All of his creations got shanked by any sort of black disruption & had at least one top tier match which was difficult - for which I applaud his honesty. However, how is that making his decks more attractive? I realize he was stating 'Control & Combo can & should be played in Legacy more than they are' not 'my decks are the uber-shiznit, they never lose, you all suck (as he does in boards where he is not moderated....)' Yet why would I play any of his decks when they have glaring weaknesses - including reliance on singletons that I can cut off?

[kirdape3]

That's also two-plus months old. It's been submitted for at least one of them, and it's also before Ill-Gotten Gains had come out to be one of the two best combo decks in the format.

[Di]

I'm just wondering why the hell Imperial Recruiter isn't in the Aluren list, unless it was mentioned in the article.

/shrugs.

[MattH]

I'm just wondering why the hell Imperial Recruiter isn't in the Aluren list, unless it was mentioned in the article.

/shrugs.

Because it's dead until you have Aluren, unlike every other card in the deck.

[TheDarkshineKnight]

Why isn't anyone working on Survival Aluren? You get the most borken card in the format and Toad's favorite card.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I'm still wondering how we can transit from arguing about how Raven Familiar is the best card in Aluren, to how Court Hussar is terrible because although it's pretty much the same effing card in every other way, it's slightly more vulnerable to StP. But then, I kind of gave up hope on arguing with Toad.

Hrm, let's see, what else. Bardo didn't invent Thresh, and the card drawing engine on his Tog list starts on turn 4, so I'm not seeing LftL as being any slower.

[Evil Roopey]

Bardo didn't invent Thresh

Yes as I recall Bardo was working on a Miracle-Gro list that was evolved into Thresh by CavernNinja.

[Bardo]

Bardo didn't invent Thresh

As far as I'm concerned, that distinction would fall to Ben Rubin and Alan Comer (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=sideboard/strategy/sb20020124b).

And shout-outs aside, I think this was a great article. Well done. :)

[Zilla]

As far as I'm concerned, that distinction would fall to Ben Rubin and Alan Comer (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=sideboard/strategy/sb20020124b).
Except that the primary distinction between Legacy Thresh and classic Gro is the lack of Dryads. Thresh =/= Gro. As far as I'm aware, the choice to drop the Dryads and focus more on the Thresh creatures in Legacy was originally made by CavernNinja. This does not, of course, delegitimize or detract from the formidable work that you and others have done on the archetype for this format.

[Mad Zur]

Except that the primary distinction between Legacy Thresh and classic Gro is the lack of Dryads. Thresh =/= Gro.
Optimization is not the same as the creation of a new deck. Replacing Dryad with Mongoose was not a fundamental change to the deck; it was simply the process of replacing a suboptimal card with a similar but more viable alternative. There was no significant strategic change, and so no basis to consider it a different deck. A great deal of evolution has occurred between Gro's creation and it's modern form in Legacy, and it is absurd to tie all of this to one card. Even if it could be said that at some point in its history the deck ceased being Gro (though the concept and strategy behind it remain the same), and even if this could be narrowed down to the removal of one card (though this is oversimplification at best), it would not be Dryad, it would be Gush. Yet you seem to agree that the deck continued being Gro even after Gush was banned. If losing Gush didn't change Gro into another deck, why would something as insignificant as creature optimization?

As far as I'm aware, the choice to drop the Dryads and focus more on the Thresh creatures in Legacy was originally made by CavernNinja. The deck that won Big Arse 2 had exactly one maindeck Mongoose, hardly more focused on Threshold creatures.

[Zilla]

Optimization is not the same as the creation of a new deck.
Regardless, in his article, Toad was giving credit for the introduction of the archetype into this format. That credit rightfully belongs to CN. He was among the first to optimize it for Legacy, and he was the first to play it to a strong finish at a significant tourney, and he popularized the Dryadless build, hence the reason that people still refer to the deck as NQG, which was the moniker he gave it. I'm certainly not saying he invented the archetype from scratch, but he is largely responsible for its current popularity.

[scrumdogg]

Regardless, in his article, Toad was giving credit for the introduction of the archetype into this format. That credit rightfully belongs to CN. He was among the first to optimize it for Legacy, and he was the first to play it to a strong finish at a significant tourney, and he popularized the Dryadless build, hence the reason that people still refer to the deck as NQG, which was the moniker he gave it. I'm certainly not saying he invented the archetype from scratch, but he is largely responsible for its current popularity.

I thought the development was fairly simultaneous - except that Ian lives in VA & has access to a lot more highly visible Legacy. Regardless, though, CN will never get credit from Durand as he does not acknowledge us. Were Bardo solely (or even primarily) a Source user, he would not have received credit either.

[Mad Zur]

Regardless, in his article, Toad was giving credit for the introduction of the archetype into this format. That credit rightfully belongs to CN. He was among the first to optimize it for Legacy, and he was the first to play it to a strong finish at a significant tourney,
Not really. (http://mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3996)

But we're off-topic. I wasn't saying Ian doesn't deserve any credit, I was saying it's ridiculous to call it a new deck based on one strategically minor card swap (and that as far as I'm concerned it was created by Alan Comer and the others mentioned in Shvartsman's article).

[Bardo]

Regardless, in his article, Toad was giving credit for the introduction of the archetype into this format. That credit rightfully belongs to CN.

With all due respect here, are you serious? The deck was an importation of the 1.x Comer/Rubin template and still shares the same essential qualities as its forebears:

* Anemic mana count
* Replacement of land with cantrips
* 12+ cantrips
* 8+ free counters
* Average casting cost of spells between 1 and 1.5

The shell exploits the synergies between cheap green d00ds when paired with blue spells; and splashes a third (or fourth) color to increase its match percentages against the decks that straight U/G is weak against. None of this has changed in the last four years.

I don't think Ian's awesome victory at BA2 accounts for its popularity, so much as me writing 15,500 words (http://www.starcitygames.com/pages/articlefinder.php?PHPSESSID=9e7b36645ae4e02c4110a012c18c16fc&keyword=spero&Search+The+Net%21=Search%21) about the deck and its development on SCG. I hope I'm not coming off as a raging douche here, but it's exceedingly presumptuous to account for Thresh's popularity to BA2 alone.

The truth is, many people contributed to the development of Thresh in Legacy. From Ian, the Hatfields, RidiculousHat and many, many others. For instance, I worked diligently on it on TMD since my very first post on that site (http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=19419.msg316170#msg316170), and well before I even knew this site existed. (And I'm still running that same EE more than two years later!) :)

I got back into the game after taking a 6-7 year (Mirage - Mirrodin) haitus and was enamored by a list in one of rakso's archived articles when I was reading all of his stuff:

I still have the list archived on my computer:

Super Grow by Maxim Barkman (Aug 09, 2003)
Worlds 2003 Type I side event

1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Sapphire
4 Accumulated Knowledge
1 Ancestral Recall
4 Brainstorm
3 Counterspell
1 Cunning Wish
2 Daze
1 Fact or Fiction
4 Force of Will
1 Gush
1 Merchant Scroll
2 Misdirection
3 Opt
1 Peek
1 Time Walk
4 Quirion Dryad
3 Meddling Mage
2 Mystic Enforcer
2 Seal of Cleansing
2 Swords to Plowshares

LAND
4 Flooded Strand
1 Library of Alexandria
3 Polluted Delta
4 Tropical Island
3 Tundra

SIDEBOARD
1 Balance
1 Counterspell
2 Deep Analysis
1 Intuition
1 Meddling Mage
1 Misdirection
1 Naturalize
2 Null Rod
2 Sacred Ground
1 Seal of Cleansing
2 Swords to Plowshares

That was my starting point, sans Library, et al.


I wasn't saying Ian doesn't deserve any credit, I was saying it's ridiculous to call it a new deck based on one strategically minor card swap

I completely agree. And, you know, Dryad's still not that bad right now. Looking at my old lists on my hard drive, I dropped two of mine in the spring, before BA2, since Dryad is kind of shit against any deck running Mogg Fanatic or a lot of burn. And at the time, there was a heck of a lot of burn and even most Goblins decks weren't correctly optimized and frequently ran Lightning Bolt, etc. It was after BA2, that I said "duh, just get rid of all of them." CavernNinja's removal of Dryad, for that tournament, was an inspired and wise metagame call.

But lately, I've been smashing decks left and right with Dryad back in the mix again. From this puny local tourney (http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=29977.0) ('missed you Zilla), and a lot of recent Dryad-beatdown on MWS. So, I wouldn't count the little green lady out of the picture for good. One of the top 8 Lille decks ran a few in the maindeck as well. With graveyard hate even more prevalent (sb'd Crypts to maindeck Leylines and Wretches), having burly beaters that aren't reliant on the graveyard is pretty sweet (again).


that as far as I'm concerned it was created by Alan Comer and the others mentioned in Shvartsman's article

Just to be clear, this is my point as well. We all had a hand in the deck's trajectory.