PDA

View Full Version : [DTB] Vial Goblins



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

Evil Roopey
03-01-2005, 12:17 AM
Please note that Roopey and CAngel were working on this deck simultaneously. I have merged their threads and the first two posts contain worthwhile introductions to the deck.

Peter_Rotten

Well despite the fact that I said that AEther Vial sucks in the Goblin Sligh thread, I went around to test it out. I found out one thing, the deck is actually good. I guess this proves the fact that you shouldn't bash something until you test it, right? So I have done some testing with the deck, nothing to extensive, but the deck definatly show much promise. So here goes.

Vial Goblins
Lands:
14x Mountain
4x Wasteland
4x Rishadan Port

Creatures:
4x Goblin Lackey
4x Goblin Wachief
4x Goblin Ringleader
4x Goblin Piledriver
4x Goblin Matron
4x Gempalm Incinerator
4x Mogg Fanatic
3x Seige-Gang Commander
2x Goblin Pyromancer
1x Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker

Vials:
4x Aether Vials

Sideboard:
3x Price of Progress
1x Goblin Sharpshooter
1x Goblin Tinkerer
2x Patron of the Akki
4x Pithing Needle
4x Pyrokensesis

Well, there you have it folks. I know. I know. It looks exactly like the Extended decks. Thats because it is exactly like the Extended decks, plus Lackeys of course. The deck is built upon the card advantage given to you by Goblin Matron and Goblin Ringleader and mad beats from Goblin Warchief and Goblin Piledriver, all to lead up to the big turn where Skirk Prospector and Goblin Sharpshooter goes nuts on your opponent. This is all by using Lackey and AEther Vial as ways to pump out creature after creature.

The card choices seem to be pretty obvious, we've all seen goblin decks before, this one is no different.



Match-ups
Solidarity: 4-6 This probably wasn't a good choice to go first, but this is the only matchu-up that I have tested extensively. Against this deck you want to matron out Warchiefs and Piledrivers and go nuts. A first turn Lackey second turn Warchief almost always wins the game. If you are worried about this match-up a lot you can run an 8 blast board cutting Swords.(I was actually thinking about doing that anyways BTW.)

I don't know the numbers for any of the other match-ups, but i will tell how to play against it.

ATS: Well against ATS your going to want to outrace them while gaining card advantage at the same time. So Matron will almost always get a Sharpshooter first. Then it will get Ringleader after Ringleader. There will be times when you want to get Ringleader instead, just so you can get the engine going, but garanteed Sharpshooter is amazing against this deck.

RG Survival Advantage: In the few games played against the deck it seemed kind of like a 50/50 match-up. I think this was only because of the splash of black for OVersold Cemetary in the RGSA deck which made every turn Baloth more plausible. Against the normal RGSA though I think it would be around 6-4 in Vial Goblin's favor.

Landstill: This is the deck that I fear. All of the creature hate plus Humility from the board makes this matchup a difficult one to win, but not impossible. You can easily just overcome them with threats, and if the first turn Vial resolves you should be in good condition.

Angel Stompy: I haven't had the time to test this considering no one in VA plays the deck because its bad.

Well I think thats it, I will definatly report back when more testing is done, but I wanted to get the deck out there to see if anyone could help bring it along. So please discuss!

Roop

Sims
03-01-2005, 12:31 PM
Intro:
Goblins have been a popular archetype in every format they have been legal in; From people playing Goblins of the Flarg with Goblin King, to Onslaught Block and Gob-Bidding. So it is no surprise that they are a beloved archetype in Legacy. I was a very avid Food Chain Goblin player in the old 1.5, but that was ended on September 1st. Saddened by the loss of my pet deck, I turned my focus to helping Zilla revamp Goblin Sligh for the new format with decent success. Recently though, Goblin Sligh has fallen out of favor as the power level of Legacy has increased. Trying hopelessly to keep up, I played it anyway, trying to figure out what was so wrong. The answer was simple: Your early rush could be easily stopped, and then you are stuck topdecking and looking for answers. Frustrated, I shelved the deck and worked on other projects.

Fast forward to February 4th. Mike Flores posted an article on the new Starcitygames Premium site discussing Goblins in Extended. There were various versions: some with Burning Wish, some with Living Death and Patriarch's Bidding. Regardless of what direction the deckbuilder took they all had one thing in common: A card advantage engine. Without further ado.. (Authors Note: I realize this is nearly identical to the R/b 1.x builds, I have tried bringing in the 1.5 cardpool, but it really just doesn't do much for the deck.)

//Name: Vial-Goblins v1.0 (Port by CorruptedAngel, inspired by Flores and 1.x)
//Mana
12 Mountains
4 Badlands
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 AEther Vial
4 Chrome Mox
//Goblins
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Skirk Prospector
4 Goblin Piledriver
4 Goblin Matron
4 Goblin Warchief
1 Goblin Sharpshooter
4 Goblin Ringleader
2 Siege-Gang Commander
1 Kiki-Jiki
//Disruption
4 Cabal Therapy


Card Choices:
Lands: Pretty self-explanatory. An argument could be made for running a full 8 Fetchlands, but so far I have had no problems drawing land or getting black mana when I need it.

AEther Vial: This card is simply amazing. Usually played Turn 1, an AEther Vial then enables you to play instant speed blockers and later plays a vital role in your Card Advantage machine.

Chrome Mox: Acceleration. Gives the ability to Therapy on turn 1 to scout for trouble, then pitch what is the most dead to you at the time (spare Warchief or Therapy, a Siege-Gang that'll be dead for a few turns, etc) and turn it into a 1 drop goblin, or preferably an AEther Vial.

Mogg Fanatic: Arguably Reds best one drop. Is a Goblin. Serves multiple roles. Questions?

Prospector: Good for accelerating out early Warchiefs, also useful later for turning used Matrons and tapped/about to die Goblins into mana to play more threats. Enables a potential alternate win through SGC and Goblin Sharpshooter, thus 4 is easily the correct number.

Piledriver/Warchief: There is simply no point in having a Goblin deck without these cards. Piledrivers are your biggest beaters and Warchief turns just about every draw into a serious threat.

Matron/Ringleader: Your Card Advantage system. Topdecking either of these will create more Goblins and reverse a grim board position.

Sharpshooter: Hurts Survival decks mana bases and makes quick work of opposing weenie decks. Used in conjunction with SGC and Prospector he can create wins when you need to win right away.

Siege-Gang Commander: Goblin generator as well as a reusable damage source. Tokens can be used for mana, Damage, or simply making Piledriver huge.

Kiki-Jiki: When Kiki hits he creates Card Advantage by copying Ringleaders and Matrons. Can also be used to copy Piledrivers, Siege-Gangs, or Sharpshooters to create lethal damage in a pinch.


Cards not included:
Goblin Lackey: Yes, yes I know. Cheap cost, broken effect. The downside? He is a 1/1 creature that has to live and connect with your opponent to be anything more than a Mons Goblin Raider. I have tested him and I found him to be useless 9 times out of 10, so he was cut.

Burning Wish/Living Death: These cards take the deck in a different direction, but I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. They orient the deck to set up for one lethal turn, similar to Food Chain. More to come on these variants later.

Goblin Goon/Mogg Flunkies: Could probably be fit in the deck, but I found them to be sub-par compared to other choices (Sharpshooter, Kiki-Jiki, etc.)

Sparksmith: Could very well find its way back into the deck, as it is removal in a deck that is in a lack of it. Reservations about it are that it damages you (which can hurt when you are running a vast number of Goblins.)

Goblin Cohort/Mogg Conscript: Identical cards that could possibly find their way into the deck as they are 1 drop 2/2s in a deck that will likely be playing creatures on nearly every turn.

Sideboard Options:
The board currently is under construction, as it is usually very metagame dependant, but a list of possible options are as follows:

Sulfuric Vortex: Can stop Pulse of the Fields, E.Angel, Baloth, Spike Feeder, etc. as well as being a damage source.

Anarchy: A catch-all sweeper for white. Shuts down Decree tokens, E.Angel, Pro-red critters, CoP: Red, Warmth, Worship, etc.

REB/Pyroblast: These are fairly obvious choices if your metagame has blue in it. Forcing through spells or destroying obnoxious Chills can be very beneficial to you. These also could help you in the Solidarity matchup.

Crash: Artifact destruction. Cheap and easy way to get around Chalice of the Void, Powder Keg, and Disk.

Burning Wish: Running it in the board allows you to run a copy of Bidding or Living Death in board aswell to board in versus Mass Removal ala Disk, Deed, and Wrath of God.

Duress: Extended decks run these to give additional disruption in the Control and Combo matches, no reason why it isn't possible here either.

Planar Void: A speed bump for survival decks, hopefully slowing them to give you additional time to win.

Perish: Catch all answer to Green creatures. Stops annoying creatures like Troll Ascetic and Plated Slagwurm while killing off mana acceleration at the same time.


There are obviously much more options than this, but these are a few that are predominant in my mind. Feel free to adapt the board as needed to best suit your metagame.


Playing the Deck:
The deck is fairly simple to play as a Beatdown deck, but it also has some nifty tricks that allow it to pull out wins it shouldn't. Your primary objectives are to lay an AEther Vial and begin churning out Goblins, using Matron and Ringleader to restock your hand. Cabal Therapy is in the deck for protection and disruption, throwing off your opponents game plan or pre-emptively striking at dangerous cards such as Wrath or Survival. It plays much more similar to Food Chain than it does to traditional Goblin Sligh... which leads me to the big point about AEther Vial...

AEther Vial is very key to this deck, and I will not hear any questions of "Can Vial be removed for Lackey? Lackey is strictly better right??" Wrong, Lackey is not strictly better. Lackey is faster, to be sure, but it has to survive to connect to your opponent and sucks after turn 3. Turn 3 and later is where this deck begins to shine. By using your turns 1 and 2 to set up Vial, Therapy away threats, early board control via Fanatic, and acceleration with Mox and Prospector, your turn 3's can be very explosive, having Ringleader, Warchief, and a Piledriver swinging at your opponents face. The biggest misconception about this deck is that it is sub-par to Goblin Sligh because it doesn't consistantly Goldfish by turn 4... The problem with this statement is, neither does Goblin Sligh. This deck takes into account the fact that it's early game will be disrupted, and creates a favorable late game by using Vial and Matron/Ringleader to produce card advantage and threats en masse.

That being said, you usually want to put a counter on your first Vial every turn until it hits 4. This allows you to play threats (Fanatics, Piledrivers, Matrons/Chiefs) in order, and then ultimately start generating advantage via Ringleader. Your second Vial usually stops at 3, this allows you to play free Warchiefs, but more importantly, it lets you drop Matrons to go and get Ringleaders or the Goblin you need specifically at that time. I would only go to 5 counters on a vial if you have a second Vial on 4, and only if you have a Kiki-Jiki or SGC in your hand.

Do not be afraid to use Prospectors ability. A Turn 1 Prospector is still a turn 2 Warchief, and potentially a turn 3 Ringleader. That is by no means a bad start. The late game Prospectors may seem dead, and you likely will want to remove them to Chrome Mox, but I would resist the urge to do so as they allow for broken plays with Siege Gang and Sharpshooter.


Matchups:
Landstill: Ugh... U/w Landstill has been the cause of one hell of a headache. They maindeck Disk, Wrath of God, and Swords to Plowshares already and can board in Chills, CoP: Red, and Pulse of the Fields... this is probably your worst matchup. The general idea is try and hit them with Cabal Therapy as early as possible for countermagic, using the flashback when possible to nab any cards that might ruin your day (Wrath, Disk, etc.), this coupled with an early Vial can allow you to start getting your beats in and begin using Ringleader and Matron. So far this is the only matchup where I have missed Lackey.

Survival Variants: Goblin Sharpshooter anyone? Follow your primary strategy: Therapy for key cards, let your Vials create threats, Sharpshooter away their mana base, and let your Ringleaders and Matrons overwhelm them with the Card Advantage they provide. If you can keep them off of Survival and their Mana with Therapy and Sharpshooter, this should be a fairly simple matchup. In the case of WeldSur, you may need to modify your plans a bit, but keeping them off of Survivals and Welders forces them to try and hardcast their fat.

Enchantress: I went into this matchup expecting a blowout in their favor... I came out wondering how the hell I went 2-0. The answer was fairly simple: I kept Confinement from resolving. Their biggest threat against you is Solitary Confinement, do whatever you can to keep it off the board. Build mana to force Piledrivers through against Elephant Grass, anywhere from 5-10 points of damage is all you need. Sharpshooter, Fanatic, and SGC clean them up.

Belcher: This actually isn't as bad as many would think, primarily due to Spoils of the Vault. Their Duresses and Therapies can hurt, but they aren't overly devastating as you are running more creatures than anything. Use your own Therapies to keep them off the major acceleration like LED and Tinder Wall, then use your Beats in conjunction with their own Spoils to win.

So far this is all I have tested, as these results are primarily based upon the three Tournaments I have played the deck in. I plan on doing more testing vs. Survival Variants, Angel Stompy, other Control, Solidarity, etc. and I will post matchup results and strategies when possible.


Conclusion:
In a field where Goblin Sligh is becoming less popular due to it's struggle to perform in the current state of the metagame, this deck offers a solution by slowing the clock a bit, but increasing redundancy and adding a Card Advantage engine that can simply overwhelm your opponent or turn a grim game-state into a favorable one.

Comments welcome.



Edited By CorruptedAngel on 1109694846

LunchBox
03-01-2005, 12:46 PM
Before cutting Lackeys, did you think about making it a 2-of? For example, -2 Skirk Prospector, +2 Lackey. I would want the most free ways to get Goblins into play as possible, even if the Lackeys are sub-par.

Also, one of Flores' more interesting choices was maindeck FTK. I know it's not maindeck worthy, but in matches where the card advantage isn't as important, FTK might deserve to be sided in for Ringleaders.

What do you think of Kirdape's analysis of the RG Survival Advantage matchup that he talked about in the Goblin Sligh thread?

Love the deck. I think we were on the same wavelength after reading that Flores article.

Sims
03-01-2005, 01:01 PM
Honestly I have tried various numbers of Lackeys after deciding it wasn't worth it as a 4-of, but in the end they really didn't do me any good. I think I actually played something off them once in my testing with them where I wasn't already winning, and that's saying something. Although, being as powerful a card as the Lackey is, room can be made for those who hate playing without it. Simply cutting a Prospector (Lackey does nearly the same thing) and maybe a Chrome Mox would give you the 2-of slot. But I found them to be unneccessary.

On the FTKs, I primarily left them out because of the fact that they aren't Goblins, but that isn't to say they aren't strong. This deck does lack removal, and having a few FTKs in the board could potentially be strong as you want your Vials on 4 anyways. My primary worry about them would be dropping them to the bottom of the library via Ringleader, because I have never wanted to side out Ringleaders so far. Plus they are not tutorable via Matron.

Kird wasn't really comparing them in a matchup sense more than he was saying that he found the deck Sub-par to play while he has access to R/G Survival, and in a way that is partially understandable, but I am not sure it is correct. I think both decks are on a similar level, and while it is true that R/G Survival can produce Card Advantage over multiple turns where as Matron and Ringleader are more of 1-shots, Goblins can drop an army on the table to overwhelm the opponent faster and can abuse Kiki-Jiki to extend the Survival-esque tutoring and drawing past the 4 Matrons and 4 Ringleaders. I do believe that, currently, R/G Survival may be a stronger deck.... but with some fine tuning Goblins should easily be on the same power level.



Edited By CorruptedAngel on 1109717019

mackaber
03-03-2005, 12:36 PM
I agree that Goblin Lackey sucks if not dropped turn 1.
I'd still insist on running a full set of 4, since it's a lot more powerful than some other cards in the dec. Especially since you are only running 4 Aether Vial's and building this dec completly on it's shoulders sounds like you are asking for a whole lot of mulligans. Especially angel's list looks like it needs that turn 1 vial badly!
On the same note, building a dec that relies on an Artifact, in a format where people are packing maindec disenchants left and right don't sound too hot.

Have you considered Wasteland?

Sims
03-03-2005, 01:03 PM
I agree that Goblin Lackey sucks if not dropped turn 1.
I'd still insist on running a full set of 4, since it's a lot more powerful than some other cards in the dec. Especially since you are only running 4 Aether Vial's and building this dec completly on it's shoulders sounds like you are asking for a whole lot of mulligans. Especially angel's list looks like it needs that turn 1 vial badly!
On the same note, building a dec that relies on an Artifact, in a format where people are packing maindec disenchants left and right don't sound too hot.

Have you considered Wasteland?
Actually, it (lackey) is much less powerful than any of the other cards in the deck. Running 4 is completely out of the question, as Mons Goblin Raiders isn't that hot of a Goblin anymore.

Specifically at the AEther Vial comment, the deck isn't built around AEther Vial... It's built around a redundant amount of Goblins to make an advantage engine such as Matron/Ringleader good. Vial just makes that engine Ridiculous. While I am always eager and happy to play a Turn 1 AEther Vial, it isn't a required Turn 1 play. Running 20 permanent mana sources (16 non-Fetch lands, 4 Chromes...24 if you count Prospectors) you can fairly easily hardcast just about any threat in the deck, it is just much easier with the Vial. So no, I don't find it "not too hot" to build a deck like this in an environment with Survival hate, because the deck doesn't need the Vial to win.

What would you propose dropping for Wasteland? My primary argument against it is that it's not a permanent mana source. You would be removing spells in order to fit it into the deck, which in this case spells would be mostly Goblins, thus weakining your Ringleaders and diluting the decks redundancy. That's not exactly a hot proposition, even if it is keeping your opponent off his Taiga. Testing is warranted, and I will take a look into it, but currently it doesn't sound like a tech play.

Evil Roopey
03-03-2005, 01:34 PM
Well it seem CAngel and I have completely different views when it comes to Goblin Lackey. Not running 4 Lackeys in any Goblin deck where Lackey is legal is a sin. I wasnt running Lackey when I first started testing the deck since I just netdecked it and played it to see what the Legacy cardpool could add to the deck. Goblin Lackey was definitly one of those cards, actually it was the only card. Goblin Lackey is like a super-vial. It does everything Vial does except faster. I don't understand how you can not run this card as a 4 of.

@CAngel
I don't see how your using a redundant amount of Goblins to produce full advantage of Matron/Ringleader when you cut 8 Goblins from the main to run Therapy and Mox. I hated drawing Chrome Mox after first turn, and even then it slowed me down more than it sped me up, since you have to pitch gas to it. Chrome Mox just doesn' fit in the deck I don't think.

BTW never assume that Prospector and Lackey do the same thing since what they do aren't even similar.

Roop

bigredmeanie
03-03-2005, 01:34 PM
Funny how I started a thread Very similar to this about a month ago and it was closed because "goblin sligh Thread" already existed.

Anyway, we did alot of playtesting and it almost never beat Welder Survival We decided that Goblins just wasn't good w/o Scull clamp or recruiter.

Evil Roopey
03-03-2005, 01:40 PM
Actually I was just testing against WeldSur yesterday and beat went 6/4 against it. The fact that you can get out a turn 2/3 Sharpshooter because your run 6 is amazing. And just pure card advantage and speed overran the deck completely. I will admit though the stupid first turn Survival thing was like an automatic loss, but other than that it was actualyl a favorable matchup.

Sims
03-03-2005, 02:58 PM
Not running 4 Lackeys in any Goblin deck where Lackey is legal is a sin.

Good thing I don't believe in sinning. I was running lackey as a 4-of in the deck when I first started playing it (ask Artowis), and he was just... not good... I do not run this card as a 4-of, or at all, because I don't care about dropping Siege-Gang Commander turn 2, and that is all Lackey does. I want my first two turns worth of draws before I play a Ringleader that way I can hopefully draw some more land/therapy before I start dropping things to the bottom of the library. The deck isn't built for speed, it's built to survive past Turn 3. A vulnerable 1/1 that must deal damage for his effect to be useful in a deck with next to no removal is very sub-par... he's bad vials 5-8 and is entirely unneccesary. Goblin Lackey does absolutely nothing for your late game at all.


@CAngel
I don't see how your using a redundant amount of Goblins to produce full advantage of Matron/Ringleader when you cut 8 Goblins from the main to run Therapy and Mox. I hated drawing Chrome Mox after first turn, and even then it slowed me down more than it sped me up, since you have to pitch gas to it. Chrome Mox just doesn' fit in the deck I don't think.

I never cut 8 Goblins from the main... those Goblins were never there. My creature-base is a near identical port from the 1.x creature base, due to the fact that you don't need more Goblins. Cutting Therapy (your only disruption) for something like Mogg Flunkie is a weak venture at best, and leaves you more vulnerable to any form of permanant based hate your opponent can run. In your R/w version (what version did you port that had White in it, btw?) I would easily cut those Flunkies for STP or Disenchant main, because the deck needs disruption. As far as the Lackey vs. Chrome Mox. It's simple, I want to cast my threats before my attack phase. I hardly ever have a chrome in my hand with nothing that I can pitch to it, and normally once I cast a Ringleader I will have at least 1 Goblin in my hand that I don't need, so it has been more of a help than a hinderance.



BTW never assume that Prospector and Lackey do the same thing since what they do aren't even similar.

Actually, this is untrue. They do the exact same thing, they generate a way to accelerate your higher cost Goblins onto the table. Prospector just has a nicer interaction with SCG and Sharpshooter. In the grand scheme of playing this deck, they are nearly identical, and the Prospectors side benefit makes him infinately stronger than Lackey.



@ All: Do not make comments about "All goblin decks need Lackey" without testing first. Lackey is not the end all, be all Goblin. It can't be broken if it can't realistically survive.

kirdape3
03-03-2005, 03:37 PM
I don't know, I personally think that it's a blatant error to not run 4 Lackeys. Sure, you have all of these things that are better than Lackey on any other turn but 1 - but there's nothing almost in the format better than that Lackey. It's both Vials 5-8 AND a guaranteed block or removal spell from the opponent, because hitting a Siege-Gang Commander (or God forbid, a Kiki-Jiki) is pretty close to game right on the spot.

An analogy is Workshop into Trinisphere on the play. Any other turn but 1, it's pretty mediocre (they're liable to have dropped their Moxen to get their 3 mana to cast anything) - but it's powerful enough to have just gotten restricted.

Sims
03-03-2005, 04:45 PM
Then I suppose I am the minority here who sees that it isn't necessary.. Whatever. All I can say is I have played the deck in two different areas locally (1 with more established "net decks" the other with more home grown style decks) and have fairly consistantly monkeystomped without the aid of said 1/1 dork. Run him if you wish, the only thing I can realistically see cutting is Chrome Mox, but I highly advise against it.

Do as you wish.

Watcher487
03-03-2005, 07:57 PM
The thing that everyone BUT Sims is looking for is the 3rd-4th turn kill. What Sims is looking at is a deck that overloads his opponent and then has the ability to come back from the overload faster than his opponent.

That is why Lackey isn't in his deck. I would like to say that everyone should rethink what they are saying before pulling out the cross to burn him on. THE FORMAT HAS SLOWED DOWN!!!! If you can't overload your opponent before he has caught up to you, you lose. Flat out, no other way around it. Any intellegent person would know what to do against a Lackey. (Ehhh I'll block it with my BOP, then my wall until I kill you.) Now if your playing against non-White non-Red decks it might be good to side in but what do expect from your opponent???

kirdape3
03-03-2005, 09:30 PM
I expect to be able to let that Lackey draw fire, then kill them with a Warchief and company. If he hits, in a lot of cases that's a huge swing. If he doesn't, then that's fine. Killing a Bird or mutualing with an Elf is perfectly acceptable to me. Otherwise, he's Vials 5-8. I'd personally play with a creature that says 'When this deals combat damage to an opponent, add up to RRRRR to your mana pool. This mana may only be used to cast Goblins.'

Goblin Lackey is banned in Extended for a reason - this deck would be utterly dominant in that format if he was still legal. It's Tinker for red... that can't be horrible. Skirk Prospector isn't anywhere near on this level.

Evil Roopey
03-03-2005, 10:36 PM
The format slowed down? Thats a really bold statement, considering all it has done has become faster. Everyday people are working on making Solidarity and WeldSur better and faster decks. ATS takes around 4 turns until you can't beat them anymore, and racing a turn five Disk or turn 4 Wrath against LandStill is very hard without Lackey. Hell even GoblinSligh will kill your tuirn 4-5. I dont knwo where you are getting that the format has slowed down in anyway.

Roop

mackaber
03-04-2005, 07:38 AM
@Watcher: The basic assumption behind your whole argument is that you wan't to build a sort of a controlish goblin dec around your Aether Vials, now obviously this is a viable strategy since it seems to be working in extended right?
The point is however, when looking at a format with a greater cardpool there will be some other strong cards that you might suite the dec quite nicely, now Legacy gives us an additional tool in form of Goblin Lackey.
Since we already have a card that serves a simialar function, and might even be supirior, since it can't be blocked and is better than the Lackey when drawn late in the game we could assume that we don't need Lackey anymore, since it does not suite the dec's strategy as well.
I for my part think this logic is extremely flawed, for one thing Angel comparing goblin lakey to Mon's Goblin Raiders is not doing lakey any justice, and your other argument to defeat his claim to beeing one of the most broken goblin's of all time is that he is so easy to answer, hell yeah he's a 1/1 red creature what were you expecting? To quote David Price on this one "There's no wrong threats only wrong answers". And goblin lakey is one hell of a threat on turn 1. Assuming your playing first there is only a very limited number of spells that are actually beeing played that can handle him and in case your opponent puts a 1/1 or god forbid 0/1 creature in his way you still have 6 or so cards in your dec to kill it and let lakey through. Trading your lakey for StP, FoW, or findhorn elf is rarely going to be a bad play since it draws out the good answer's for your other dudes or stunts the opponent's developement. And don't you tell me that people are not affraid when goblin lakey comes down on turn 1.
And why is that so? because hitting with a turn one lakey is always good, you can do so much more than just siege gang turn one. Double piledriver any one? I personally love matron for piledriver go.
I agree lakey sucks later than turn 1 but hell how good is vial any later than turn 2?
All this leads me to the conclusion that maybe when building this dec we should take a better look at the available cards and try to exploit these cards as best as possible, even if this means to push the dec into a slightly different direction.

Watcher487
03-04-2005, 08:30 AM
@Roop: Thank you for agreeing with me. Prior to the bannings The fundemental turn for Legacy was (big galla openning) TURN 3. I wonder what it is now....... ohhh yeah TURN 4. Thank you, try the veil.

@mackaber: It's not like I'm dissing the little punk goblin. I have used it to some good. But my big thing is that I like it as a sideboard option. But the thing that a few people obviously ignore is the fact that prior to the bannings the deck played about 16 land with 6 fetchs, and was not able to cast Siege Gang unless you sac'd a bunch of goblins. With both of these decks are so high on the curve to begin with. The other problem, Lackey places goblins into play AFTER COMBAT, no hasty beasts, no huge win.

Evil Roopey
03-04-2005, 12:03 PM
Ok I think I am really missing something here. How is Lackey good in GoblinSligh which is full of dudes that you can cast with ease, but he's not good in a deck where your guys actually cost redonkulous amounts of mana. Goblin Sligh runs critters that cost 1 and 2 mana maybe 3 if you are running Warchief yet no one argues against him in that deck. Is he even neccesary in Sligh? No, no he isn't. Actually the deck would be fine without it. Buts that as far as it would go, fine. We want perfect. We don't settle for fine. Goblin Lackey just makes Goblin decks good. Sure they would be OK without him, but we want a deck that is actually going to beat the person that sits across from you.

You don't want to watch Solidarity go off when the only thing you have played is a Vial, Prospector, and a Warchief. Is that going to kill them by turn 4? No it isn't. So why would you ever ever play this deck without Lackey?

Flames deleted. No need for personal attacks.

Pete_Rotten

LunchBox
03-04-2005, 12:21 PM
I think a lot of this is personal preference, and there isn't going to be an answer on the Lacky really until someone does some serious testing with the deck and takes it to a tournament. Personally, I think the Lackeys are better than the Chrome Moxen in the deck, but maybe that's just me. In CA's favor, he did Top 4 with it in Albany last weekend. I'm assuming that was a no Lackey build. What about the build that calosso Top 8'd with at the Lucky Frog last week? Lackey or no Lackey?


You don't want to watch Solidarity go off when the only thing you have played is a Vial, Prospector, and a Warchief. Is that going to kill them by turn 4? No it isn't.

The Extended tech for playing fast combo is to use a single Goblin Pyromancer in the MD to Matron up. It usually pushes the kill to turn 3-4. It also acts as a Wrath of God against the mirror.

Evil Roopey
03-04-2005, 12:33 PM
Calloso was running my build. The only reason he played it was cuz i gave him the list like 2 days before the tounry.

Pyromancer might have some potential, although it needs testing.

And just so you know that I have constantly been testing the deck for the past 2 weeks and wouldn't cut Lackey if you gave me a dollar.

Roop

Sims
03-04-2005, 02:30 PM
In CA's favor, he did Top 4 with it in Albany last weekend. I'm assuming that was a no Lackey build.
I've run it in 4 tournaments so far. The first one was with my initial test build (running 4x Lackey) and I went 2-2, obviously missing the Top 4 cut. In the 3 tournaments I've run since I've top 4'd twice (undefeated through swiss in one tourny) and barely missed the Top 4 in the 3rd as the Top 4 seeds ID'd in, using the no Lackey build I have listed above.

This has basically turned into a witch hunt because there is a viable Goblin deck that doesn't run Lackey. Fine, whatever, I just won't post in this thread or keep my list here up to date as I work on it. If people are unwilling to think outside the box that, just maybe, you don't need the god damned thing and it really does nothing for you... Fine, not my problem. Take things out, play Lackey, whatever. Enjoy.

LunchBox
03-04-2005, 02:50 PM
In CA's favor, he did Top 4 with it in Albany last weekend. I'm assuming that was a no Lackey build.
I've run it in 4 tournaments so far. The first one was with my initial test build (running 4x Lackey) and I went 2-2, obviously missing the Top 4 cut. In the 3 tournaments I've run since I've top 4'd twice (undefeated through swiss in one tourny) and barely missed the Top 4 in the 3rd as the Top 4 seeds ID'd in, using the no Lackey build I have listed above.

This has basically turned into a witch hunt because there is a viable Goblin deck that doesn't run Lackey. Fine, whatever, I just won't post in this thread or keep my list here up to date as I work on it. If people are unwilling to think outside the box that, just maybe, you don't need the god damned thing and it really does nothing for you... Fine, not my problem. Take things out, play Lackey, whatever. Enjoy.
You have to understand that if you post a Goblin deck on a 1.5 forum that doesn't have Lackey in it, then your choice to not include Lackey is going to be questioned and scrutinized. Defend you choice with your tournament results, which you are doing. That's why I asked about how it had been performing. I don't feel that either of the lists are perfect right now since Roop isn't running Cabal Therapy and since you have zero Lackeys.

Honestly, I think the real question is the following: Lackey or Chrome Mox? They both serve similar roles in the deck (accelerating goblins) and both are crap in the late game. How many games have you won because of Chrome Mox? How many times have you cast a Ringleader into a Chrome Mox instead of another Goblin?

Mad Zur
03-04-2005, 02:53 PM
Why are Lackey and Mox mutually exclusive? If cutting mana sources is the way to fit Lackey in, shouldn't cutting Mountains be just fine?

LunchBox
03-04-2005, 03:09 PM
Why are Lackey and Mox mutually exclusive? If cutting mana sources is the way to fit Lackey in, shouldn't cutting Mountains be just fine?
Because Mountains aren't card disadvantage, and I don't think the deck really wants to imprint creatures.

Check out the 1.x Goblin decks from Jeek. (http://jeek.net/library/phillie2005.cgi?consensus=1&deck8496=on&deck8503=on&deck8529=on&deck8532=on&deck8534=on&deck8536=on&deck8539=on&deck8553=on&deck8556=on&deck8596=on&deck8612=on&deck8629=on&deck8640=on&deck8649=on&deck8654=on&deck8663=on&deck8684=on&deck8699=on&deck8706=on&deck8711=on&deck8713=on&deck8719=on&deck8731=on&deck8739=on&deck8792=on&deck8811=on&deck8812=on&deck8813=on&deck8817=on&deck8820=on&deck8836=on&deck8837=on&deck8843=on&deck8844=on&deck8846=on&deck8848=on) I know it's a different format, but this is what the deck is based on. Only 36% of the Top 8 Goblins decks ran 1 Chrome Mox, 33% ran 2, 11% (4 decks) ran 3, and 5% (2 Decks) ran all 4. This tells me that the deck can be successful in the random Extended meta without Chrome Mox. Maybe the same is true in Legacy.

PS - Beware of the Jeek website. I've spent way too much work time on it in the past couple of days.

Artowis
03-04-2005, 04:48 PM
Ok I think I am really missing something here. How is Lackey good in GoblinSligh which is full of dudes that you can cast with ease, but he's not good in a deck where your guys actually cost redonkulous amounts of mana. Goblin Sligh runs critters that cost 1 and 2 mana maybe 3 if you are running Warchief yet no one argues against him in that deck.

Actually, Lackey is shit in Goblin Sligh ever since you guys cut the bigger men from it. You would've been better off running Raging Goblin over him. When the absolute best deal you can get off him is MAYBE Warchief, something is wrong.


We want perfect. We don't settle for fine. Goblin Lackey just makes Goblin decks good.

No he doesn't. The 1.x lists we're about 10x better than any piece of shit deck that was being worked on here and they didn't have Lackey. You wouldn't be copying the stupid deck from 1.x if it wasn't good to begin with.

Here's my take on the whole Lackey thing, the plus side is he's fucking amazing turn 1 esp. on the play. The main problem I can see with him is literally every single deck, good or shitty, has a easy anwser to him already. This is Legacy, land of lousy creature decks and burn. Quick count shall we? Every Survival deck has either a mana critter or FoW to stop him. Landstill has minimum 8 1st turn anwsers, plus it's arguable they don't even care if he does hit them once thanks to sweepers. Burn has burn, UG Madness has FoW and Rootwalla, black decks have a random goober, belcher wins on turn 2, etc.

If Legacy was slightly more refined, this wouldn't be so much of an issue, because what Kird said is true. Under most circumstances a simple trade is actually fine with you, which is why it's understandable a lot more people want Lackey in the deck. Personally I can see it both ways, since Lackey takes up another 4 slots in your deck (If he's not a 4-of, don't play him).

Anyways my version of the 1.5 deck built w/o Lackey (Honestly I'm not sure if this is the right build, because Lackey is broken, but I haven't played both enough) is just like CA's, except for the following changes.
-2 Chrome Mox
-4 Mountain
-1 SGC

+4 Wastes
+2 Goblin Sharpshooter
Goblin Pyromancer

Adding Lackey would be removing Prospector and Sharpshooter's become Incinerator's and possibly fitting a Sparky in the MD.



Edited By Artowis on 1109971781

Mad Zur
03-04-2005, 05:18 PM
Because Mountains aren't card disadvantage, and I don't think the deck really wants to imprint creatures.

Check out the 1.x Goblin decks from Jeek. (http://jeek.net/library/phillie2005.cgi?consensus=1&deck8496=on&deck8503=on&deck8529=on&deck8532=on&deck8534=on&deck8536=on&deck8539=on&deck8553=on&deck8556=on&deck8596=on&deck8612=on&deck8629=on&deck8640=on&deck8649=on&deck8654=on&deck8663=on&deck8684=on&deck8699=on&deck8706=on&deck8711=on&deck8713=on&deck8719=on&deck8731=on&deck8739=on&deck8792=on&deck8811=on&deck8812=on&deck8813=on&deck8817=on&deck8820=on&deck8836=on&deck8837=on&deck8843=on&deck8844=on&deck8846=on&deck8848=on) I know it's a different format, but this is what the deck is based on. Only 36% of the Top 8 Goblins decks ran 1 Chrome Mox, 33% ran 2, 11% (4 decks) ran 3, and 5% (2 Decks) ran all 4. This tells me that the deck can be successful in the random Extended meta without Chrome Mox. Maybe the same is true in Legacy.

PS - Beware of the Jeek website. I've spent way too much work time on it in the past couple of days.
Sure, I'm not saying Mox is necessarily good, but it's not just an issue of Mox vs. Lackey, it's two issues: Mox vs. land and Lackey vs. mana source (apparently). You could easily run both Mox and Lackey or neither one.

NeoNataku
03-04-2005, 11:38 PM
After reading through this thread, I would side with the second decklist. Cabal Therapy is just, wow good. I agree with some of the above posts. Lackey and Mox are both crap late game. Early game, they can both get you a turn two warchief. The mox requires you to toss a card, but later on that card wont matter much after a ringleader. Lackey, however, can repeatedly accelerate a SGC onto the board on turn two. I'm pretty split.

My question for you guys, regarding the second decklist, would Living Death and/or Unearth work? Unearth is a one mana global reanimation spell that can also be tossed if you're against the wall, and living death can do crazy things with SGC and Prospector, as well as work as a psuedo-WoG if the going gets tough. Plus, they both synergy with Prospector, SGC, Sharpshooter, and Therapy.

Is it worth a shot or is it just plain lame?

kirdape3
03-05-2005, 04:51 PM
Lackey begets a couple of cards that you really want to resolve. Culprits include:

Goblin Ringleader
Goblin Warchief
Siege-Gang Commander
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker
Goblin Matron (for one of the above).

That makes Lackey an absolutely critical card - you turn it sideways, it deals damage, one of those spits out, that's really good. Right?

calosso
03-09-2005, 08:18 PM
I don't know what is wrong with CAngel but Lackey is a broken card if u can go lackey first turn then siege-gang second turn swing for 6 then drop warchief play 2 piledriver, a sharpshooter or matron for 2 seems pretty broken to me, but that is only my opinion.

Good Lord, am I the only one having a tough time understanding this post? Please, proofread your posts, spell out the word "you," and avoid giant run-on sentences.

Peter_Rotten

Sims
03-09-2005, 09:14 PM
I don't know what is wrong with CAngel but Lackey is a broken card if u can go lackey first turn then siege-gang second turn swing for 6 then drop warchief play 2 piledriver, a sharpshooter or matron for 2 seems pretty broken to me, but that is only my opinion.

Good Lord, am I the only one having a tough time understanding this post? Please, proofread your posts, spell out the word "you," and avoid giant run-on sentences.

Peter_Rotten
/sigh....And to think I'm passing up Nagafen for this....

Ooookay, from the top. The way you wrote that scenario, you are doing something like this.

Turn 1: Mountain, Lackey.
Turn 2: Mountain, SGC magically pops out, swing for 6, drop Warchief, play 2 PDs.

That's a game loss. Lackey needs to connect before that SGC comes out. I will say this one last time: I do not run Lackey because I don't care about dropping <random Fat CC goblin> on Turn 2. My game plan isn't focusing on playing SGC Turn 2 with Warchief + Double PD backup. If it was, you can be damn sure I'd be running 4 Goblin Lackey. As it stands, I don't need a Turn 2 SGC to win me the game, and unless I can be assured to get him (Lackey) through, he is just a 1/1 dork. This is where what Artowis said about the build changing comes in, things would shift to a Sparky and Incinerator build so you have removal VS. the Sharpshooter and Prospector build that give you the secondary win condition. That build looks more for the Turn 2 Fat and is less interested in Vial.

Everyone is wanting to take the deck in a different direction, that's not a bad thing, you just build the deck differently. But simply criticizing me for not running Lackey in a build that is less interested in his ability (if he lives) on Turn 2 is completely stupid. Play with the deck, if you are finding that in your metagame you cannot win without a Turn 2 SGC (Kiki doesn't count, there really isn't anything worthwhile to copy on Turn 2 before he gets bolted), then by all means shift the build to focus more on the Lackey and the Turn 2 as opposed to the Turns 3/4. Just don't mock my intelligence or skill level because I don't Auto-Include Lackey in every fucking Goblin deck I build.

AnwarA101
03-09-2005, 10:37 PM
I don't know what is wrong with CAngel but Lackey is a broken card if u can go lackey first turn then siege-gang second turn swing for 6 then drop warchief play 2 piledriver, a sharpshooter or matron for 2 seems pretty broken to me, but that is only my opinion.

Good Lord, am I the only one having a tough time understanding this post? Please, proofread your posts, spell out the word "you," and avoid giant run-on sentences.

Peter_Rotten
/sigh....And to think I'm passing up Nagafen for this....

Ooookay, from the top. The way you wrote that scenario, you are doing something like this.

Turn 1: Mountain, Lackey.
Turn 2: Mountain, SGC magically pops out, swing for 6, drop Warchief, play 2 PDs.

That's a game loss. Lackey needs to connect before that SGC comes out. I will say this one last time: I do not run Lackey because I don't care about dropping <random Fat CC goblin> on Turn 2. My game plan isn't focusing on playing SGC Turn 2 with Warchief + Double PD backup. If it was, you can be damn sure I'd be running 4 Goblin Lackey. As it stands, I don't need a Turn 2 SGC to win me the game, and unless I can be assured to get him (Lackey) through, he is just a 1/1 dork. This is where what Artowis said about the build changing comes in, things would shift to a Sparky and Incinerator build so you have removal VS. the Sharpshooter and Prospector build that give you the secondary win condition. That build looks more for the Turn 2 Fat and is less interested in Vial.

Everyone is wanting to take the deck in a different direction, that's not a bad thing, you just build the deck differently. But simply criticizing me for not running Lackey in a build that is less interested in his ability (if he lives) on Turn 2 is completely stupid. Play with the deck, if you are finding that in your metagame you cannot win without a Turn 2 SGC (Kiki doesn't count, there really isn't anything worthwhile to copy on Turn 2 before he gets bolted), then by all means shift the build to focus more on the Lackey and the Turn 2 as opposed to the Turns 3/4. Just don't mock my intelligence or skill level because I don't Auto-Include Lackey in every fucking Goblin deck I build.
I really think the difference between the two builds is that they are trying to do different things. I think Roopey's build is a pure aggro decks that may have a slower clock than Gobin Sligh but it doesn't run out of steam as early because it has card advantage. CA's build seems that it plans to win the attrition war and plans to eventually overwhelm its opponent with its multiple threats. So the lackey is of less important when trying to go with this strategy.

kirdape3
03-09-2005, 11:57 PM
There are three seperate Goblin builds at work here.

The first should look like this, since it's the Top 8 build at Columbus.

Top 8 - Antoine Ruel

4 Mountain
2 Swamp
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Sulfurous Springs
4 Shadowblood Ridge
4 Rishadan Port

3 Mogg Fanatic
4 Skirk Prospector
4 Goblin Piledriver
1 Sparksmith
1 Goblin Sharpshooter
4 Goblin Matron
4 Goblin Ringleader
4 Goblin Warchief
1 Siege-Gang Commander

4 Cabal Therapy
2 Chrome Mox
4 Burning Wish
2 Living Death

Sideboard:
1 Chainer's Edict
1 Patriarch's Bidding
1 Perish
3 Duress
3 Cranial Extraction
1 Decompose
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Meltdown
1 Reanimate
1 Pyroclasm
1 Cave-In

Or, how about this one. It was 9th at GP: Eindhoven (The list isn't public to my knowledge because it didn't make top 8 and they don't post GP decklists).

Goblins: Olivier Ruel

15 Mountain
4 Rishadan Port
4 Wasteland

1 Siege-Gang Commander
1 Goblin Sharpshooter
1 Goblin Pyromancer
4 Mogg Flunkies
2 Gempalm Incinerator
4 Goblin Ringleader
4 Goblin Matron
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Skirk Prospector
4 Goblin Warchief
4 Goblin Piledriver

4 AEther Vial

Sideboard:
4 Pyrostatic Pillar
2 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Pulverize
2 Overload
1 Shattering Pulse
1 Goblin Sharpshooter
1 Sparksmith
2 Gempalm Incinerator

The third is the R/w build that stems from the older, burn-heavy builds. Rather than actually using good cards, it uses Seal of Cleansing. I am increasingly disenchanted with such a build in this format, as Seal is not a Goblin.

4 Plateau
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Bloodstained Mire
11 Mountain

4 Goblin Lackey
4 Mogg Fanatic
2 Gempalm Incinerator
4 Goblin Matron
4 Goblin Warchief
4 Goblin Piledriver
4 Goblin Ringleader
4 Goblin Piledriver
2 Siege-Gang Commander
1 Goblin Sharpshooter

4 AEther Vial

Sideboard:
4 Seal of Cleansing
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Pyrostatic Pillar
2 Gempalm Incinerator
1 Goblin Sharpshooter

Here's the thing. I'm far more likely to trust a pair of deckbuilders like the Ruel brothers than I am some random forum-dweller who doesn't run the best possible card in the archetype. (Remember, Goblin Lackey got banned in Extended after Worlds 2003 because the deck rapidly became too fast and powerful).

In the black splash builds, it's hard to fathom why Living Death or Patriarch's Bidding isn't available SOMEWHERE. Landstill just Wrathed? Cast a Death, at best they get a Dragon while you just kill them. Is Survival building up an overwhelming board position? Death that shit, kill them (since they were probably bad enough to have Anger in the graveyard, so everything's useless while you kill them). This version actually has the least use of Goblin Lackey, except that Lackey causes very swingy games.

The monored version has up to 30 Goblins in it, and when you're almost assured that a resolved Lackey attack drops something, that's probably good. Since the maindeck of Goblins and R/w Goblins are quite similar, you can be rest assured that I'm running Lackey in the latter deck, if it exists in a week.

When I'm 'blindly' criticizing the non-inclusion of Lackey, it's because having both options is actually available (just find room somewhere for a single Prospector in the R/w build and find it off of Matron if you want to combo kill) and you can and will win games off of the random Lackey into Siege-Gang draws. The R/b deck really still wants the ability to cast a 5cc bomb spell that wins the game immediately upon resolution (one of the recursion twins) and somewhat of an ability to assume the control role against the aggro decks.

I don't know, maybe I'm just that much worse at Magic than you guys. But I'm going to listen and pattern my decks after the best ones available, and they certainly aren't anything from this format.

Happy Gilmore
03-10-2005, 01:46 AM
All this talk about Lackey is going nowhere. Everyone is so upsessed with this concept that they are over looking a very important aspect to these decks, disruption. Ok, I admit that in Arizona I have little real opportunity to play Legacy but I do play online ext. And let me tell you, the thing I fear the most from Goblins is the Therapy. Any non burn based goblin deck is going to face a uphill battle against combo and control if it doesnt have any disruption, period.

one really simple example, and I'll shut up.

T&N vs Goblins in online ext:

t&n packs moments peace main, as well as platinum angels and the goon squad. (comparable to various decks in legacy, ie. solidarity and ATS which can almost assure a win once a certain criteria is met.)

Gobins plays almost the exact goblin list minus the fanatic, running sledders instead. Runs 4 burning wish main, as well as 4 therapy, 4x vial

Burning wish for extraction means you just win by racing them, add to that 4 Therapys and it becomes an uphill battle for the T&N player.

All I am really trying to say is that Therapy and black in general is key in almost every bad matchup, which I am sure was a major contributer to CA's success. Corrupted angel, could you tell us what you thought of the disruption you are currently packing? And would Burning Wish be out of the question?

BoTS
03-10-2005, 02:12 AM
But then you have to realize that your statement is a moot point because Tooth and Nail is a nonexistent deck in Legacy.

Happy Gilmore
03-10-2005, 02:35 AM
I was simply trying to make the point that without disruption the goblin deck cant win. Same thing goes for Legacy as well, direct damage can only go so far. The deck needs both beats and disruption to be most effective.

LunchBox
03-10-2005, 10:40 AM
In the black splash builds, it's hard to fathom why Living Death or Patriarch's Bidding isn't available SOMEWHERE. Landstill just Wrathed? Cast a Death, at best they get a Dragon while you just kill them. Is Survival building up an overwhelming board position? Death that shit, kill them (since they were probably bad enough to have Anger in the graveyard, so everything's useless while you kill them). This version actually has the least use of Goblin Lackey, except that Lackey causes very swingy games.

Or you could just run 4x Cabal Therapy and tons of Goblins and Therapy the Wrath/Disk out of the Landstill player's hand instead of hoping a 5cc spell resolves. I don't think the balls-to-the-wall mono-red version can be run successfully in a field full of Landstill (which 1.5 is becoming...again) since Landstill punishes aggro for overextending. And that's how Goblins wins most of the time: overextend the board until they deal 20+ damage. Cabal Therapy allows a weapon against Landstill and other board sweepers that mono-red doesn't. Plus the R/b could bring in 3-4 Duress out of the board for games 2 and 3.


But then you have to realize that your statement is a moot point because Tooth and Nail is a nonexistent deck in Legacy.

Just replace Tooth and Nail with Survival Variant X and you have the same situation. I'm not saying that Burning Wish is great in the deck, but Cabal Therapy would certainly help out against any of the Survival variants. Plus you get to run Goblin Sharpshooter.

mackaber
03-11-2005, 06:57 PM
I've actually tested the matchup against landstill with a monored version running vial and lakey with 22 land including 4 wastelands and 3 ports plus a toolbox creature suite insted of flunkies.
The matchup was about 50/50 but tended to be easyier to play for the landstill player. Here the disruption via land destruction worked nicely to help win with an aggresive draw.
I feel that running ports really has nice synergie with the decs general strategy, but further testing will have to tell.
Also running 1 Sparksmith seems quite strong while KikiJiki is probably overkill.

scrumdogg
03-14-2005, 02:48 PM
Nasty nonsense deleted.
Peter_Rotten

One of the difficulties in Legacy currently, as pointed out by Aaron Forsythe of all people, and highlighted by this thread is the 'small pockets of individual metagames'. We do not yet (YET) have the national tournament structure of a GP, PT or PTQs (even something along the lines of an NAC) to focus the format. Therefore, you will see radically different versions in aggro heavy Vancouver, burn-happy Albany, and control heavy Syracuse - and all three might be successful - in their own metagame. Until our format has the high level support needed, a lens if you will, to focus our format (which is why Standard & 1.x have more regulated metagames, in part, because there IS a larger stage and people prepare specifically for that larger stage) we will remain diluted by local needs & concerns.

TheInfamousBearAssassin
03-14-2005, 09:57 PM
Just a note: You can't site the fact that Extended builds don't use Goblin Lackey as an argument, because Goblin Lackey is banned in Extended. Because when it wasn't, every Japanese player played it in their Gobvantage decks and did ridiculous things with it. Just saying.

frogboy
03-15-2005, 10:23 PM
I only played Goblins in Extended, but I dropped black entirely and just sideboarded green, essentially cutting hand disruption then sideboarding in answers to problems. I havn't tested in Legacy yet, but I'm not sure if I would go back to playing Therapies or if I'd play Lackey.

First, Therapy is not a Goblin. This means it doesn't affect the board or go into your hand off a Ringleader. It is most potent when you've resolved a Vial, but the problem with that thinking is that you typically won't resolve the Vial against the decks that you want to be Therapy-ing. It's also terrific at filling up your hand when you're trying to curve out without a Vial.

Lackey. I'd definitely test it. My Extended list:

4 Wasteland
2 Chrome Mox
1 Forest
4 Wooded Foothills
8 Mountain
3 Karplusan Forest
2 Siege-Gang Commander
1 Goblin Pyromancer
1 Goblin Goon
4 Goblin Ringleader
4 Goblin Matron
2 Goblin Sharpshooter
4 Goblin Warchief
1 Sparksmith
3 Gempalm Incinerator
4 Goblin Piledriver
4 Skirk Prospector
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 AEther Vial

The sideboard is not particularly relevant. Obviously, in a port, the bad lands will get cut for duals. I'm not sure if I'd continue to play Wastelands or not; they might become ports, Moxen, or basics.

These are the cards I could consider cutting from the maindeck for Lackey or something else: Pyromancer, SGC, Goblin Goon, 2 Gempalms, the second Sharpshooter, and the Sparksmith. Additionally, Skirk Prospectors could be cut if necessary.

Goblin Goon is an easy out. His primary functions are to not scoop to Engineered Plague and beat up nonGoblin red decks. Neither of those is that useful. Double SCG is very amazing, both to draw and tutor for. It's also a very powerful Lackey drop. Sharpshooter is completely insane against Survival decks and aggro in general. I might want a third. The Sparksmith shitkicks Madness right in the teeth, in addition to being able to kill utility combo creatures. Gempalms are amazing against creatures in general, the mirror, and aren't dead, but I might cut one or two. Prospectors accelerate Warchief. Pyromancer is excellent against slower Extended combo, but probably less so against storm-based combo that can kill on turn three. It's ridiculously powerful in the mirror, though.

As a side note, I don't particularly care for Kikijiki, because he's mostly good when you're already winning. It's obviously not bad if you resolve a Matron with a Vial at four or five, but you're probably winning if that happens anyway.

So that leaves cutting a Goon, a Prospector, Pyromancer, and a Gempalm for Lackeys. I won't repost the decklist so as to avoid pissing off Peter, though.

Obviously, the problem with Lackey is that every single deck can deal with it with ease. That is, however, answers that aren't killing Warchiefs. Not sure how good the tradeoff is.

That does leave the deck with zero hand disruption, though. Dunno how good that is in this format.

Something to ponder: All the FCG decklists played 4x Prospector and 4x Lackey...but no Fanatic. Fanatic is obviously insane against aggro, but he's decidedly mediocre in other matchups. It might be worth testing with three or less of those.

Evil Roopey
03-16-2005, 12:35 PM
I have been obviously working with this deck for a while now and the build I happen to be running right now is MonoRed. There was never a reason to have the splash. Our metagame down here in VA is going crazy. I really don't know whats going on. More and more combo seems to be popping its head into the scene. So i have accordingling changed the board and maindeck.

Lands//
11x Mountain
4x Wooded Foothills
1x Bloodstained Mire
3x Wasteland

Vials//
4x Aether Vial

Goobos//
4x Goblin Lackey
4x Goblin Warchief
4x Skirk Prospector
4x Goblin Matron
4x Goblin Ringleader
4x Mogg Fanatic
4x Goblin Piledriver
4x Goblin Incinerator
1x Goblin Sharpshooter
1x Siege-Gang Commander
1x Sparksmith
1x Goblin Pyromancer
1x Kiki-Jiki

I cut the Flunkies from the deck because well, they dont do anything. They apply the beats sure, but they just aren't necessary in this deck. So instead I added a toolbox of Goblins so that I had more versatility. The card choices are pretty damn obvious, and most of the people have gone over them while arguing.

Kiki-jiki really might not make the cut, because he really is a win more card. As of now though he has pulled me out of some tight situations, plus the theory behind this deck is card advantage, and boy oh boy is he good at that. :p

Just some food for your brains,
Roop

frogboy
03-16-2005, 11:22 PM
The reason for a splash is there are numerous cards, primarily enchantments, that wreck you in a most savage manner.

Why are you only playing three Wastelands? The card is a four of or a none of, with the sole exception being if you run one, plus Crucibles and Intuitions.

Obfuscate Freely
03-17-2005, 12:45 AM
The reason for a splash is there are numerous cards, primarily enchantments, that wreck you in a most savage manner.
I think what Roopey was trying to say is that our metagame in NoVa doesn't require a splash. The Goblin decks around here originally started splashing green to hose Enchantress decks, and they continued to splash so they could answer Survival. Lately, though, Enchantress has seen a lot less play, and I believe that Vial Goblins's record against Survival has been positive without the splash.

Personally, if I were to splash in Vial Goblins, I'd likely prioritize combo hate over enchantment hate right now. If that were the case I'd likely follow the lead of the Extended players and go with black. Cabal Therapy is just so good.


Why are you only playing three Wastelands? The card is a four of or a none of, with the sole exception being if you run one, plus Crucibles and Intuitions.
I see absolutely no logic behind that statement. If he feels that the deck needs 19 lands, but only needs 16 red sources, then there is very little reason not to run 3 Wastes. Running a 4th Wasteland would require cutting either a red source or a nonland; perhaps Roopey feels that Wasteland #4 is worth neither sacrifice.

Unless there is a better non-mountain land to run (Port, Factory?), it makes perfect sense to run 3 Wastelands.


everyone arguing about Lackey

I can appreciate that CorruptedAngel is thinking "outside the box" and not assuming Goblin Lackey to be an auto-include. However, even upon reconsideration, Lackey seems to be very powerful in this deck and I would only cut it after thoroughly testing and deciding that he was actually worse than alternative choices.

In a lot of this deck's tougher matchups (mostly against combo and control), Lackey should help much more than hurt. He accelerates your clock, and protects your card drawing. I also think that with a build like Roopey's, with 4 Fanatic and 3-4 Gempalms, even creature-based decks will have a hard time consistently blocking a first turn Lackey. So like I said, it would require conclusive testing to convince me that Lackey isn't worth running.



Edited By Obfuscate Freely on 1111034810

Artowis
03-17-2005, 02:52 AM
I see absolutely no logic behind that statement.

It's incredibly simple when you think about it. Wasteland is one of those cards you either want to maxamize your chances of seeing early on (As a 4-of) or not at all (As a 0-of). Running it as a 3-of makes no logical sense as far as I can tell. The deck runs no other form of mana-denial, hence you can't even argue that it was supplementing another card in the strategy and hence just being extras. You're either lowering your chances of seeing the card for no reason or you don't need/want it enough to put it's entire reason for being in the deck into question.

Obfuscate Freely
03-17-2005, 03:23 AM
Wasteland does supplement another card in the deck - Mountain. There is no need to run a full 19 Mountains in a deck that can so easily use colorless mana. Running a few Wastelands in place of Mountains offers you a modicum of disruption at no practical cost.

The fact that Wasteland has that "tap: add 1 to your mana pool" line is what makes it so good; it is completely non-situational disruption because it will always tap for mana like any land would, and it can therefore take up slots that would otherwise just be basic lands.



Edited By Obfuscate Freely on 1111044301

Artowis
03-17-2005, 03:46 PM
Um... if you're going to use a arguement like that, why AREN'T you running Factory or Port then? Since you're using it 'to supplement Mountain' and not because Wasteland is actually good.

Obfuscate Freely
03-17-2005, 03:53 PM
Wasteland is generally considered better, I guess. You'd have to ask Roopey if he's considered other options.

My point was just that "Wasteland shouldn't be there as a 3-of" is a foolish thing to say when its being used primarily as a mana source.

Artowis
03-17-2005, 04:15 PM
My point was just that "Wasteland shouldn't be there as a 3-of" is a foolish thing to say when its being used primarily as a mana source.

The majority, usually don't even count Wasteland as a mana source. In an aggressive deck like this, I can't remember many times when I've ever not used Wasteland as mana-denial. I doubt it's really 'foolish' when it's commonly treated and catergorized for what it's main effect and use is, instead of the lesser used 'making 1 colorless'.

SpatulaOfTheAges
03-17-2005, 08:07 PM
Speaking from my experience with Ponza, I don't find that to be necessarily true. In decks like Zilla Stompy where there's virtually no colorless mana requirements, almost everything being 1 mana, that may be the case, but in a mono-color deck with a lot of generic mana requirements, having Wasteland as a 3x is acceptable if it leaves you enough red mana to operate without having too many lands.

This is especially true with the decrease in non-basic lands recently; the ability to kill those lands can be looked at more as bonus than as the sole purpose of running Wasteland.

frogboy
03-17-2005, 09:38 PM
Well, if you're using mana denial "as a bonus" why not play Rishadan Port so that you can constantly use it and be able to port basics?

If you're mostly tapping for colorless, it should probably be another mountain; hands with Wasteland, Wasteland, Mountain you MUST mulligan without a Vial. Three mountains is almost always keepable unless your creatures are all awful. Bear in mind that the most important Goblin to have in play is Warchief, and he costs RR.

I still think it's wrong.

SpatulaOfTheAges
03-18-2005, 03:08 AM
Well, if you're using mana denial "as a bonus" why not play Rishadan Port so that you can constantly use it and be able to port basics?

Port might be better. Port can also shut down two lands for a turn, against control.


If you're mostly tapping for colorless, it should probably be another mountain; hands with Wasteland, Wasteland, Mountain you MUST mulligan without a Vial. Three mountains is almost always keepable unless your creatures are all awful. Bear in mind that the most important Goblin to have in play is Warchief, and he costs RR.

Don't you think that depends on the hand? The odds of your hand having no plan besides Warchief, no Vial, no Lackey, and double Wasteland without another mountain or a prospector seem rather slim, don't you think?

Bongo
03-19-2005, 02:18 AM
Unlike Extended, Chrome Mox is more useful in Legacy since the format is slightly faster and thus requires your deck to be as fast as the other decks (if not faster).

This deck has a lot of imprint targets and can regain the loss of a card via Ringleader/Gempalm/Matron. So far, the Mox has been pretty useful because the deck is mana-hungry and needs permanent manasources.

My decklist is similar to Roopey's:

Mana (20):
8x Mountain
4x Wooded Foothills
4x Wasteland
4x Chrome Mox

Non-Goblin (4):
4x Aether Vial

Goblins (36):

1cc:
4x Goblin Lackey
4x Mogg Fanatic
4x Skirk Prospector
2cc:
4x Goblin Piledriver
4x Gempalm Incinerator
3cc:
4x Goblin Matron
4x Goblin Warchief
4cc:
4x Goblin Ringleader
Toolbox:
1x Goblin Sharpshooter
2x Siege-Gang Commander
1x Goblin Pyromancer

As you can see, the list is very streamlined, I have found this to be the most consistent and efficient version that's reasonably close to Olivier Ruels build.
Most things about Kiki have been said, and it's clear that it doesn't really belong into the deck. I also don't run Sparksmith because Gempalms are just better at removing creatures. The second SGC has been the nuts, and I strongly recommend running the second one. I also want to fit in a second Sharpshooter, what's the best thing to cut?

To sum this up: Ever played Lackey and Vial both in the first turn? [love]

TheInfamousBearAssassin
03-19-2005, 05:19 AM
Why not run Goblin Burrows? I can appreciate the argument that "x lands could be colorless", but frogboy is right that a single Wasteland will rarely alter the course of games. Goblin Burrows, on the other hand, can give the deck added threat density and help clear away large-assed blockers (Mogg Fanatic can suddenly take out a Ravenous Baloth)

T is for TOOL
03-19-2005, 08:25 AM
Um... if you're going to use a arguement like that, why AREN'T you running Factory or Port then? Since you're using it 'to supplement Mountain' and not because Wasteland is actually good.
You:
a) are missing the point of the 'arguement'.
b) are assuming that Wasteland was chosen without first being tested against other prospective candidates.
c) come off as arrogant, which not only hurts your credibility, but also any valid points you make.

The 'arguement' was a response when frogboy posted:




Why are you only playing three Wastelands? The card is a four of or a none of, with the sole exception being if you run one, plus Crucibles and Intuitions.
ObfuscateFreely pointed out (and rightly so), that this statement makes no logical sense.

Mountain only taps for red mana, while Wasteland taps for colorless and has the ability to trade with a nonbasic land. If the color of the mana does not matter, then Wasteland is better than Mountain.

Using the above logic, it makes perfect sense to trade mountains for Wastelands as much as the manabase allows because you are gaining versatility at almost no cost.

That being said, it makes sense to trade mountains for any colorless producing land with an ability that offsets the minor opportunity cost of the trade. Goblin Burrows, Mishra's Factory, Wasteland, Quicksand, Rishadan Port, Desert, Maze of Shadows and others are all possible substitutes. Some of these choices are clearly worse than others, but they all produce colorless mana and they all have an extra ability. The argument that there is a better replacement than Wasteland, however, is different from stating that Wasteland does not belong simply because you are only running three.

As for what land is optimal, it will require playtesting to determine what to put in, as the benefits of the switch will most likely be minimal, and varied according to metagames. I do think that Wasteland, Goblin Burrows, Rishadan Port, and maybe even Dustbowl could go on the list. If I were testing it, I would leave those three slots proxied in the deck, and decide when I drew it what land it was for the game to give myself a better idea of what land I'd like to be seeing.

Artowis
03-19-2005, 04:44 PM
Of course I come off as arrogant. I couldn't believe I had to explain why 4x wastes > 3x wastes. But then you have the argument (And oh man, I made a typo originally, I hope you're really proud of yourself for catching it.) that it's merely supplementing the land in the deck.

So since you realistically expected to use it for mana, I then asked why you weren't using Port (Or Goblin Burrows as IBA suggests) then, which is generally some good in Vial Goblin decks and made more sense as a 3-of then Wasteland. As Frogboy and IBA have said previously, only using one Wasteland will rarely have an effect on the game...



b) are assuming that Wasteland was chosen without first being tested against other prospective candidates.

Since Roopey made no mention of testing any alternates and they aren't exactly the first choices that come to mind for a Goblin deck. It seemed like a perfectly reasonable assumption to make.


To sum this up: Ever played Lackey and Vial both in the first turn?

No, because I actually like having a hand left to DO something with. Land + Chrome Mox / Imprint + Vial + Lackey = 5 cards already out of hand. If you actually have gas left, good for you, but I'm betting you wouldn't. [glare]

kirdape3
03-19-2005, 05:45 PM
Honestly, if you're running a 3-of land that taps for colorless mana in this deck it almost has to be Goblin Burrows. Wasteland is alright, but the number of absolutely MUST kill lands in this format is pretty much Thawing Glaciers - and you should be able to race Tide.

If you're going to run Wastelands, you really probably want to also run Rishadan Port to have a viable mana denial strategy while you ramp AEther Vial to 3.

As for Chrome Mox, I'm not sure it's needed. You're going to be spending a Goblin to make it such that your other Goblins come out a turn earlier... and you have Skirk Prospector already. Yes this format is pretty fast, but in a lot of matchups Goblins is a control deck - you can't afford to be burning cards for speed as you will simply run out of the former without killing via the latter.

mackaber
03-19-2005, 08:38 PM
Try beating Landstill without 4 Wastelands.
In my oppinion Wastelands rock, since they have great synergie with Vial/Lackey.

T is for TOOL
03-19-2005, 10:23 PM
Of course I come off as arrogant. I couldn't believe I had to explain why 4x wastes > 3x wastes. But then you have the argument (And oh man, I made a typo originally, I hope you're really proud of yourself for catching it.) that it's merely supplementing the land in the deck.

I quoted 'arguement' because it was not only a typo, but a microcosm of your entire post. Also, your 4x wastes > 3x wastes explanation:


The deck runs no other form of mana-denial, hence you can't even argue that it was supplementing another card in the strategy and hence just being extras.

is just flat out wrong. If swaping another Mountain for Wasteland affects the deck negatively, then 3x wastes > 4x wastes.


So since you realistically expected to use it for mana, I then asked why you weren't using Port (Or Goblin Burrows as IBA suggests) then, which is generally some good in Vial Goblin decks and made more sense as a 3-of then Wasteland.

You concede your position in a debate when you change topics as a response to criticism. We've suddenly gone from debating '4x waste > 3x waste' to 'there are better alternatives than Wasteland'. The change in focus is fine, especially since the first debate is off-topic. However, you not only come off as arrogant, but you are arrogant if you'd rather subtly change the topic rather than admit that you're wrong.

Artowis
03-20-2005, 01:15 AM
I fully admit I misconstrued the entire first argument. It sounded pretty awful in my head and I couldn't figure out why you would ever run THREE Wastes if you could help it.

Again, I point out the brazen fact that I am arrogant most of the time, just like most of the people here are. That's why I think we get along, oh so lovely, on these boards.



Edited By Artowis on 1111295770

Bongo
03-20-2005, 01:32 PM
As for Chrome Mox, I'm not sure it's needed. You're going to be spending a Goblin to make it such that your other Goblins come out a turn earlier... and you have Skirk Prospector already. Yes this format is pretty fast, but in a lot of matchups Goblins is a control deck - you can't afford to be burning cards for speed as you will simply run out of the former without killing via the latter.
Maybe that Lackey/Vial example wasn't the best one, but in that case a single Ringleader or Matron will refill your hand. So far, the strength of Chrome Mox has been that I can cast Warchief on turn 2 and then go crazy in the third turn.
Also with four each of Ringleader/Gempalm/Matron, I have found that I can recoup the card disadvantage from the imprint and still have a constant stream of cards.

Kurasa
03-21-2005, 10:24 PM
So far, the strength of Chrome Mox has been that I can cast Warchief on turn 2 and then go crazy in the third turn.

You can already cast Warchief on Turn 2:

land, prospector
land, sac prospector, warchief

Chrome Mox has no place in this deck. It simply cannot afford to throw threats away for nothing. Goblins is already fast enough, C-Mox does not speed it up at all.

As for the Wasteland argument, what could ever make you want to run 3 as opposed to 4 in a deck that needs only 2 mountains to function? Running 4 wastes does nothing to hurt your mana base, but helps you against many decks. Rishadan Port is another viable, option as it helps in the control matchup, but you already have good numbers going into those.

Run 4x port/wasteland

Sims
03-21-2005, 10:42 PM
Okay.. so you get a turn 2 warchief... and.... only 3 available mana on turn 3?

His point is that Chrome Mox allows for a turn 2 Warchief at the cost of 1 goblin and allows you to have 4 available mana on turn 3, which simply can be nuts. You need to supply a reason as to why Chrome Mox has no place in the deck, as it DOES speed the deck up.

As for the Lackey debate, I relapse... I've found it to be important enough in the control matchup to find room for it, despite the fact that after a certain point in the game it's kind of sub-optimal. I concede.



Edited By CorruptedAngel on 1111459524

TheInfamousBearAssassin
03-22-2005, 02:28 AM
[quote="Bongo"]So far, the strength of Chrome Mox has been that I can cast Warchief on turn 2 and then go crazy in the third turn.

You can already cast Warchief on Turn 2:

land, prospector
land, sac prospector, warchief

Chrome Mox has no place in this deck. It simply cannot afford to throw threats away for nothing. Goblins is already fast enough, C-Mox does not speed it up at all.

As for the Wasteland argument, what could ever make you want to run 3 as opposed to 4 in a deck that needs only 2 mountains to function? Running 4 wastes does nothing to hurt your mana base, but helps you against many decks. Rishadan Port is another viable, option as it helps in the control matchup, but you already have good numbers going into those.

Run 4x port/wasteland
This has already been gone over. 4x Wasteland would hurt the deck. The maxim that "4 of or none-of" is tired and lazy thinking, and it's simply not true. What matters is the proper balance of land in this deck, and the proper balance of colored mana, which has to be viewed as x/60, not x/15.

Bongo
03-22-2005, 02:49 AM
Thanks for answering that issue, CA.

Chrome Mox is no way an automatic inclusion in the deck. I'm running it right now because I wanted to speed the kill up since the deck was slower than Goblin Sligh in terms of pure speed.
I have found that with Chrome Mox, your average fundamental speeds up by roughly half a turn.

Also, by running Chrome Mox, the deck can kill on turn 4 like Goblin Sligh, while at the same time running a card advantage engine. So in that respect, this is superior to Goblin Sligh in most circumstances.

The fact that you have to throw away a Goblin hurts, but I have found the tradeoff for speed acceptable. This is largely because the card disadvantage from Chrome can be recouped via Ringleader/Gempalm/Matron, like I said before.

Anybody else tried this out? Do you think the speed outweighs the card disadvantage?

-Bongo

cartman34
03-22-2005, 08:48 AM
Anybody else tried this out? Do you think the speed outweighs the card disadvantage?
Well it depends.I am running 2 Chrome Mox configuration combined with 4 Wastelands, just like the latest Extended Decklists.Running a full set of Wastelands is really important and with Chrome Mox you can disrupt your oppenent and you can still cast some beatz.

I think that Chrome Mox without any doubt is powerfull but it has no interaction with Vial thats why I only 2 , I cant explain why I feel that 2 is the right number but somehow it is O.o

Sims
03-22-2005, 06:02 PM
I have been running 4x Chrome Mox still as I have yet to truly find a situation where I have been hurt by having 4x Chrome Mox in the deck, although I don't think that 4 is optimal. Less is probably going to be the correct choice in the end, whether it be 3 or 2.

frogboy
03-24-2005, 01:33 AM
I played two Chrome Mox in Extended. It's akin to playing six Skirk Prospectors. The drawback is that you never ever want to draw two, and it costs two cards instead of one. The mana boost, however, is permanent. It's also solid for making your opponent tap out when they think you're two turns away from playing Warchief/Ringleader/SGC and thus can safely play a permanent.

It's also really hard to lose games where you play Piledriver, go, Warchief, swing, without wasting a turn making Prospector.

Bongo
03-27-2005, 01:32 PM
When I was browsing through the Angel Stompy thread, the following occurred to me:

Angel Stompy runs three Chrome Moxen, and has 10 ways to draw cards (4 Tithe, 3 Mask, 3 Sword)

Vial Goblins (my current version) runs four Moxen, and has 12 ways to "draw" cards (4 Ringleader/Gempalm/Matron).

So far, I didn't encounter too many situations where the Mox was useless, but three might be the way to go. Although double Chrome Mox for turn 2 Ringleader was pretty sick.

Update: I moved the lone Pyromancer to the board for the much needed second Sharpshooter.

There has been much talk about the maindeck, but what about the sideboard? Right now, my shitty default sideboard looks something like this:

4 REB
4 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Goblin Sharpshooter
1 Goblin Pyromancer
1 Goblin King (tech for the mirror)
3 Goblin Vandal

Actually, I don't know what's best against Solidarity: a quick Pyromancer, some REBs, some fat like Goblin Goon or land destruction via Boil. I'm leaning towards the first two options, but don't know if that's the best thing to do. The Goblin King wins the mirror singlehandedly and can be searched up with Matron.

The sideboard definitely needs some tuning, so if you got any suggestions, feel free to post them.

RandomScrub
03-27-2005, 03:51 PM
I would take out the Sulfuric Vortexes in the sideboard. Really, what are you going to board them in against anyway. Pyrostatic Pillar seems a lot better. Also, I agree with frogboy, any more than 2 chrome mox is terrible, since I always prefer to have a land instead of two moxen

JRiverz
03-28-2005, 05:37 PM
Hi, this is a tournament report of my 3rd/4th finish at the Shinders Tournament in Minnesota for 10 duals. My deck of choice was Vial Goblins. I anticipated a lot of Landstill, fish and survival. My assumption was correct and it paid off. We got up at 11:00 and called Corey’s house. Corey and Jeff were set to go. Don made some last minute adjustments to his Landstill deck and we were off. Jeff and Corey decided to play blue-based decks. I met up with the people from St. Cloud. We were all playing altered Extended decks. The pairings went up and Josh announced that the tournament had 86 players and was going to be 7 rounds followed by a cut to top 8.

Round 1 Vs Richard playing mono green fading tricks. Game 1 I see all land cards but eventually get a Siege Gang Commander and win promptly. Game 2 is more of the same. He gains a lot of life and then I pile drive him.

Round 2 Vs Pat playing R/G survival advantage. I know Pat because we both play at the Monster Den. He is a 1.5 regular. I win the dice roll and go broken both games. I dump a bunch of goblins and he gets overwhelmed by the green masses. So know I am 2-0 and feeling good. I go out for a breath of fresh air. When I Return I am informed that the rest of my team are all sitting at 1-1. C’mon guys.

Round 3 Vs I forgot your name playing W/R control. I win game one after getting 4 goblins from a ringleader. Game 2 I waste his only mana source and kill him with assorted goblins.

Round 4 Vs Mike playing U/W Angelstill. Mike wins the first game when I draw 13 land and he gets 4 standstills. I win games 2 and 3 on the back of some broken draws and an Aether Vial. Awesome! 4-0 If I win my next round I will be able to draw into the top 8.

Round 5 Vs Chris playing Landstill. I get broken draws both games and ride the card advantage from Goblin Ringleader. I start game 2 with a vial and eventually beat him with no lands in play.

Round 6 Draw with Erik playing U/B/g tog. I head to Arbyz with Jeff and Don. Mmmm Fries. I get back just in time to draw with my 7th round opponent, Jeremy Zwirn. Now I haven’t played for 2 hours and the Goblins are getting mad. Corey ends the day with a record of 4-3.

Top 8 quarterfinals Vs Erik with U/B/g tog. I win a very close game 1. Game 2 he gets out 2 chills and there is nothing I can do when he attacks me with a lethal tog. I am mana screwed for several turns then I get land and run him over. This was the worst part of the day. I had to wait for an hour for Jeremy and Lenny to finish their match. I would play the winner. Eventually Zwirn wins and I lose to him in 2 close games. Oh well. I walked away with 2 Survival of the Fittest and 2 Polluted Delta.
It was a good day. Zwirn was my first lose of the day. My finishing record was 6-1-2. Not bad for a deck with 4 non-creature spells.

Here’s the deck:

4x Aether Vial
4x Goblin Warchief
4x Goblin Piledriver
4x Goblin Ringleader
4x Goblin Lackey
4x Mogg Fanatic
4x Gempalm Incinerator
4x Goblin Matron
4x Skirk Prospector
2x Goblin Sharpshooter
1x Siege Gang Commander
1x Goblin Pyromancer
4x Wasteland
4x Bloodstained Mire
4x Wooded Foothills
8x Mountain

SB//
4x Swords to Plowshares
4x Disenchant
4x Red Elemental Blast
2x Plateau
1x Siege Gang Commander


I hope You enjoyed reading my report.

Jesse

gustoh
03-28-2005, 05:56 PM
This was the worst part of the day. I had to wait for an hour for Jeremy and Lenny to finish their match. I would play the winner. Eventually Zwirn wins and I lose to him in 2 close games. Oh well. I walked away with 2 Survival of the Fittest and 2 Polluted Delta.


Jesse
I believe the match lasted about almost 2 hours Jesse...

I should have hard casted Slice and Dice...

And I don't know if I'm wrong but I think you were the only person playing goblins on Saturday. I was going to post a report but Carla said he'd post a tournament summary so I'm still waiting for him to post before I do mine.

Congrads on your top 4 finish

LT...

JRiverz
03-28-2005, 06:05 PM
I think one other person was playing Goblins. They were playing the extended burning wish varient. With black. I'm not sure what his record was at the end of the day.

Jesse

frogboy
03-29-2005, 12:47 AM
Goblin King is a Lord, not a Goblin. Pyromancer is 294729384729384x better in the mirror. Tutorable Wraths are hot, and they're also solid for alpha strikes. I like 2 Sharpshooter/1 Pyromancer/1 Sparksmith for utility creatures.

BoTS
03-29-2005, 01:10 AM
Sparksmith really isn't very good in the mirror. Sure it kills a few goblins, but unless you already have a better board position, the life loss is too devastating to be worthwhile.

frogboy
03-29-2005, 10:40 AM
Well, it's not an awful turn two play, but it's not something to Matron for, either. Sparksmith is, however, completely ridiculous against UG Madness. It's really hard for them to win if you get it by turn four.

Artowis
04-01-2005, 03:51 PM
So what does this deck actually lose to?

Right now I've been going 40/60 against Landstill for the most part and R/G and ATS can be issues if you get a slow start. But since you usually don't, I don't mind the few random losses. I've basically been smashing every single deck except fast combo and Landstill. I can even race slower combo like Solidarity with no problem thanks to Lackey, Vial and Pyromancer.

So can we improve the Landstill match at all?

frogboy
04-02-2005, 02:02 AM
Depends. Not having tested, I couldn't say. I presume the mass removal is what's giving you difficulty; there's no really good out to that outside of Patriarch's Bidding, which not particularly exciting. If, however, punching through for the last few points of damage is an issue, Price of Progress may be worth considering. Scald's also a possible choice, but ~infinite maindeck Disenchants don't make that a very palatable idea.

If it's permission, obviously, try some form of the eight blast plan, and draw Vial more often.

Sims
04-02-2005, 02:19 AM
From my experience, the big problems versus landstill were

-Mass removal: Wrath hurt, but was easily recovered from with Ringleader.... but Disk and Disenchant stop your Vial -> Ringleader -> More threats plan...

-Permission: Keeping you off Lackey and/or Vial can slow you down a lot, giving them time to dig for more answers to your threats (WoG, Swords, Counters, etc.)

-Standstill itself: You really don't like giving them more cards, and without Vial you cannot circumvent breaking it, walking your threats into more answers.

-My Metagame: In Albany, there used to be metric asspiles of Red. Hence my matchups vs. Landstill were skewed with the boarding in of CoP:Red + Pulse of the Fields + Chill. A pain indeed.


Edit: Before the "Well a smart player will bait the counters..." comments start flying, when you think about it there are really very few threats they give a shit about: Vial, Lackey, Warchief, Siege Bang, and Living Death (in R/b) namely. In my experience it was impossible to bait things out when they just let you play whatever you wanted, countered the important shit, then wiped the board clean and proceeded to go beats with manlands.



Edited By CorruptedAngel on 1112423042

LunchBox
04-02-2005, 06:21 PM
Is the build that's losing to Landstill running Cabal Therapy? I haven't had a chance to play against Landstill yet, but I was thinking that Therapy should be getting rid of mass removal. Duress out of the board should help (for Mogg Fanatic), and I'm trying 3x Port, 3x Wasteland with my mana base. I should note that all of this is theoretical, but if nothing else, it should make the Landstill matchup better.

Sims
04-02-2005, 06:45 PM
Therapy can be vital but at the same time playing vs. a build that has 3 Disk and 3 WoGs pre-board, and then 4/4 of those + a combination of CoP:Red and Chill. Fighting through 4 Therapies against Countermagic and Brainstorm is tough. Honestly I haven't had Duress in my board (despite it being in the 1.x boards) as for my Metagame there is so much that I'm trying to cram in my board I haven't found room yet.

Edit: Yea, busy. Grammar + such can take a break for a while.



Edited By CorruptedAngel on 1112481990

Bongo
05-16-2005, 12:30 PM
Compare this manabase:

4x Wasteland
4x Bloodstained Mire
4x Wooded Foothills
8x Mountain

with this one:

8x Mountain
4x Wooded Foothills
4x Wasteland
4x Chrome Mox

and this one:

11x Mountain
4x Wooded Foothills
1x Bloodstained Mire
3x Wasteland


Why are there such big differences here? For a deck streamlined such as Vial Goblins, one would expect a consolidated manabase.
The only common thing I see here are the 16 red sources.

Fetchlands or Chrome Mox?
This is a very important and difficult question. There are pro and cons for both options.

Fetchlands
+enable splashing (as a maindeck or sideboard option)
+increase the chance you hit Goblins with Ringleader
-vulnerable to Stifle, Blood Moon
-lifeloss

Chrome Mox
+provides crucial extra speed
+permanent nonland manasource
-vulnerable to artifact destruction
-cardloss

This is really a tough one. Chrome Mox is high-risk, high-reward. Fetchlands are low-risk, low-reward. Right now, I'm leaning towards the Mox, the speed it offers really pushes the deck over the top in numerous matchups.

What do you think?

-Bongo

LunchBox
05-16-2005, 12:39 PM
I'm currently running:

4 Bloodstained Mire
2 Wooded Foothills
10 Mountain (or 4 Badlands/6 Mountains when I splash)
4 Rishadan Port
2 Chrome Mox

I think I'm one of the few people that are running the 1.5 version with 22 mana sources. I like Mox, but it's definitely not a 4-of since it creates some anti-synergy with Goblin Lackey and Vial. I'm also becoming a big fan of Port over Wasteland. It gives you something to do with your mana when you have a Vial out, and it's never dead in some matchups like Wasteland can be. I was trying 3 Waste/3 Port, but I kept running into color issues so I've currently dropped it.

Bongo
05-16-2005, 01:22 PM
I'm also becoming a big fan of Port over Wasteland. It gives you something to do with your mana when you have a Vial out
Do you have spare mana?
I have found the deck to be quite mana hungry, even when there is a Vial out.

Although Port is useful against decks with nonbasics, it "eats" two mana every turn, which interferes with your plan of casting Goblins.

The deck IS manahungry. I lost many games because I lacked the necessary mana.

I agree with Chrome Mox, though. Three or two seem to be the right number.

-Bongo

CavernNinja
05-16-2005, 01:29 PM
Fetchlands
...
-vulnerable to ..., Blood Moon
WTF? A fetchland is hardly vulnerable to blood moon. If you are bringing in blood moon than it will much more greatly affect your opponent than you. If your opponent brings in Blood Moon then you should be happy with the game/match win since he brought in dead cards against you.

LunchBox
05-16-2005, 01:35 PM
Do you have spare mana?
I have found the deck to be quite mana hungry, even when there is a Vial out.

There are lots of times when it's more advantageous to not cast the goblin, but instead Vial it out (to avoid counters, for example) so here you would have spare mana. Might as well use that mana for Port. Not every game is:

Turn one: Vial/Lackey
Turn two: Piledriver, EOT 1cc Goblin

Most of the time, I'd rather go:
Turn one: Vial
Turn two: Port, EOT Lackey
Turn three: Port, Swing Lackey, EOT Piledriver

It obviously depends on the matchups, but I think Port is a little more flexible than Wasteland. Remember that this deck can be very controlling, depending on the draw and the matchup.



Edited By LunchBox on 1116261737

Mad Zur
05-16-2005, 03:36 PM
Wait a minute, who says you can't take out Mountains for Chrome Mox? Obviously at some point you have too many fetches and not enough lands to fetch, but you could go with 6 fetch/6 Mountain/4 Mox as your red sources, or something like that. The deck rarely needs seven lands, and it's got Mox and Wasteland to back them up. You could argue for going even lower on the Mountains, but this is assuming 4 Mox anyway, which isn't particularly likely to be the right number.

I don't know what the optimal manabase is, I'm just pointing out that you've got a lot of options. Also note that the Extended decks run a pretty constant 22 mana sources. Does Lackey really allow you to cut two lands?

Sims
05-16-2005, 04:10 PM
Also note that the Extended decks run a pretty constant 22 mana sources. Does Lackey really allow you to cut two lands?
For the most part, Yes. Not every deck has an answer to a Turn 1 Lackey, especially if the metagame is unprepared for it, and Vial gives you another (albeit slower in the first few turns) method of bypassing potential mana screw. For reference I'll post my manabase, but make note that there aren't hardly any decks in my meta right now which are reliant enough on Non-basics to make me want to run Wasteland, I deal with those decks with Price of Progress from the sideboard:

6 Mountain
4 Badlands
2 Swamp
4 Bloodstained Mire
2 Wooded Foothills
2 Chrome Mox

I feel that 2 Chrome Moxen is the right number. It allows me to have a permanent mana boost and I don't often have a dead one in my hand. The 6 Fetches allow me to thin my deck of land and make my Ringleaders more effective, and the 2 basic Swamps are fairly obvious includes so I can cast my black spells in the face of opposing Wastelands. Could my deck benefit from Wasteland? Possibly, but right now the meta in Albany has become stagnant to the point that Wasteland will only slow me down, and Price of Progress from the board will flat out kill the opponent, so that is a choice I made.

Obfuscate Freely
05-16-2005, 08:52 PM
I'm pretty sure that running less than 21 mana sources hurts the deck. Lackey doesn't change things enough.

The Extended lists mostly vary in mana count from 21 to 23, depending on how many colorless sources they run. 2 Chrome Moxen is pretty common, as is the minimum of 15 red sources. Keeping that in mind, I've been mostly happy with this manabase:

13x Mountain
4x Wasteland
2x Goblin Burrows
2x Chrome Mox

I have had problems getting enough red mana, but having Wasteland is invaluable. Burrows is questionable, but I'm usually not unhappy to draw it. Prospectors trading with Factories is hot.

I did start testing the deck with 3 Chrome Moxen. I occasionally drew multiples and it sucked. I haven't missed the 3rd, but I do like having them in the deck.

I admit I have not tested Port. Everything Lunchbox said about it makes sense, but I think my meta sees enough nonbasics to justify Wasteland. It is possible that Port should replace Burrows, since it complements Wasteland so well.

Oh, and you can easily swap 6-7 Mountains for fetches if you like. I run it with basics because they're Mirage black bordered. :p



Edited By Obfuscate Freely on 1116287853

Bongo
05-18-2005, 12:32 AM
Interesting, there seem to be even bigger disparities than I first thought.

Fortunately, there are some things most people agree on:

2 Chrome Mox
4 Wasteland/Rishadan Port
14-17 red sources

The choice between Wasteland and Port should be a metagame-decision.
However, we need to work on the configuration of the red sources. The number of red sources depends on the number of Fetches you run, a build with no Fetches can afford to run less red sources, leaving more space for other cards. So the right question to ask would be:

What is the right number of Fetchlands in the deck?

Obfuscate Freely
05-18-2005, 09:07 AM
Why can a build without fetchlands afford to run fewer red sources?

Sims
05-18-2005, 02:41 PM
However, we need to work on the configuration of the red sources. The number of red sources depends on the number of Fetches you run, a build with no Fetches can afford to run less red sources, leaving more space for other cards. So the right question to ask would be:

What is the right number of Fetchlands in the deck?
I agree with Ob... How exactly can you get away with running less Red sources with no Fetchlands? That simply makes no sense to me, as I would figure you would want more Red producing lands so you can actually draw them in the absense of Fetches.. ???

Anyways, I feel the correct number of Fetches, if they are run, obviously the Mono-R decks don't need to run fetches (although it makes your ringleaders more effective), is somewhere between 4-6. That would allow you to fetch out your Red sources and make Ringleaders more effective, while still having enough mana sources (Wastleands/Ports for you guys, more Mountains/Swamps for me) to draw mana when you need to.. Cause admit it, there are times when you just need to topdeck a land, and running too many Fetches can deny you that ability.



Edited By CorruptedAngel on 1116438161

NeoMike
05-18-2005, 03:17 PM
OK - I would like to reffer everybody to the list that got top 8 at the last PGI event. My friend Nathen and I made his deck at around mid-night, only because he loved playing goblins, and we had practically everything. I tried to get him to run Fetchlands, but he said that he wouldn't... Why? I don't know, but he was able to run both Wasteland and Port quite well. while not worrying about his number of red sources.

Here is his mana base:

15x Mountain
4x Wasteland
4x Rishidan Port

If you want the decklist it is posted here. (http://mtgthesource.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2682)

EDIT: I believe that the only arguement in fetchlands is that if your splashs another color, you have to run at least 4-6 fetches. But rarely have I seen a need for the deck to splash any color...

AnwarA101
05-18-2005, 04:07 PM
However, we need to work on the configuration of the red sources. The number of red sources depends on the number of Fetches you run, a build with no Fetches can afford to run less red sources, leaving more space for other cards. So the right question to ask would be:

What is the right number of Fetchlands in the deck?
I agree with Ob... How exactly can you get away with running less Red sources with no Fetchlands? That simply makes no sense to me, as I would figure you would want more Red producing lands so you can actually draw them in the absense of Fetches.. ???

Anyways, I feel the correct number of Fetches, if they are run, obviously the Mono-R decks don't need to run fetches (although it makes your ringleaders more effective), is somewhere between 4-6. That would allow you to fetch out your Red sources and make Ringleaders more effective, while still having enough mana sources (Wastleands/Ports for you guys, more Mountains/Swamps for me) to draw mana when you need to.. Cause admit it, there are times when you just need to topdeck a land, and running too many Fetches can deny you that ability.
My impression of the deck (I've played against it many times) is that it always wants to draw more land. Its a goblin deck that runs goblins that cost 3 and 4. In that case, I'm not sure running fetchlands in a mono-red build makes much sense. The thinning effect of fetchlands is very overrated (the math shows it to be very little) and given that this deck actually wants to draw into land number 3 and 4, why run fetchlands at all? If you are running more than one color then its obvious why run fetchlands, but otherwise I don't see it. It seems like most people have settled around 15-16 red sources with about 4-5 colorless sources.

calosso
05-27-2005, 12:29 PM
yes, but the point of thinning the deck out since it improves the chance of getting more goblins off the ringleader.

Sims
05-27-2005, 01:16 PM
yes, but the point of thinning the deck out since it improves the chance of getting more goblins off the ringleader.
Duh.

His point still remains. With the Mono-R version (i.e; The version where you aren't Fetching off-color lands) you don't need to search for lands or thin the deck as much because a hefty chunk of your mana base produces Red mana. If you do over Fetch, you then run into the problem of not being able to find your 4th and 5th land drops. Do I agree to not run Fetches entirely in the Mono-R builds? No, I still like fetching lands and making Ringleaders more powerful... But I don't feel the deck needs to run 6-8 Fetchlands like the Splash-builds. By the way, please refrain from a one-liner such as that. Everyone knows it makes your Ringleaders slightly more effective, just restating it with no other argument or backup is not going to support your stance.

AnwarA101
05-27-2005, 03:07 PM
yes, but the point of thinning the deck out since it improves the chance of getting more goblins off the ringleader.
Duh.

His point still remains. With the Mono-R version (i.e; The version where you aren't Fetching off-color lands) you don't need to search for lands or thin the deck as much because a hefty chunk of your mana base produces Red mana. If you do over Fetch, you then run into the problem of not being able to find your 4th and 5th land drops. Do I agree to not run Fetches entirely in the Mono-R builds? No, I still like fetching lands and making Ringleaders more powerful... But I don't feel the deck needs to run 6-8 Fetchlands like the Splash-builds. By the way, please refrain from a one-liner such as that. Everyone knows it makes your Ringleaders slightly more effective, just restating it with no other argument or backup is not going to support your stance.
I really think either way, the fetching doesn't matter. The amount that it reduces your chances of drawing that extra land that you just took out of your deck is so low. But you are free to run as many fetchs as you would like - just be aware that they aren't that much different than mountains, because your chances of drawing another mountain/fetch is about the same. I guess the only disadvantage would be the issue of Stifle (which isn't very big) and the life loss which is minimal as well. Given that it doesn't reduce your chance of drawing a land by much, it does about the same for your Ringleader.

Slay
05-30-2005, 03:28 PM
I know this may sound stupid and highly unoriginal, but has anyone thoguht of adding Food Chain to the deck? I was just recently playing against a Vial Goblins deck with ATS, and I was always a single turn away from getting Tradewind Muse lock on when he dumps Food Chain and Matron, gets Ringleader, performs some more funky stuff, and swings for 30 or so. This happened three times in a six game testing period. It seems to be fairly powerful in its own right, a resolved Food Chain means you'll never have mana problems again, ever. It's also severely hot with SGC's ability.

Also, splashing green gives you sb options like Ground Seal and Naturalize, which are fairly sexy.
-Slay

Sims
05-30-2005, 04:43 PM
It's also severely hot with SGC's ability.
You know Food Chain mana can only be spent on casting a creature spell, right? You cannot RFG something to Food Chain to generate mana to throw Goblins.



Edited By CorruptedAngel on 1117482227

tseriousterry
06-02-2005, 04:55 AM
Would it not be prudent to add chrome moxes when adding alot of fetchlands? If you are drawing into more goblins, you can imprint them for faster starts? I have been playing a similar varient for sometime now, almost 3-4 months, and my current land set up is:

2x Chrome Mox
10x Mountain
8x Mountain Fetch
3x Wasteland
2x Plateau/Badlands/Taiga (meta game dependant)

Not to throw the current mana base disccussion in a different tangent, but the only thing I feel this deck is lacking is some sort of renewable draw/card adv engine. Is there some way to bounce Ringleader back to hand? That would be nuts. Obviously this is would force the deck into a blue splash (crystal shard comes to mind).

Blitzbold
06-02-2005, 07:22 AM
Has anyone thought about abusing Kiki-Jiki in Legacy Goblins? He is a Goblin too, so he can come down 2nd turn via Lackey.

If he survives you can copy your own Lackey at the opponent's EOT (thus keeping the copy until the end of your turn) and then again before your next attack. This means that you will be attacking with 3 Lackeys on turn 3 and probably unloade your whole hand. Any opponent not able to deal with this will be dead shortly afterwards.

Kiki can also be used to copy the Ringleader, which is at least as insane as with Lackey, providing enormous advantage without the need to splash other colors.

tseriousterry
06-02-2005, 07:53 AM
If you look at the first two builds mentioned in this thread, the build mentioned by CorruptedAngel uses it as a one-of.

My 2 cents on the card is that its a win more card. From my testing, this deck has slow start but a very high top speed, reasoning being that it takes 3 mana sources to really get going (matron, warchief, ringleader if warchief is played the turn before, etc) but this deck can come out from a bad position and just overwhelm people with hasted piledrivers if the mana permits. Kiki jiki just makes your good board position even better. In that one-of slot I perfer the Pyromancer. Gotta love mad jail breaks, and it messes with people's math.

Obfuscate Freely
06-02-2005, 08:08 AM
The NoVa players have pretty much always played a copy of Kiki-Jiki. I was skeptical at first just because I couldn't find room, but I've since stuffed him in and he is of course ridiculously powerful.

Incidentally, tserious terry, Kiki is probably what you're looking for, a constant draw engine, able to make new ringleaders every turn. Even if he's stuck copying a Matron, Kiki simply wins if he isn't dealt with immediately. And Kiki is a much better source of card advantage than any sort of bounce.

I agree on Pyromancer, though. We in NoVa run him too. The Extended players found that Pyromancer was capable of speeding the deck up a full turn, and being able to steal that turn from Solidarity or Enchantress is very important.

As for your manabase, terry, 25 lands seems extremely high. You don't need 20 red sources at all; is there some reason you run so many lands?

And once again, fetchlands do not make a big difference in the number of lands you will draw, or in the effectiveness of your Ringleaders. Think about how many fetchlands you will pop before casting a Ringleader on, say, turn 4. Two, maybe? That's 6 lands out of the deck instead of 4. Let's say you've drawn 10 cards naturally (you went first), so you either have 50 cards left (without fetching) or 48 cards left (with fetching). The percentage of your deck that is now land is:

without fetches: 21/50 = 0.42
with fetches: 19/48 = 0.40

I'm not saying that the difference isn't significant, especially if the game goes long, but the tiny difference it will make in most games simply cannot justify the inclusion of Chrome Mox. This is especially true since Chrome Mox is at its best in the first couple of turns, anyway, long before fetches offer even this bit of deckthinning.

You should still run Mox because it is good in the deck regardless of how many fetchlands you run. If you are having problems drawing enough colored spells, you should cut some lands. That's the best way to reduce your chances of drawing them. :p

tseriousterry
06-02-2005, 10:23 PM
Good points. I have always thought that the tokens created by kiki jiki did not make the "come into play" effects. I think this was because I read somewhere that Cloud of Faeries did not untap lands if vialed out. Then I read the oracle text, now it makes sense. I think I am going to run 1 kiki jiki in my deck.

I feel that fetchlands can not be interchanged for chrome moxes. Fetchlands give you card quality (assuming that you would rather draw a card with a casting cost instead of a land) while chrome mox gives you accelleration at the price of card disadvantage. Do you really need speed when the deck consitantly goldfishes at turn 4? I would rather thin out the deck and add to consitancy, but these points are all small since as you pointed out, very marginal improvements either way. Chrome moxes wont lead to first turn wins and thining out your deck wont lead to massive improvements.

Given the mana curve, how many colored sources do you have to run? Extended decks choose to run about 15. So, how about

6x Mountain
8x Fetch
3x Waste
2x Chrome Mox

calosso
06-05-2005, 06:22 PM
I have done alot of testing and it seem that i never really want to pitch a card for Mox.
Also the reason the Vial Goblins is better then Goblin sligh is beacause it has enough card advantage so it doesn't burn out.

Also my mana base is 19 lands

3 waste
5 fetch
11 mountains

So far it has gotten me very far in the frog tournaments.

Double posts merged. -Zilla

Zilla
06-05-2005, 06:32 PM
I agree with colosso; Chrome Mox is bad for the deck. This isn't a combo deck like FCG was per se; it doesn't need to reach a critical amount of mana by a specific turn. Far more important to its strategy is its staying power in the late game, which Chrome Mox doesn't help. Further, Chrome Mox is an awful topdeck.

I disagree with the 19 land count, however. 20 is the very very lowest it should go, and I'm inclined to say 21 might be best for the sake of stability. 19 is far too few for deck that ideally wants 4 mana by turn 4.

Sims
06-05-2005, 06:34 PM
I think having below 20 mana sources is really a bad idea. 19 Lands is fine and all, but 3 of those are usually not going to be a mana source as they are going to be an LD spell, so you are realistically running 16 lands. That to me is not enough, as I've recently upped my land/mana base from 20 to 21.

7 Mountain
4 Badlands
2 Swamp
2 Foothills
4 Mires
2 Chrome Mox

21 Mana sources has been doing fine for me since I upped it from 20. Chrome Mox is a card I refuse to cut, as it allows for so many tricky Turn 1 plays it isn't even funny.

Badlands, Therapy for Swords. No Swords? Mox imprinting the worst card in your hand, Lackey, Go.
Mountain, AEther Vial. Vial gets FoWed. Mox, Lackey, Go.
Mountain, Mox, Piledriver, go. Mountain, Warchief, swing, go.

Running more than 2 seems to be a bad choice, but the Tempo boost it provides has greatly outweighed the card it costs to work.

:Slay:


Edit: Also, the Extended versions of this deck ran anywhere from 2-4 Moxen depending upon which build and color splash you were looking at.



Edited By CorruptedAngel on 1118007389

Zilla
06-05-2005, 06:42 PM
Our differences of opinion on Chrome Mox may be derivative of the fact that I'm splashing white for SB options, where you're splashing black for Duress and/or Therapy. I agree that Therapy/Lackey is a strong first turn play, and perhaps Chrome Mox is warranted for that ability.

The most broken play you're going to make with Chrome Mox in the non-black version is first turn Lackey/Vial. With this play, you've already used 5 out of 7 of your opening hand (Land, Mox, Lackey, Vial, pitch card for Mox), meaning at most you have two threats to play out with Lackey and/or Vial over the coming turns. That is not good. It means you're in topdeck mode by turn 3 without the means to finish up the game quickly, which is bad.

Bottom line, I can see merit for 2 Moxen in the black builds. Testing has shown (for me at least) that it sucks in the non-black builds.

Sims
06-05-2005, 06:56 PM
Our differences of opinion on Chrome Mox may be derivative of the fact that I'm splashing white for SB options, where you're splashing black for Duress and/or Therapy.
I would agree with this point. With Therapy, Vial, Lackey, and Duress (after board against combo/control) the Chrome Mox allows for a variety of sick first turn plays. I can't count the amount of games I've been able to race Solidarity because Chrome allowed a turn 1 Pyro Pillar that they needed to FoW and let my other threats on turns 2/3 through, or essentially lose if they couldn't.

frogboy
06-05-2005, 08:31 PM
Chrome Mox also lets you have the wet-dream inducing turn two Warchief, which is the most powerful use of the card.

Obfuscate Freely
06-06-2005, 10:00 AM
Is Pyrostatic Pillar a black card now?

Chrome Mox is great in this deck, with a splash or without. Its mana curve is so top-heavy that some hands actually require Mox to be playable, and other hands are simply amazing with Mox.

I agree with Frogboy that second-turn Warchief is strong, as is third-turn Ringleader (perhaps via a second-turn Matron) in some matchups.

In general this deck thrives on having more mana available to it in the early game, and it also has the card draw to make up for Mox's cost. I've cut down from 3 Moxen to 2 to decrease the chance of drawing multiples, but I wouldn't go any lower.

And just for the record, opening up with Lackey + Wasteland is often much more broken than Lackey + Vial.



Edited By Obfuscate Freely on 1118062900

tseriousterry
06-07-2005, 03:47 AM
Would it be sacreligous to consider green as a possible splash color? Green has their equivilent of disenchant with naturalize but also really strong hate with Choke. Also, a card such as Fecundity comes to mind as well, to help after a wrath or after you ping away stuff with a fanatic or SGC or when you sac things to Prospector.

Evil Roopey
06-07-2005, 02:09 PM
I don't see why you would ever run Choke over Boil. Boil is 10 times better, especially when there is a Prospector in play.

Fecundity is over kill IMO. It doesn't do much by itself, other than when you have Warchief and Prospector going nuts.

I also disagree with Mox. I have done quite a fair bit of testing with Mox, and I never liked seeing it. If you guys are putting up the same numbers though, I'm not going to argue it, I'm just not going to play it.

Roop

kirdape3
06-07-2005, 02:42 PM
21 mana is also REALLY low. Most Extended builds ran 23, since you actually need to hardcast your Siege-Gang Commander from time to time. That same conventional Extended wisdom had it as AEther Vial, or Chrome Mox, but rarely both since you can't keep your hand full of goodies for when they inevitably smash your board.

Sims
06-07-2005, 04:05 PM
I usually have no problems hardcasting Siege-Gang or Kiki-Jiki, unless I am getting raped by Sinkholes, but I do agree that 21 mana is lower than I'd like it to be. However, I'm not quite sure I see why AEther Vial and Chrome are mutually exclusive as one or the other but not both. To me the Chrome Mox is more like Ancient Tomb was for us in Food Chain Goblins; A Permanent mana boost with some form of disadvantage. Except instead of paying 2 life every time I tap it, I remove a card in my hand from the game. It speeds me up at a cost and allows me to obtain my objectives quicker. While I do understand the concept of not being able to keep your hand full when you are tossing cards to Chrome and Vialing critters out, I don't think it'll be a large issue in enough matches if you play the deck properly and don't over-extend into Wrath of God... Unless you are holding a Living Death or Bidding that you know won't be countered.

LunchBox
06-07-2005, 04:18 PM
21 mana is also REALLY low. Most Extended builds ran 23, since you actually need to hardcast your Siege-Gang Commander from time to time. That same conventional Extended wisdom had it as AEther Vial, or Chrome Mox, but rarely both since you can't keep your hand full of goodies for when they inevitably smash your board.
Just to put some numbers on that 'rarely':

26 of 106 Goblin decks that made Top 8 of a PTQ (http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/deckshow.php?&t%5BC1%5D=ext&feedin=1&simple_card_name%5B1%5D=chrome+mox&simple_card_name%5B2%5D=aether+vial&event_type=PTQ&deck_name%5B%5D=Goblins&start_num=25&start_num=0&limit=25) ran both Chrome Mox and Aether Vial.

24 decks (22.64% of the total) ran 2 Chrome Mox only, and of those 24, 20 ran 4 Aether Vial as well. So that means that 18.87% of the Goblin decks that made Top 8 at a PTQ ran 2 Chrome Mox and 4 Aether Vial, which is significant.

From my count, 12 decks ran 3 or 4 Chrome Mox, and only 4 of these decks ran Vial.

So it seems that if you're going to run Chrome Mox and Vial, 2 Moxen really seems to be the right number. Any more than 2 and it's time to start thinking about dropping Vial.

I got everything from here. (http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/deck_analysis.php?event=1&deck=Goblins)

I could spend all day doing this.

calosso
06-08-2005, 01:52 PM
True most extended players run diffrent mana bases.
But what i don't understand is what do you cut for the chrome mox I have tried to fit it in but i can't.
can you tell me what your build looks like so i can test it some more.
:)

Sims
06-09-2005, 06:31 PM
True most extended players run diffrent mana bases.
But what i don't understand is what do you cut for the chrome mox I have tried to fit it in but i can't.
can you tell me what your build looks like so i can test it some more.
:)
The question is, whom were you directing this question to? It'd be easier to answer if we knew whom you were asking. Anyways, for reference purposes, this is my current listing.

//Mana (21)
7 Mountain
4 Badlands
2 Swamp
4 Bloodstained Mire
2 Wooded Foothills
2 Chrome Mox

//Non-Goblins (6)
3 AEther Vial
3 Cabal Therapy

//Little-Red Men (33)
3 Skirk Prospector
4 Goblin Lackey
4 Mogg Fanatic
1 Sparksmith
4 Goblin Piledriver
1 Goblin Sharpshooter
3 Gempalm Incinerator
4 Goblin Matron
4 Goblin Warchief
3 Goblin Ringleader
1 Siege-Gang Commander
1 Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker


I've been fairly happy with this build so far, and 21 mana sources hasn't been a problem thus far. Things I'm considering:

Removal of Sparksmith to board. He's a great removal piece but he hasn't really been a game swinger or winner for me. Maybe I just haven't played against Madness enough.
AEther Vial count has done fine for me at 3. I like seeing them but I can't say I enjoy seeing them all the time, which was happening when they were a 4-of. As a 3-of, I see them enough for it to matter, but not enough to make me hate a dead mid-late game draw.
The 4th Ringleader might find it's way back in, but I've got a feeling if I remove Sparksmith, another land might make it in before the Ringleader simply for consistancy sake.

Also for Reference, my sideboard looks like this:

//Sideboard:
2 Goblin Sharpshooter
3 Duress
3 Anarchy
3 Perish
4 Pyrostatic Pillar

Perish has been prized in my metagame for it's ability to wipe the board of the various Green decks suddenly coming back (like Secret Force) while giving me an out vs. Amazing Results II when Dave B gets Worship with Troll Ascetic on the table. Pyrostatic Pillar shores up my matchup with Solidarity and other Storm Based combo, while Anarchy is the general answer to most things white. Duress comes in from the board against Control and Combo while the Sharpshooters can be brought in for various reasons against Survival as well as other creature based decks. Things to consider:

Used to run Bidding/Death in the board, but there were few matches that they were the only way for me to win. They might make their way back in with the increase in P.Deed and Kegs I've seen lately.
There could be a Pyromancer here somewhere, just haven't decided where.
Perish could likely be something better: From Pithing Needle, to Crypt, Bidding/Death.. anything.


So yea, feel free to flame, as I know some people will really want to.

cartman34
06-09-2005, 07:30 PM
Sorry but I don´t like your build because with the decision to remove a Vial and Ringleader you are cutting 2 cards which used to be the Engine of the Deck.The Vial is only really good when it hits the table in the first two turns.If you want Vial Turn 1 you should run 4 to increase the chance.Ringleader is the best Card of the Deck and I would run Leader #4 over SGC,Kiki and Incinirator all the time.3 Incinerators seem to be too much and 1 Leader and 1 Pyromancer would work better than 2 Incinirators I guess.
I also would like to add that I think that Therapy is about 10 times better than duress in this deck and that instead duress #3 in the Sideboard I would run a therapy.

just my 2 cents

ps:Do you board Perish against Survival Decks?

Evil Roopey
06-09-2005, 07:50 PM
No he probably boards them against Solidarity's transformational sideboard!


Just to let you know my list as well:

Lands//
15x Snow-Covered Mountain
4x Wasteland

Vials//
4x AEther Vial

Gobbos//
4x Skirk Prospector
4x Goblin Lackey
4x Mogg Fanatic
4x Goblin Piledriver
1x Sparksmith
4x Goblin Warchief
4x Goblin Matron
4x Gempalm Incinerator
1x Goblin Sharpshooter
4x Goblin Ringleader
1x Goblin Pyromancer
1x Siege-Gang Commander
1x Kiki-Jiki Mirror Fucker

I believe that the full set of Incinerator and Fanatic are essential to support the Lackeys. I also have been fine only running 19 lands, I think you are all crazy by the way. The 5 toolbox creatures fit in now because of lack of lands. You should all probably look into this list, I don't think I can remember the last time it didn't T8 when it was played.

Roop

Sims
06-09-2005, 08:02 PM
Yes, I removed a Vial and a Ringleader. Vial I explained why, it's a dead draw mid to late game and 3 is enough to draw reliably. Ringleader has been fine as a 3-of, because I rarely go through all 4 in 1 game (this isn't FCG) and Matrons are still a 4-of, allowing me to get one when if I need to. Also, I already stated that I might cut Sparksmith for the 4th Ringleader as Sparky hasn't been pulling his weight really. As for Incinerators, I won't cut them. Uncounterable removal is some kinda good, and when it is tutorable that's even better. Therapy is needed disruption, but it's not a Goblin. Could I switch a Duress in the board for a Therapy? Sure, no reason why you couldn't, I just prefer the 3/3 Setup.

Boarding Perish vs. Survival: I have done it before, as a Turn 3 Perish will wipe the board of any mana production critters/walls that Sharpshooter, Gempalm, and Fanatic haven't cleaned up already allowing me to set up a pretty strong attack... But they are there for Amazing Results. They're there to kill every threat that is in Amazing Results in 1 sweep so you can win, or take out a Troll that is sitting behind Worship.

Zilla
06-09-2005, 08:12 PM
Ringleader is the best Card of the Deck and I would run Leader #4 over SGC,Kiki and Incinirator all the time.
This hurts your credibility a lot, since Kiki-Jiki can copy your beloved Ringleader all day long, thus reproducing its CIP ability literally every single turn. The Jeek is like 12 Ringleaders duct taped together.

@Roopey:

What do you do about the whole "scoop to CoP:Red" thing? Wouldn't it behoove you to splash white for Disenchant? Your list is pretty close to mine, but I'm running 20 land and the white splash so I don't flat-out lose to white.

Zilla
06-09-2005, 08:29 PM
Moved by popular vote to LMF. The deck has been placing well in several different metagames, is well-known, and has a (mostly) optimized decklist upon which most players agree. It's also the strongest pure aggro deck in the format, if you consider RG Survival to be Aggro-Control. A cleaned up thread with a fully optimized list and card choices, strategy explanation, and matchup analysis will replace this one soon. -Zilla

Evil Roopey
06-09-2005, 09:22 PM
Actually there will be Pithing Needles in the board to deal with troublesome things as that. Pithing Needle stops to many things that hurt this deck for it not to be in the board. Also cool since now I don't have to splash any colors.

Woot for Meta Forum!


Roop

Zilla
06-09-2005, 09:31 PM
Actually there will be Pithing Needles in the board to deal with troublesome things as that. Pithing Needle stops to many things that hurt this deck for it not to be in the board. Also cool since now I don't have to splash any colors.

Woot for Meta Forum!


Roop
Pithing Needle doesn't answer Pariah (Angel Stompy) or Worship (Angel Stompy/Amazing Results II). Thoughts?

B is for Big Job
06-09-2005, 10:09 PM
Anarchy?

:Slay:

TheInfamousBearAssassin
06-10-2005, 06:53 AM
Play Anarchy instead of Pithing Needle, as Needle is teh terrible card.

kirdape3
06-10-2005, 08:52 AM
Needle answers a ton of things. As I've already gotten into in other threads. You're going to want to use Needle to handle some of the more powerful threats against you, not limited to equipment, CoP:Red, Survival, and even random stuff like Ravenous Baloth (from R/G, one of your most awful matchups).

calosso
06-10-2005, 02:04 PM
I currentl play anarchy and i have never sideboarded it in so pithing needle will replace it also
needle stops

welder
Mishra's factory
deed
cursed scroll

needle is nuts

Evil Roopey
06-10-2005, 02:19 PM
Pithing Needle is better than Anarchy in many ways, many of which were already mentioned, so I won't remention them. But the problem of Pariah and Worship is easily remedied because no one around here plays ASStompy because its a horrible deck.

Roop

SkippyTheLemming
06-10-2005, 03:37 PM
By playing needle over Plateau, you also rule out the chance of getting wastelanded on a 2 land hand...And it comes out as soon as you need it.

Zilla
06-10-2005, 05:24 PM
But the problem of Pariah and Worship is easily remedied because no one around here plays ASStompy because its a horrible deck.
It's a horrible deck that can flat out win against you turn 3 and do it consistently if it wants to. If Vial Goblins is as popular as you say it is in your metagame, then subjectively speaking AS is a strong meta choice where you are, regardless of you feelings about the deck's strength from an objective standpoint.

When I hear someone say "this deck never fails to Top 8", my first response is always to ask, "then why aren't people playing X card or deck that flat out kicks your ass?" I wasn't asking you if people do play it - I was asking how you intend to cope with it if they do.

calosso
06-10-2005, 11:39 PM
Godzilla people have already sideboarded cards for vial goblins people have been main decking

E. Plague
Cop Red
plague spitter
humility

and goblins have still won.
Because of this i am gonna try out r/w vial goblins to deal with some of these threats.

Bastian
06-11-2005, 08:03 AM
Truth be said the only cards that Goblins should worry about that Needle can't stop are Worship and Pariah, but these are used so randomly that Needle becomes better just because it circumvents more threats than Anarcy does.

I must say I've put Needles in several SB of my decks.

Laurent Fleury
06-11-2005, 10:14 AM
Truth be said the only cards that Goblins should worry about that Needle can't stop are Worship and Pariah, but these are used so randomly that Needle becomes better just because it circumvents more threats than Anarcy does.

I must say I've put Needles in several SB of my decks.
And how does the deck get any worse by adding 4 plateau to the MD and 4 Disenchant to the SB ? I mean it always have been the main problem of Gobo (gg-like artifact or enchantment, and mass removal), in extended or last year Type 2 they played Naturalize, but in Legacy I think Disenchant is the way to go, with Sword to Plowshare in White (no one can spit on the best creature removal of Magic no ?), and the Main Deck loses nothing, baring the wastelandable lands, which is sad but heck, I would whine myself if there would be no drawback at all in playing RW goblin.
For Mass Removal, holding a Ringleader in hand can help, or a SGC, but it's still hard for sure. Against Red and Black mass removal, I'm tempted to test Goblin King, but no, just no...

GRAH
06-11-2005, 10:45 PM
[And how does the deck get any worse by adding 4 plateau to the MD and 4 Disenchant to the SB ?
Skippy already answered this. I'll quote him.

By playing needle over Plateau, you also rule out the chance of getting wastelanded on a 2 land hand.
Vial Goblins is the kind of deck that never wants to lose tempo...especially to something like Wasteland.

TheInfamousBearAssassin
06-12-2005, 03:28 AM
Pithing Needle does surprisingly little to Silver Knight, Exalted Angel, Solitary Confinement, and Pulse of the Fields.

Zilla
06-12-2005, 08:29 PM
Pithing Needle does surprisingly little to Silver Knight, Exalted Angel, Solitary Confinement, and Pulse of the Fields.
Quoted for truth. The point is that the white splash provides you Disenchant for the annoying game-stopping enchantments and artifacts, and provides Swords as a convenient way of removing creatures with Pro:Red or an ass end bigger than 3-4. Pithing Needle is only half a solution in that regard. You can say that Pithing Needle is good against a lot of decks, but I've done a little research, and it turns out that Disenchant and StP are good against more than one deck in the format as well. Shocking, I know.

Anarchy is decent tech against white, but it's much more narrow than Disenchant, StP, or Pithing Needle.

Claims that Plateaus can be Wasted and therefore screw up your tempo is a ridiculous argument against a splash. First of all, you're playing Wasteland yourself, and those can be Wasted, which can screw up your tempo. Using a Wasteland on your opponent also screws with your tempo. And yet, the deck plays Wastelands. Why? Because the flexibility it provides outweighs the potential cost of disruption. I posit that running Plateaus is no different in this regard.

Furthermore, there's no reason to run a full 4 Plateaus. Game one, you don't need them, and games two and three, you'll only need one on the table at any given time. Want to avoid having your Plateaus Wasted? Run two of them and 8 fetches. If you don't want your Plateau to get Wasted, don't fetch one. This isn't rocket surgery.

calosso
06-13-2005, 08:09 AM
true white provides diesenchant but I have done some testing and splashing green wouldn't be to terrible. I think it should be tested a little furthur.

Capitalization, spelling, and grammar are important aspects of any post, particularly when posting in the LMF. Try to concentrate on them in the future, as unwillingeness to do so will result in a warning. -Zilla

Zilla
06-13-2005, 04:51 PM
true white provides diesenchant but I have done some testing and splashing green wouldn't be to terrible. I think it should be tested a little furthur.
White provides Disenchant and Swords to Plowshares. Green provides Naturalize and what? Artifact Mutation? That might have been important when Workshop was unrestricted, but I see no need for it now. What else is there? Choke for the Landstill matchup maybe, but beyond that I can't think of a single reason why you'd want green over white.

xenoq
06-13-2005, 09:25 PM
Kird ape. Duh.

You + spam = warning. You've been on these boards long enough to know the site rules. Start following them. Three word posts are not useful. If you think that a non-goblin creature card is an obvious inclusion in an all goblins deck, you're sorely mistaken. If you're being sarcastic, your post is still spam. -Zilla

Slay
06-13-2005, 09:37 PM
Green gives you Food Chain, which, in combination with Kiki-Jiki, SGC, Matron, or Ringleader just makes the game unfair.

It also gives Ground Seal, which is nice in some metagames, and a few other goodies I can't name right now. City of Solitude, maybe?

In addition, it allows you to play a single Forest because it is fetchable.
:Slay:

Zilla
06-13-2005, 09:47 PM
Green gives you Food Chain, which, in combination with Kiki-Jiki, SGC, Matron, or Ringleader just makes the game unfair.
I don't necessarily dispute this, but if it were true, why aren't people doing it? Back when Recruiter was unrestricted I tested Vial in FCG and it seemed like the Vial and Food Chain were in competition. In many regards, the two cards fill the same role in the deck, which is as an accellerant for your threats. For Ringleader to work properly, particularly without Recruiter in the mix, you want the highest concentration of goblins possible in the deck. Food Chain obviously doesn't help with that. It also requires you to remove actual threats to make room for it which hurts your redundancy. In FCG, it was obviously worth it because it Just Won Games™, but that's not the case in Vial Goblins.

Is the accelleration really worth the tempo cost, the harm to your redundancy, the weaker threatbase, and the worse game against control? Maybe, but I have doubts. Has anyone actually tested it?

Sims
06-13-2005, 09:51 PM
I haven't personally tested it, I've only seen it go off due to Kiki and Ringleader, but the deck has to run multiple copies of kiki, which can potentially cause problems if you draw multiples without a Food Chain on the table. I haven't seriously considered it, although it was pretty brutal watching it go off.

Zilla
06-13-2005, 09:57 PM
I haven't personally tested it, I've only seen it go off due to Kiki and Ringleader, but the deck has to run multiple copies of kiki, which can potentially cause problems if you draw multiples without a Food Chain on the table. I haven't seriously considered it, although it was pretty brutal watching it go off.
Can you explain how it "goes off" with multiple Jeeks? Just use a Jeek to copy Ringleader, sac him to Food Chain, cast another, repeat? That doesn't sound that reliable, since there's no way to ensure you'll draw into another Jeek. It also sounds like it would make it even easier than it already is for Landstill to beat you. Am I missing something?

Carney2k4
06-13-2005, 10:02 PM
I don't necessarily dispute this, but if it were true, why aren't people doing it? Back when Recruiter was unrestricted I tested Vial in FCG and it seemed like the Vial and Food Chain were in competition. In many regards, the two cards fill the same role in the deck, which is as an accellerant for your threats. For Ringleader to work properly, particularly without Recruiter in the mix, you want the highest concentration of goblins possible in the deck. Food Chain obviously doesn't help with that. It also requires you to remove actual threats to make room for it which hurts your redundancy. In FCG, it was obviously worth it because it Just Won Games™, but that's not the case in Vial Goblins.

QFT

The reason Food Chain was so powerful was because of stacking your deck with Recruiter and going off and gaining crazy amounts of mana until you finally overwhelmed them.

Now, you have a limited amount of creatures, with only Matrons to search for Ringleaders, which could end up being dead draws and result in card disadvantage.

Vial does the exact same thing as a Food Chain would, except it doesn't scream card disadvantage, and comes down on turn 1, whereas Food Chain would come down on turn 3.

IMO, it's just really not all that viable, or needed for that matter. This deck is already fast, can sometimes race combo and holds its own against aggro. Adding Food Chain would hardly even improve the speed of the deck, as you would be taking out Goblins, making the deck less consistant, which in turn would hurt Food Chain, and Ringleader for that matter.

Slay
06-13-2005, 10:02 PM
Like CA, I've only seen a Goblins deck use it, I've never tested it out for myself. What I have seen is a third-turn Food Chain, then a Fourth-turn Matron fetching Ringleader casting Ringleader grabbing three goblins including a SGC casting SGC getting 9 mana dumping your hand and winning the next turn, or this turn if you have a Warchief in the mix. It's probably a win-more card, but if it hits the field, you're going to end up winning the game. You don't even have to replace threats with it, you could go -1 Vial -1 Land +2 Food Chain.

Functionally, I'd say it's the equivalent of a double Lackey when talking about the mid-game(obviously Lackey is way better early game), you get to lackey out what you want, then abuse its CIP effect, then lackey again with the CIP effect netting you cards.

But more testng would be required.
:Slay:

EDIT: Godzilla, that doesn't work. The Kiki would be whomped by the newfangled Legend Rule, and you would get a good taunting. What i assume would happen is Ringleader generated ridiculous card advantage, Kiki copied Ringleader, generating even more card advantage, Ringleader and copy are sacked for 10 mana, hand is dumped, you win the prize.

Carney2k4
06-13-2005, 10:12 PM
Taking out a land in a deck that can run as low as 19 lands for a 2G spell just doesn't seem like it would work. Also, if you are running 3 Vials, -1 Vial is simply just out of the question, as the reason the deck can run 19-20 lands is because of Vial.

I would like to see the list you'd be taking the -1 land and -1 Vial out of.

Zilla
06-13-2005, 10:39 PM
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote (Slay @ June 13 2005,9:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">EDIT: Godzilla, that doesn't work. The Kiki would be whomped by the newfangled Legend Rule, and you would get a good taunting.[/quote]
Not if you sacced the first Jeek to Food Chain like I said in my post, no? I understand that he's a legend.

Slay
06-13-2005, 10:45 PM
I profess to know nothing about Vial Goblins, I don't even have a list created and I've never played with the deck in my life. However, I've played against it numerous times, and I can say that on the third turn, a Food Chain can get ridiculous in a deck designed to abuse it the most thoroughly. I only mention it because it's definitely sped the kill up by a lot, and the extra juice needed to beat out a hasty Sharpshooter might warrant it begin played.

On the other hand, I haven't seen the other guy's hand, and I don't know if he had Food Chains stuck in his hand unusable because there were better things to do, or because they would be dead cards in the circumstances. But again, it certainly warrants testing.
:Slay:

EDIT: Godzilla, your wording made me think you were sacking the Ringleader to the Food Chain. My bad.

Zilla
06-13-2005, 10:56 PM
However, I've played against it numerous times, and I can say that on the third turn, a Food Chain can get ridiculous in a deck designed to abuse it the most thoroughly.
Having co-created FCG for 1.5 and played it probably more than any other single deck, I can agree with this sentiment. However, even when Recruiter was unrestricted, Food Chain rarely if ever resolved against control. Landstill was always FCG's worst matchup, and by adding Food Chain to Vial Goblins, you'd be worsening its matchup with Landstill too, and it already isn't good.

Basically, Food Chain may improve your aggro matchup some, but in most cases you should already beat aggro easily. It seems to me that adding Food Chain will slightly strengthen your already strong matchups and significantly weaken your already bad ones. Admittedly I could be wrong, but I think it's likely you'll see it pan out that way in testing.


EDIT: Godzilla, your wording made me think you were sacking the Ringleader to the Food Chain. My bad.
Yeah, it was confusingly worded. My apologies.

Slay
06-14-2005, 12:49 AM
What about against RG Survival Advantage? Would the extra turn Food Chain speeds you up (possibly) be enough to just barely squeak out the win before hasty sharpshooter or recurring baloths get online?

And speaking of Landstill, if green was added to the deck, what about City of Solitude? Is it too slow? It means that you can save up until a later turn, and then bust out with SGC + Warchief + Piledriver and there's not a damn thing they can do about it, not even block or pop a disk.
:Slay:

LunchBox
06-14-2005, 10:33 AM
And speaking of Landstill, if green was added to the deck, what about City of Solitude? Is it too slow? It means that you can save up until a later turn, and then bust out with SGC + Warchief + Piledriver and there's not a damn thing they can do about it, not even block or pop a disk.

The problem with the Landstill matchup isn't the counters, but the board sweepers. Wrath + Disk (or Akroma's Vengence) is what causes you to lose after you've overcommitted the board. And don't forget StP. Vial can slip under counters (outside of FoW) and help you get some Goblins in play, but you still have to watch out for the mass destruction spells.

I still think the best way to play against Landstill is going with the black splash for Therapy and Duress (post board), but it's still difficult.

Sims
06-14-2005, 02:27 PM
And speaking of Landstill, if green was added to the deck, what about City of Solitude? Is it too slow? It means that you can save up until a later turn, and then bust out with SGC + Warchief + Piledriver and there's not a damn thing they can do about it, not even block or pop a disk.

The problem with the Landstill matchup isn't the counters, but the board sweepers. Wrath + Disk (or Akroma's Vengence) is what causes you to lose after you've overcommitted the board. And don't forget StP. Vial can slip under counters (outside of FoW) and help you get some Goblins in play, but you still have to watch out for the mass destruction spells.

I still think the best way to play against Landstill is going with the black splash for Therapy and Duress (post board), but it's still difficult.
Quoted for truth.

Landstill is a bitch of a Matchup, in all forms. The match takes some intelligent play, knowing when to cast your Therapies and Duress in the R/b deck, and knowing the limit between "enough threats" and "over extension" so you don't get extremely decimated by the Turn 4 Wrath. Without the Black splash, Landstill is even harder of a matchup, but we're not currently discussing splash routes right now.

Also, yes Zilla, the "going off" involved playing ringleader, getting Kiki on the table, copying Ringleader, RFGing and irrelevant goblin to play another matron for Kiki, RFG Jeek to play Jeek2, copy ringleader, etc... Requires more luck than I think it's worth, but I think it has the same "I Win" qualities of resolving Living Death or Bidding in most matchups. If the deck is built right, you should just win.

Zilla
06-14-2005, 07:30 PM
Also, yes Zilla, the "going off" involved playing ringleader, getting Kiki on the table, copying Ringleader, RFGing and irrelevant goblin to play another matron for Kiki, RFG Jeek to play Jeek2, copy ringleader, etc... Requires more luck than I think it's worth, but I think it has the same "I Win" qualities of resolving Living Death or Bidding in most matchups. If the deck is built right, you should just win.
Figured. In an all aggro meta, the green splash for Food Chain might be a decent choice, but in any meta with control, I think it's a major folly. To make room for Food Chain and still retain effective Ringleader draws, you pretty much have to remove Vials for Food Chains. This in itself harms your control matchup because you're removing ways to play uncounterable goblins for a card that costs three times as much and will never resolve against control.

Then you must remove 3 utility goblins that properly fit your curve and replace them with 3 5cc goblins that will never resolve against control, and that are dead in multiples without Food Chain on the table, again, totally screwing your game against control.

Essentially, the Food Chain combo is win more against your good matchups and completely assfucks your tough ones. It doesn't seem like the best choice as far as competitiveness is concerned. It does sound fun, though.

Obfuscate Freely
06-14-2005, 08:13 PM
Why should a control player ever counter Food Chain?

The problem with Food Chain against control isn't that it gets countered; if it were actually a threat that would make it good. Food Chain sucks because it doesn't swing, and because Ringleaders already have counters aimed at them, even if you remove another Goblin from the game in order to play one.

Saying that Food Chain only helps good matchups is probably incorrect, though. If a Food Chain version of the deck has a faster goldfish, that could help out against combo, which does actually exist in some Legacy metagames. :;):



Edited By Obfuscate Freely on 1118790961

calosso
06-15-2005, 08:38 AM
I have been testing red white vial goblins and what do you guys think of Goblin legionaire.
NOTICE I PUT NO QUESTION MARK AT THE END OF THAT QUESTION! BUTTTTTTTTTTSEX!

tseriousterry
06-15-2005, 10:27 AM
I tried it and it seemed like an overcosted Fanatic to me. The other ability is situational and does not answer board sweepers or StP. Nothing too impressive.

TheInfamousBearAssassin
06-15-2005, 10:36 AM
Why should a control player ever counter Food Chain?
Just to adress the specific point; because a good player won't try to use Food Chain to combo off as soon as possible against control. He'll untap again and use it as a mana accelerant that enables the dropping of multiple large threats a turn relatively early on in the game; most control decks will find it hard to counter two Ringleaders in a turn, for instance.

Zilla
06-15-2005, 07:04 PM
Why should a control player ever counter Food Chain?
Just to adress the specific point; because a good player won't try to use Food Chain to combo off as soon as possible against control. He'll untap again and use it as a mana accelerant that enables the dropping of multiple large threats a turn relatively early on in the game; most control decks will find it hard to counter two Ringleaders in a turn, for instance.
Quoted for truth. It is not in and of itself a threat, but it facilitates the ability to play an overwhelming amount of threats in a single turn, allowing the goblins player to overwhelm control's ability to counter its threats through sheer force of numbers. It is a must-counter. The reason it harms your control game is because it will never be castable before turn 3, giving them plenty of time to get mana to counter, can't be "cheated" into play with Lackey or Vial, weakens the effectiveness of your Ringleaders, and replaces actual threats in your decklist. Furthermore, it forces you to run 4 Jeeks, which are high-cost, bad in multiples, and are replacing more efficiently costed threats in the deck. All in all, Food chain buggers your control matchup more than it already is.

As for your observation about potential improvement of the combo matchup, it's astute and I'd considered it. However, I did a bit of goldfishing (since that's basically what the combo matchup is anyway) with a build running Food Chain, and the average goldfish over 20 games was nearly identical between the two. Obviously 20 games is hardly enough to make any definitive conclusions, but the lack of impressiveness in the results made me abandon further testing because I'm lazy.

Both builds were goldfishing most often around turns 4-5. The Food Chain build got a few more turn 3 kills than the Vial build, but it also had a higher number of games in the turn 5+ range due to opening draws with multiple Jeeks and/or Food Chains and not enough early threats. It would sometimes sit mostly idle until turn 3, because the only threats in its hand were 3cc or above. That's definitely not the way Goblins wants to be playing. In theory, you could take the FCG route and add in some Tombs and/or ESG's to accellerate it out, but then your destabilizing your manabase, losing even more threats, and screwing up your game even more against control. Early testing seems to indicate that it's not worth it.

To be objective, though, I haven't spent a lot of time optimizing and testing a Food Chain list. It's possible that it could be better in a very combo-heavy, control-light metagame, if such a thing exists.

Obfuscate Freely
06-15-2005, 08:03 PM
Just to adress the specific point; because a good player won't try to use Food Chain to combo off as soon as possible against control. He'll untap again and use it as a mana accelerant that enables the dropping of multiple large threats a turn relatively early on in the game; most control decks will find it hard to counter two Ringleaders in a turn, for instance.

I might buy that if Food Chain didn't cost 3. By the time your accelerating out double-Ringleader, they can just counter both of them.

But if Food Chain really is must-counter, how could it be bad against control? I understand that it messes with Ringleaders, and your manabase, but if it "never resolves" against control, it sounds great. Vial Goblins doesn't actually have any must-counters aside from Ringleaders and early Vials. If you could add another must-counter in Food Chain, while possibly strengthening your game against non-control decks, it should definitely be looked into.

Again, though, as a control player, I would never counter a mana accelerant that costs 2G to play and costs a creature every time it's used.



Edited By Obfuscate Freely on 1118876693

calosso
06-15-2005, 09:23 PM
What about a turn one Lackey if they cannot deal with it they are forced to counter it because the cannot deal with first turn
Gang-bang
speaking of gang-bang, I LOVE BUTTSEX!!!!11!!!
kiki
or even ringleader

Sims
06-15-2005, 09:26 PM
If they don't hold a FoW or Swords for your turn 1 Lackey, the odds are they are just going to Wrath on Turn 4 and clean up what you had anyways. So unless you have the amazing nuts of Lackey -> Warchief , cast PD, cast PD.... and they have no answers....



Edit: To be fair, as a Turn 1 Drop it is a large threat, but it is by far from game over if it resolves.



Edited By CorruptedAngel on 1118881680

calosso
06-15-2005, 09:28 PM
But the point is Lackey is almost forcing the control player to deal with the lackey so they would have less recources for the food chain.

Sims
06-15-2005, 09:36 PM
But the point is Lackey is almost forcing the control player to deal with the lackey so they would have less recources for the food chain.
Perhaps, but the Swords that they would likely burn on the Lackey (as opposed to FoW) isn't going to stop your Food Chain in the first place. Also, if Food Chain does resolve and you manage to get a load of Goblins en masse, you still need haste. So unless you have 2x Cheifs, that Swords they didn't waste on your Lackey will remove your haste and leave you impotent while they Wrath/Disk/Vengeance away your board.

type_Necromancer
06-21-2005, 01:32 AM
Here is a decklist for Goblins that have brought me through a tournament UNDEFEATED vs. ATS, Landstill, Welder, and many other decks that are at best SLOW. (I am not calling welder slow just reliant on key cards).

4x AEther Vial
4x Goblin Lackey
4x Mogg Fanatic
2x Skirk Prospector
4x Goblin Piledriver
4x Goblin Matron
4x Goblin Warchief
1x Goblin Sharpshooter
4x Goblin Ringleader
3x Seige-Gang Commander
2x Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker

4x Rishadan Port
4x Wasteland
4x Bloodstained Mire
4x Badland
8x Mountain

The Lackey turn one is obviously the best play, and if there are any 1/1's in the way when I go to swing I can usually kill it with a Mogg Fanatic.

Wasteland is simply the best card in the format.

Rishadan port is great when you have played enough goblins to put your opponent to their heels. It allows you (especially in combination with Wasteland) to limit the amount of measures they can use to stay alive.

Only two Prospectors because you get them at will with Matron and Ringleader.

Only one Sharpshooter because the decks that you cannot kill with 12 Goblins and 90some damage, usually cannot kill you either, so just go and get it with Matron or Ringleader.

Kiki-Jiki needs no explanation, Lackey in a Kiki-Jiki then two lackeys, then death. Duplicate Ringleader, Duplicate Seige-gang, Duplicate Warchief so all goblins are REALLY cheap, (my favorite) Duplicate Matron, usually for the win.

Ringleader is next to broken. (I do not know if anyone cares but I went through my whole deck 4 cards at a time and found that 75% of four cards revealed will have 3 OR MORE goblins in them.) This test was done 4or 5 times.

Vial is just good. I beats counter and gives you free cards with ringleader and matron and kiki-jiki, at instant speed. People play their turns to get to the next, meaning they are planning on what you turn will produce, when you use their end step to play a ringleader and find 3 new goblins that really messes someones momentum up.

Go ahead and knock it, I really don't care because it wins me tournaments, if you can handle it, build it and try it.

Oh, and the reason for the Badlands is I like to study other decks A LOT. I scout, and know my opponents, this allows me to use one of the best cards ever printed to it's fullest ability, Cabal Therapy. If you know what makes a deck tick, and can post-pone that from occurring, you will increase you winning percentage GREATLY.

As for the people who HATE Lackeys, you will be happy to know that when I win game one, unless my opponent likes to go second, I ALWAYS SIDE OUT 4X GOBLIN LACKEY.

They are only good on turn one and there are just too many things to stop them any time after, however, being the first play of a round may be the best play in 1.5

dsg123456789
06-25-2005, 02:40 AM
So, is what splash color is the one of general consensus? Green for Food Chain? White for Swords? Black for Cabal Therapy?

Sims
06-25-2005, 03:09 AM
That's a good question, and one that likely will be getting it's own thread in the Open forum soon. It seems that the biggest toss up is between Mono-Red for consistancy, splash White for Disenchant (more than StP), or black for general hand disruption elements to try and give yourself a fighting chance vs. Landstill (which is still a bad matchup)...

At this point, I think the Mono-Red players are more numerous than the splash players (of any color)... and that's to be expected, especially since most people who may have brought this deck with them from 1.x may not have dual lands. That's fine and dandy, but it doesn't help us out as far as what splash is the ideal splash. Currently, Zilla and I have seemed to agree that it is a Metagame issue... There is a lot of Control and High-Tide combo in my area, so the hand disruption helps me win games I have no right to win, where Zilla may see a metagame where the Disenchants and Swords will win him many more games than a Cabal Therapy/Duress or a Perish. I'd say stick with a Mono-R build first, evaluate your metagame and find out what you are losing to or are having trouble with, then splash accordingly.

type_Necromancer
06-25-2005, 03:49 AM
I like to splash black for Cabal Therapy because I am very good with that particular card. I generaly know what other decks need to win in a timely manner. Swords is kind of mindless because you wait for the threat and then deal with it. I like to play aggressively (which is why I like goblins) and Cabal Therapy feeds into that style. I also like to get the E-Plague before it hits the surface. If it comes into play, you have the same chances of winning as if you were to disenchant it; for it has already done it's worst when it comes into play. The second plague is never talked about because if [/I]it[I] hits, everyone knows the outcome.

danyul
06-27-2005, 06:53 AM
This is a bit off-topic but I was wondering...
(and yes, I used the Search function to see if this was already covered. I came up with nothing.)

I read a Mike Flores article (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/8850.html) about Vial Goblins in which he pretty much advocated the use of FtK. Now, being the impressionable youth that I am, I immidiately tossed 4 FtK into my Vial build. I must admit that they really are quite nice with a Kiki on the board, in addition to them being just all around good. However, FtK does suffer the drawback of being milled away when I play a Ringleader - something that happened often enough to make me wish the damn things were just goblins.

I was browsing the thread and noticed something that I had missed time and time again (I reread these forums when I'm bored). You guys are running Gempalm Incinerator where I would be running FtK. I swapped out the FtKs for Incinerators as soon as I noticed this and I havent gone back. The Incinerators are just too useful, both in the early, mid, and late game. Most times, the creatures I am trying to kill dont have a toughness above 4 anyway (utility creatures, mostly). I cant think of any other pros right now, its 3 am here.

Anyway, I was just wondering if you guys had already realized this or..uh, I dunno. What do you think of Gempalm Incinerator VS Flametongue Kavu???

Another thing. I noticed that the RB builds dont run Incinerator where the RW builds do. Is there a reason for this??

LunchBox
06-27-2005, 09:58 AM
I read a Mike Flores article about Vial Goblins in which he pretty much advocated the use of FtK. Now, being the impressionable youth that I am, I immidiately tossed 4 FtK into my Vial build. I must admit that they really are quite nice with a Kiki on the board, in addition to them being just all around good. However, FtK does suffer the drawback of being milled away when I play a Ringleader - something that happened often enough to make me wish the damn things were just goblins.

C'mon, man. From page one of the thread:


Also, one of Flores' more interesting choices was maindeck FTK. I know it's not maindeck worthy, but in matches where the card advantage isn't as important, FTK might deserve to be sided in for Ringleaders.

And CA replied:


On the FTKs, I primarily left them out because of the fact that they aren't Goblins, but that isn't to say they aren't strong. This deck does lack removal, and having a few FTKs in the board could potentially be strong as you want your Vials on 4 anyways. My primary worry about them would be dropping them to the bottom of the library via Ringleader, because I have never wanted to side out Ringleaders so far. Plus they are not tutorable via Matron.

Could they be good? Yes. But the big problems that arise are that they aren't goblins and are bad with Ringleaders. Also, they don't help your problem matchups at all since they're bad vs. Landstill/Control with board sweepers. You should roll aggro. Gempalms are great when you need to get rid of a one toughness creature to let your Lackey through. FTK doesn't help with that.

type_Necromancer
06-27-2005, 10:41 AM
If you like FTK, use it. If you like Goblin Grenade or Food Chain, use em. But remember that when you replace goblin slots with non-goblin cards you weaken a potentialy broken card in Goblin Ringleader. 75% of the time you will flip 2 or more goblins with the Ringleader. If in addition to Vial you add FTK and STP, you may want to change that percentage to 45%. Ringleader is a close-to-broken with the ammount of cards it can get you, and if you build your deck correctly, you can exploit that to it's fullest potential.

On the topic of Gempalm Incinerator, it is important to note that cycling it will also draw you a card making it one of the ALL TIME GREATEST RED BURN CARDS EVER.

Comboplayer
06-28-2005, 01:29 AM
[color=#000000:post_uid2]Mike Flores not withstanding, I can't think of a situation when you'd what to side in FTK. As it has been said you should roll over creature decks and it (FTK) doesn't help in your problem matches (Landstill/ Solidarity). The environment that Type_Necromancer and I play in features heavy creature based decks and Type_Necromancer has had very little trouble dominating with his build. In a pinch sided in Gempalms help out nicely, but Kiki Jiki, Sharpshooter, and a veritable horde take down those decks. He's right about the power of Ringleader; it powers the horde. I also think that splashing black is the right choice: cabal therapy allows you to work around (somewhat) combo and control. I don't feel that added removal (swords) or acceleration (food chain) is needed.

This all being said, I don't like Goblins (not my style), but it is definately explosive. :O[/color:post_uid2]

Aseraphim
07-02-2005, 12:37 AM
Hey, with my experience from the source tournament and other random testing, I've come to realize several things about my deck. For one thing, I hated chrome mox in the vast majority of situations. The only times I liked it was when I also drew Sparksmith or Sharpshooter vs. a combo deck, or when I had a Skirk Prospector to imprint. This leads me to the second matter:I only liked Skirk Prospector when I had either a Chrome Mox or a Seige-gang commander. If I did end up doing something like using it to accelerate out a turn 2 warchief, all it did was make it so that my warchief was swords/bolted/etc on turn 2 instead of 3. I cut all but one of these, and have been happy with my testing so far(Left one in to matron for if I needed synergy with Seige-gang). Any thoughts on this?

Revert_To_Saved
07-02-2005, 01:46 AM
I've come to the same conclusion about Chrome Mox; rarely do I ever want to see it. However, I would never dream of cutting prospector. The deck's already relatively light on lands, relying instead on Lackey/Vial to cheat costs, and there have been a few times when I've missed land drops and had to rely on Prospector to power out a game ending Ringleader and the such. Also, I find my self using him for Sharpshooter tricks quite often. That withstanding, he is still a one drop that smoothes out the curve. What do you run in absence of Chrome Mox and Prospector?

Edit: Sorry, this was from a mono-R or R/w standpoint, I had not considered the addition of Therapy.

Aseraphim
07-02-2005, 02:15 AM
I've come to the same conclusion about Chrome Mox; rarely do I ever want to see it. However, I would never dream of cutting prospector. The deck's already relatively light on lands, relying instead on Lackey/Vial to cheat costs, and there have been a few times when I've missed land drops and had to rely on Prospector to power out a game ending Ringleader and the such. Also, I find my self using him for Sharpshooter tricks quite often. That withstanding, he is still a one drop that smoothes out the curve. What do you run in absence of Chrome Mox and Prospector?
my current list is:

// Lands
4 [A] Badlands
4 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
7 [OD] Mountain (3)
3 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [TE] Wasteland

// Creatures
3 [LE] Gempalm Incinerator
4 [US] Goblin Lackey
4 [P2] Goblin Matron
4 [ON] Goblin Piledriver
3 [AP] Goblin Ringleader
1 [ON] Goblin Sharpshooter
4 [SC] Goblin Warchief
1 [CHK] Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker
4 [AT] Mogg Fanatic
1 [SC] Siege-Gang Commander
1 [ON] Skirk Prospector
1 [ON] Sparksmith

// Spells
4 [DS] AEther Vial
3 [JU] Cabal Therapy

// Sideboard
SB: 3 [ON] Goblin Sharpshooter
SB: 1 [ON] Sparksmith
SB: 1 [JU] Cabal Therapy
SB: 3 [IA] Anarchy
SB: 3 [7E] Duress
SB: 4 [SC] Pyrostatic Pillar


With 22 land and 16 one-drops, 9 of which are creatures, I haven't run into any shortage of those. While it can be useful with Sharpshooter, it is pretty rare comparatively speaking. The direct cut I made was -2 prospector for another gempalm and therapy - one more way to force through turn 1 lackey and Therapy is gold in quite a few matchups.


EDIT:Changed 13 to the correct number of one drops

boom
07-02-2005, 03:24 AM
When you splash Badlands for Black or Plateau for White, you only need 2 since you run a fair about of fetch.

Revert_To_Saved
07-02-2005, 01:06 PM
When you splash Badlands for Black or Plateau for White, you only need 2 since you run a fair about of fetch.
That's true with the white splash, but black usually ends up with more cards requiring the color. White gets you Disenchant and possibly StP, whereas black usually gets Therapy and Duress from the get go, then lots of meta specific ones including Bidding/Living Death, making a stronger splash necessary.

Zilla
07-02-2005, 02:45 PM
Therapy and Duress from the get go, then lots of meta specific ones including Bidding/Living Death, making a stronger splash necessary.
This is only true for builds with Bidding in the board, which Aseraphim's list does not include. In a build running only Duress and Therapy, 2x Badlands, 8x Fetch is the correct way to go. It will consistently get a black source by first turn, without leaving you unnecessarily open to Wastelands if you don't need black. This is super important in a deck as tight on mana as Vial Goblins.

Aseraphim
07-02-2005, 04:44 PM
I just did some testing with both manabases, and these are the results I got(based on opening hands(since turn 1 is when you most want to duress/therapy, no mulligans):
4 Badlands, 7 Fetch
Games(Presideboard):
No therapy, black 48
therapy, black 33
No therapy, no black 13
therapy, no black 6

Games(Postsideboard):
No Therapy, black: 46
Therapy, black: 34
no therapy, no black: 6
therapy, no black: 14



2 Badlands, 8 Fetch
Games(Presideboard)
No therapy, black: 55
Therapy, black: 26
No Therapy, No black: 13
Therapy, no black: 6

Games(Postsideboard)
No therapy, black: 23
Therapy, black: 41
No Therapy, no black: 15
Therapy, no black: 21

Making it clear, postboard I had both therapy and duress lumped under 'Therapy'. So, presideboard there was no difference in the number of times I had a therapy I couldn't cast, but postboard there was a 7% increase from going with effectively -1 black source. Now, most of the hands with a therapy and no black were really crappy - no land, only wastelands, just one mountain and a bunch of 2+ casting costs with a therapy, etc... so i'll assume that 40-50% of these hands would have been mulled into one of the above three categories, which are pretty much fine(This is a pretty decent assumption- the vast majority of hands with uncastable therapies were complete ass). This reduces the difference to 3-4%, which is much less and is probably worth it when you also get more resiliency from wasteland. I'll test it out in actual games and if it still doesn't work, go to 3 badlands 8 fetch(Which is what the manabase should have been originally.

awesomeawesome
07-06-2005, 04:59 PM
With the new changes to the core set it's pretty likely that Goblin King is going to get the creature type goblin. Does anyone think that this might be worth testing now?

Also, has anyone tested Goblin Wizard? It's yet another way to cut mana costs and has the ability to stop Swords to Plowshares and get around protection from red sons of bitches (most of them being white).

Lastly, has anyone considered four maindeck burning wish as a tutor for Bidding, Pillage, etc. ?

I don't play Vial Goblins. I'm just wondering if anyone has considered any of this.

quicksilver
07-06-2005, 05:20 PM
Goblin King will absolutly not be errataed to a goblin. They had goblins back when it was printed (obv, otherwise it would be worthless at the time), so they had the option to make it a goblin then, unlike with the new errata's because they didn't have the new creature type scheme back then. Second it was specifically made not to be a goblin, other wise it would be to good. Third, they never make an errata that signifigantly changes the card.

Goblin wizard is slow as nutz, it essentially does what lackey does, only a lot slower. The only reason lackey is good is because it is fast, which goblin wizards is not. And swords will probably have already been played by the time you get it active.

danyul
07-07-2005, 03:07 AM
awesomeawesome Posted on July 06 2005,3:59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the new changes to the core set it's pretty likely that Goblin King is going to get the creature type goblin. Does anyone think that this might be worth testing now?


The (main) reason Goblin King wont be errated is because it was always meant to be a Lord. When it was printed there was a cycle of Lords that helped a certain iconic creature type (if I remember correctly). Black had Zombie Master, Blue had Lord of Atlantis, and...that's it actually. Ok, I remembered incorrectly. But anyhow, these Lords were meant to help creatures of a certain type without being of that type. I hope that clears things up.

Edit: I just read the piece on the WoTC site. I sit corrected.


awesomeawesome Posted on July 06 2005,3:59

Also, has anyone tested Goblin Wizard? It's yet another way to cut mana costs and has the ability to stop Swords to Plowshares and get around protection from red sons of bitches (most of them being white).

I've actually played against a version of the deck that ran Goblin Wizard and it was just a bit too expensive for the deck. By the time you can play the Wizard, you probably dont have many goblins left in hand. Also, it's got a big fat target on its head. Seems like an expensive, burnable Aether Vial to me.

But I lost that game, so who am I to speak?


Lastly, has anyone considered four maindeck burning wish as a tutor for Bidding, Pillage, etc. ?

I think taking out creatures for Tutors would be diluting the deck too much. Aggro decks need to be focused so that they can maintain pressure through the early and mid game. This is especially important when playing against control (Landstill) where your matchup is already close to 50/50.

Bastian
07-11-2005, 01:14 AM
We all know why Goblin King doesn't go in Goblin decks. Because he's a lord, not a goblin.

Or was he?

Goblin King (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/feature/273)

Come 9th Edition and with changes to creature types, so as to make them more distinct Goblin King receives a face lift. He's now a GOBLIN Lord which means he interacts with Goblin Lackey, Goblin Warchief, Matron and Siege-Gang Commander. Now that Goblin King is finally a Goblin could it be that he has a spot in the deck?

boom
07-11-2005, 01:37 AM
He would be killer with Blood Moon. That basically make most match ups that dont pack mass removal less than 5 turns long, as long as the Blood Moon resolves.

awesomeawesome
07-11-2005, 01:27 PM
Wow. They are changing his creature type. This is actually pretty exciting for this deck then.

noobslayer
07-11-2005, 01:40 PM
It's a shame they didn't use the foglio art. But anyways, he speeds the deck up nicely. Just not so great in the mirror match. But even with his new type, does he merit inclusion? The deck seems to have a good flow to it as is. What match-ups could he actually contribute to?

Sims
07-11-2005, 01:50 PM
It's a shame they didn't use the foglio art. But anyways, he speeds the deck up nicely. Just not so great in the mirror match. But even with his new type, does he merit inclusion? The deck seems to have a good flow to it as is. What match-ups could he actually contribute to?
Who knows, testing is going to be the only way of really answering it. The +1/+1 is a decent boost when you think about it, atleast giving you a slightly faster clock. Mountain walk gives you unblockable beats in the Survival matchups and any other aggro decks running red, which can be nice to be sneaking through 7+ power Piledrivers. But with that kind of advantage the King won't live that long, so he is kind of not as hot as a 1-of, anything higher then that 1 of and we're going into debateable territory as to what can be cut to make room for more copies. Also, it's HORRIBLE in the mirror match unless you can drop cheap and hasted Pyromancer + King for lethal damage in 1 turn.

Yea, all in all it's questionable but we shall see.

Artowis
07-11-2005, 03:05 PM
Now that it's a Goblin I basically have a reason to run it vs. E. Plague and NOSB stuff (Being searchable is such tech).

Sims
07-11-2005, 03:16 PM
Now that it's a Goblin I basically have a reason to run it vs. E. Plague and NOSB stuff (Being searchable is such tech).
That's actually a pretty good reason to run it as a tutorable target. Question is, do you squeeze it into the maindeck where things are tight enough already (IMO), or do you slide it into the sideboard to board in against matchups that the bonuses are going to help you immensely; Ex: +1/+1 vs. NoSB and Plague, Mountainwalk vs. Zoo/ATS/RGSA/3Deuce/etc.

I feel testing will likely show it to be a board slot as opposed to a maindeck slot, but that's my untested oppinion. Thoughts?

noobslayer
07-11-2005, 03:48 PM
I can see the biggest advantage is giving them more targets to worry about, making them spread their resources too thin. I also forgot about mountainwalk, that could really swing the survival match-up.

Bastian
07-11-2005, 04:14 PM
Even before now there were some extended Vial Goblins that packed Goblin Kings in the SB. And they weren't goblins yet! They were mostly used as an answer vs Engineered Plague.

The King is a poor maindeck choice because not all decks have mountains, rendering mountainwalk somewhat useless, and the boost it gives is somewhat redundant. I feel that in SB's however it should definitly find a home :)

LunchBox
07-11-2005, 05:01 PM
As boom pointed out, I also think this makes Blood Moon much better than it already was, especially in the Landstill matchup. Of course, Blood Moon has the potential to hurt the builds that splash, but if you're Mountainwalking thanks to Blood Moon, it should be GG.

noobslayer
07-11-2005, 11:22 PM
At that point, Blood Moon and Goblin King might have inncredible synergy main decked. Think of how many decks run non-basics? Virtually all good decks in the format. I also don't think Blood Moon would hurt the goblins splashing, as you just pop your fetch before it resolves and grab one of your tech basic lands.

JamesPr
07-11-2005, 11:30 PM
I don't think the Blood Moon, Goblin King strategy would be that strong, mainly, because, it's a three card combo when you think about it. You need Goblin King, Blood Moon, and a decent Goblin all out on the table for it to do what it's supposed to do.

However, I still think Goblin King can be a very strong addition in Goblins, and I wouldn't worry about the mirror all too much, considering, if you play your cards correctly, the opponent goblin mountainwalking thing shouldn't be too much of a problem. Just don't drop your Goblin King when they have more of a goblin advantage on the table out.

boom
07-11-2005, 11:43 PM
Its not a three card combo. Its three cards that are fine by themselves, but when combined have insane synergy, a major theme of goblins as a whole.

Blood Moon is good hate and it pretty much hits almost all top tiered decks. Just think of all the nonbasics they hit: duals, mishras factories, fetches, thawing glaciers, etc. Its not a bad hate card to run in the first place.

Goblin King is something you would not mind drawing as the +1/+1 pump would help against ping and gives your goblins a bigger rear end which helps immensely. Some would argue if he wasnt a Lord to begin with, he would have found his way into this deck, I am not conviced but its not too far fetched. All he really needs is 1 spot in the deck, Matron/Ringleader will do the rest. As for the goblin base, you will have a good base seeing as how that is what this deck is built around.

This deck does not need mountainwalking as a main strat because its a strong zerg rush deck to begin with, but it sure helps this deck seeing as how you can now go "Whoops, theres Blood Moon. Unless you can wipe the board or win within X amout of turns, my piledrivers, along with his friends, will go through unblocked and you die." This would help through stalemates where you cant break through.

awesomeawesome
07-11-2005, 11:44 PM
I don't think the Blood Moon, Goblin King strategy would be that strong, mainly, because, it's a three card combo when you think about it. You need Goblin King, Blood Moon, and a decent Goblin all out on the table for it to do what it's supposed to do.

However, I still think Goblin King can be a very strong addition in Goblins, and I wouldn't worry about the mirror all too much, considering, if you play your cards correctly, the opponent goblin mountainwalking thing shouldn't be too much of a problem. Just don't drop your Goblin King when they have more of a goblin advantage on the table out.
It's a three card combo with three cards that all do good things on their own anyway. Also, if you have a Blood Moon, a King, and nothing else in play then you're probably losing or not playing the deck right. That said, I'm still iffy on main-decking the Blood Moons because I think that you problaby only want one card other than your mana sources to not be a goblin so you don't dilute the power of your Ringleaders.

I suppose someone should just start testing the King.

On a side note, and if anyone's interested, I'm in the process of trading for what I need for a version of this deck because I'm pretty intrigued. I've played u/g madness for a while now and I'm bored of it. I think the combination of such good synergy and the balls to the wall play style might be more enjoyable for me to play.

Sims
07-11-2005, 11:49 PM
I don't think this is a good idea for the maindeck, but as a sideboard option it might have merrit. The ability to (in Mono-R) run 3 Blood Moon, 4 Pithing Needle, a King, and 7 slots of your choice (Pyro Pillar, REB, whatever) you can strengthen some of your matchups. For Example, you can board in Needles, Moons, and a King against ATS... turn their Nonbasics into mountains, hit them with unblockable goblins, while having their Tradewinds and Survivals turned off. Just a thought.

SpatulaOfTheAges
07-12-2005, 02:51 AM
Holy Crap. That's insane. Mountainwalk against every Survival deck + pumping to evade Plague Spitter and Engineered Plague, plus against enemy Sharpshooters? Why on earth would you not MD at least 2 Goblin Kings now?

Zilla
07-12-2005, 06:05 AM
Re: Goblin King:

Less conjecture. More testing.

Sims
07-12-2005, 02:05 PM
Re: Goblin King:

Less conjecture. More testing.
Truth. Lets get on it.

Also, running it in the maindeck would require the removal of a few cards, what could be cut to accomdate them? That, primarily, is the biggest question.

boom
07-13-2005, 12:02 AM
I would feel that you could cut the mogg fanatics or sharpshooters since goblins would now be a combo deck becuase you now have an combo-like clock and you dont need to ping away stuff since all your guys get a free pass. This combo-life feel would mean that Chrome Mox has to find its way into the deck.


Less conjecture. More testing.

Something that could not be said enough.

On a slightly related side note, if anyone wants to test, just PM or AIM me. I would love to test this out against the gauntlet.

SpatulaOfTheAges
07-13-2005, 12:43 AM
The first thing to go would be Pyromancer; King serves a similiar function without the card disadvantage and adds sometimes-evasion.

After that? Prospector. Man that card is so weak. And wala, all the card disadvantage cards have disappeared.

HBspulse
07-13-2005, 06:18 AM
Some testresults with one king MD, one SB:

Against RGSA :
It changes the way you play the deck. You just play as a combo deck, assemble all the pieces and go off in one turn. After SB it limits the damage of pyroclasm. The goblin king can be considered a key component in battling any aggro-control decks with red. ps:Always hit the mana critters with your fanatics.

Against landstill :
Blood moon is not really an option, it is quite slow and you have to face a counterwall, beb's and disenchants. It just lacks punch. Reb is a better option. King is less vital in this matchup. The blood moon + king combo is too hard to get/keep on the table.

SpatulaOfTheAges
07-13-2005, 07:17 PM
@Landstill; Did it change anything vs. Factory?

CavernNinja
07-17-2005, 10:49 PM
Goblin King seems poor in fighting against Pyroclasm, without two, you can't effectively beat Clasm. They play the clasm dealing two damage to each critter, killing your King and knocking the rest down to 2 toughness critters killing them all too.

mackaber
07-18-2005, 02:20 PM
Goblin king seems too good not to play simply due to the fact that he's basicly an 'I win' card against pretty much every survival dec., and also in the Mirror. I haven't tested him enough yet to give a final verdict but one seems to be a must! His strength against plague( the best hozer for this dec imo) is just an aded bonus! The only problem I see is that you allready have 9 3 drops so you might not wan't him in your mana curve.

Another topic I would like to bring up is Umezawa's Jitte. The card is obviously very powerful but does it deserve a spot in the dec? Since any card that is not a goblin has to be really worthvile(haha). The top8 dec at Big Arse ran a pair and it seemed to have worked there!
At first I was very sceptical but the more I think about it, the more it apeals to me. Some reasons:
- It cost 2 mana and fills a hole in most gobllin decs mana curve, since most decs run only piledrivers and maybe sparksmith and even more maybe flunkies
- equiping men while operating on vial is agood thing!
- It can handle pro red critters if it had counters before they hit play
- It gives the dec a recurable source of creature removal, wich is never bad!
- Having a jitte on the board no longer forces you to overcommit as much in the landstill matchup
- It gives you access to life gain wich comes in handy for the burn matchup wich isn't exactly the greatest
Cons:
- It's not a Goblin!
- It doesnt do much in Combo matchups!(and Solidarity seems to be one of the suckier matchups)

Maybee the dude(forgot his name) who played the dec at big arse could chime in on this!

On another note people have been claiming that goblins suck vs. Landstill!
Do you generally share this sentiment? My extensive testing of the matchup showed that it was about even with a slight advantage for the goblin player! Allthough we had a three colour Landstill build that ran disk instead of wrath and had 4 fire/ice wich are definitely superb in the matchup, but maybe wrath makes al the difference?
Maybe people are just assuming the mathup is good since the average goblin player is probably less skilled than the average landstill player, and from my expierience skill was a very deciding factor in the games that weren't over by turn 6.

Sims
07-18-2005, 02:46 PM
I disagree with the sentiment that Goblin King is "I Win" in the mirror, as you need to win the turn you play him to not give your opponent an overwhelming advantage through pumping his goblins and giving them Mountainwalk. He gives your opponents a turn to assemble and swing with an unblockable, and likely lethal, Alpha Strike if you can't kill them the turn you drop him....soo... How is he "I Win" in the mirror? Vial him out on their endstep and clean house on your turn? Sure, I can see that.... but if you play him regularly a majority of the time, you're going to get bitten in the ass for it.

Also, Most people I know agree with the sentiment that Landstill is one of Goblins worse, if not the worst, matchups. Wrath of God can mean all the difference in the world, as it doesn't sit on the board and give you a turn like Disk and it doesn't take forever like Vengeance. I will agree, however, that the matchup is primarily determined on the playskill of the pilots behind the decks. I've found in most of my testing against some pretty skilled Landstill players that I can eek wins out by capitalizing on their bad hands, but it requires skill on your part to notice what they're lacking and the luck that your hand is fast enough to capitalize and race the Wrath.

scrumdogg
07-18-2005, 03:03 PM
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but doesn't the deck have access to Prospector, Siege Gang, Sparksmith, & Gempalm (as well as possibly Jitte) to remove a non-fatal Goblin King? Admittedly Sparky & Gempalm are not optimal, but you certainly aren't lacking in ways to drop, pound, then remove. What do the experts on the subject say about Jitte? It seems versatile enough to be considered for any aggro deck, is its lack of Goblinocity too much for this deck?

BoTS
07-18-2005, 03:12 PM
Jitte has been amazing. Spatula + Team Scrabs agrees that it greatly improves the matchups of almost all of the top decks in the format. It becomes your answer to Humility, its a boon to Survival decks, it gains a lot of life against Sligh, and against the mirror it tends to win the game. The list we are running includes 6 non-land, non-goblin cards, 2 Jitte and of course 4 Vial. We ended up cutting it down to one consistently unimpressive Skirk Prospector in order to make room for the equipment, and it has been just great. Mat told me that it helped greatly him make top4.

Another card we have been testing is 1-2 Rishadan Ports in addition to Wasteland. It means cutting the deck down to 15-16 red sources, but Mat claims the added disruption has been invaluable to him.

SpatulaOfTheAges
07-18-2005, 03:15 PM
This is probably a minor note, but Gempalm is never sub-optimal. It's one of the strongest cards in the deck, almost always gaining card advantage. Sparksmith is poo though.

Jitte seems pretty good right now, giving you a big advantage against creature based decks and a way around Humility and/or Reverence. I think Goblin King might need that spot once he gets errata'd though.

@CA - Goblin King is like Overrun in the mirror; you really shouldn't play him until you're going to win. He may clutter up your hand in the meantime, but the advantages seem worth that slight drawback.

Sims
07-18-2005, 03:35 PM
@CA - Goblin King is like Overrun in the mirror; you really shouldn't play him until you're going to win. He may clutter up your hand in the meantime, but the advantages seem worth that slight drawback.
While true, and I agree with this, I'd rather have Pyromancer in the mirror. Being able to play conservatively, drop Pyromancer and Alpha Strike, then have the board get Wrathed is kinda hot. Having this happen even once will cause your opponent to stop and overthink what he's doing, forcing him to either overextend into another Pyromancer (played during his turn, post combat even via Vial) or underextend and have you swing for the fences, and the win. King on the other hand doesn't give the same kind of boost for an Alpha, nor does it clear the board to keep you from getting grilled afterwards.

@Scrumm: Again, true, but the Prospector and SGC are really the only options for removing a King after an Alpha. I'd really, REALLY loathe to waste a Gempalm to kill the King, and Sparksmith might as well be letting them attack on their turn with the amount of damage it could theoretically cause.

SpatulaOfTheAges
07-18-2005, 03:39 PM
While true, and I agree with this, I'd rather have Pyromancer in the mirror. Being able to play conservatively, drop Pyromancer and Alpha Strike, then have the board get Wrathed is kinda hot. Having this happen even once will cause your opponent to stop and overthink what he's doing, forcing him to either overextend into another Pyromancer (played during his turn, post combat even via Vial) or underextend and have you swing for the fences, and the win. King on the other hand doesn't give the same kind of boost for an Alpha, nor does it clear the board to keep you from getting grilled afterwards.
I agree that Pyromancer is better in the mirror, but it's weaker vs control and Survival decks; in fact, it's a liability vs control.

Sims
07-18-2005, 03:45 PM
It can be, but it's always been a possible sideboard option when entering a metagame that enjoys playing various combo, as well as the potential for the mirror match. Goblin King will likely take maindeck slots due to it's strengths, but I still believe that it'd be more likely to see it boarded out for Pyromancer or Sharpshooter in the mirror.

SpatulaOfTheAges
07-18-2005, 04:10 PM
I agree. Although King does make a Sharpshooter a little trickier in the mirror.

mackaber
07-19-2005, 10:02 AM
The simple fact that, unless your opponent is also playing goblins, the king is always a fair deal for 3 mana makes it a way better main dec card than the pyromancer, who can be a dead card quite often, or worse can end in disaster if played uncarefully. In certain metagames(say only goblins+combo) he might be better but otherwise i'll go for the walking, and tutorable crusade+unblockable against 60-70 percent of all creature decs any day!
And I really don't want to hear anything about every removal spell in the format handling him...
@ Angel: Your statements about the fast wraths are true but you are neglecting the fact that
a) Disk kills vial wich does really really unfair things in the landstill matchups
b) wrath costs WW which can be a problem with only 12 or so white sources (if my memory serves me correctly) especially vs. 4 wastelands

Sims
07-19-2005, 01:45 PM
The simple fact that, unless your opponent is also playing goblins, the king is always a fair deal for 3 mana makes it a way better main dec card than the pyromancer, who can be a dead card quite often, or worse can end in disaster if played uncarefully. In certain metagames(say only goblins+combo) he might be better but otherwise i'll go for the walking, and tutorable crusade+unblockable against 60-70 percent of all creature decs any day!
And I really don't want to hear anything about every removal spell in the format handling him...
@ Angel: Your statements about the fast wraths are true but you are neglecting the fact that
a) Disk kills vial wich does really really unfair things in the landstill matchups
b) wrath costs WW which can be a problem with only 12 or so white sources (if my memory serves me correctly) especially vs. 4 wastelands
I already said that King would be maindecked and the Pyromancer would be (as it always has been) a sideboard option, particularly to be boarded in during the mirror match, combo matchups, maybe even control matchups. Moving on to your concerns about Landstill.

I'm not neglecting anything. I know Disk/Vengeance kills Vial...Everyone knows that. The point I was making is that Vial Goblins can consistantly Goldfish by turn 4-5. Some Landstill players try to counter/remove the Main threats ASAP, others will sit there and stop your initial rush with Manlands and Wrath while drawing as you break standstill, in either case.... Tapping out to play Disk on turn 4 against Vial Goblins is a risky venture, at best, since you are giving them an extra turn to Blow their load all over your face. I don't fear Disk on turn 4, I fear Wrath on Turn 4.

Disk killing Vial is nearly irrelevant, considering Landstill also has Disenchant and Countermagic. Both of these do a damn fine Job at stopping the Vial.



Edited By CorruptedAngel on 1121796544

frogboy
07-19-2005, 03:05 PM
To cut Pyromancer for King (in the maindeck) is a mistake, as to cut Pyromancer removes a significant option from the deck; you can no longer go into the Matron -> win option. Yeah, King gives you some sort of the same bonus, but King is vulnerable to removal, and the bonus is not as pronounced.

Goblin King is also completely awful in the Goblin mirror; you have to drop him and have your opponent not have removal in a matchup that is all about who can get Vial and Gempalm advantage in a situation where the board has stalled. (Hint: the board should not consist of a bunch of creatures looking at each other. If it does, someone is playing wrong.) If you play him and drop an alpha strike, and all of a sudden all your creatures lose evasion, you're in a really tight spot if you were in a position where the board was stalled. Pyromancer has the added bonus of suddenly making your opponent need removal RIGHT NOW and acting as a psuedo-Wrath sometimes.

Pyromancer is also pretty fine against Landstill; it's like six or nine more free damage. Obviously the fact that infinite wrath effects is really bad for you is more of a problem than anything else.

CA was basically right about Disk being a lot worse than Wrath against Landstill. Disk is sloooooooooooooooooooow. When it's your only effective mass removal (You're going to be dead before you can Vengeance, and even if you're not, the entire deck goes two for one. They'll have more creatures.) your opponent can just board in Mutations or Disenchants or whatever and blow it away before you can do anything with it. As for WW, well, don't be retarded and blow fetchlands when you don't have to and go find a basic.

If you failed to kill your opponent with Pyromancer, you probably played wrong, or they had multiple removal spells.

On a random note, Sparksmith isn't awful in the mirror, and Skirk Prospector is reeeeeeeeeally good. His usefulness goes down somewhat with Lackey, but sometimes your opponent actually has a blocker and you can't drop the turn two Warchief.



Edited By frogboy on 1121796633

SpatulaOfTheAges
07-19-2005, 03:52 PM
Pyromancer is *terrible* against Landstill. Assuming you do it before the fourth turn Wrath, they can often StP your biggest threat(probably Warchief if you can afford to Matron->Pyromancer), take some damage, and use your Pyromancer as a WoG. After that, it's nothing but a liability. It's terrible in top-deck mode, and you *can't* cast it until you're going to win.

Sparksmith isn't just bad in the mirror; it's bad most of the time. It's slow removal that costs you a lot of life if you plan on winning. How on earth can you say it's not awful in the mirror? Each activation is going to cost about 6 life.

Prospector is the weakest card in the deck. While occasionally useful, I'd rather not have the card disadvantage. Most of the time it comes up is against combo, but that's not usually enough of a boost to race them; against combo, you're pretty much hinging your bets on Lackey. Against control, like Pyromancer, useless non-threats and card disadvantage are bad. Why the hell do I want to lose my Prospector + Warchief to a StP?


If you play him and drop an alpha strike, and all of a sudden all your creatures lose evasion, you're in a really tight spot if you were in a position where the board was stalled.

This is situationally true and reliant on the person with the Goblin King being a bad player.

frogboy
07-19-2005, 04:05 PM
Well, seeing as how you'd be using Pyromancer as your alpha strike, you'd play out two to three creatures, let them get wrathed away, and then eventually you'll be at a point where you have a couple creatures, they're at low life, you Matron up Pyromancer and go kill them.

Sparksmith is actually completely insane against UG Madness and ATS, since those decks actually can't remove permanents. It's also the best two-drop in the mirror, because it's activation will only cost you four life to kill their Warchief or Piledriver. Obviously, it's terrible to draw it when there's like twelve creatures on the board, but that situation doesn't come up a whole lot.

While Prospector is certainly the weakest card in the deck, it's by no means awful. I was trying to correct the impression that it's utter crap, which it really isn't.

SpatulaOfTheAges
07-19-2005, 04:17 PM
But they're not always *at* low enough life that the Pyromancer will win the game, and usually not so low that a well-timed StP won't ruin that plan. And then some builds are even running DoJ.

I don't consider U/G much of a meta-concern, and while it may be good against ATS, so is Goblin King.

How can you say the situation where there's more than 4 goblins on the board doesn't come up often in the mirror? All they have to do is play a handful of goblins and suddenly your Sparksmith does more damage to you than any of their critters.

Prospector, in a vacuum, isn't awful. He is by far the weakest card in the deck, which makes him, relatively speaking, awful.

frogboy
07-19-2005, 04:53 PM
But they're not always *at* low enough life that the Pyromancer will win the game, and usually not so low that a well-timed StP won't ruin that plan. And then some builds are even running DoJ.

Ideally you'd be Vialing it in after they declared blockers. I understand that this doesn't always happen, but I still say that Pyromancer -> alpha strike is a game plan worth pursuing, because most of the time where you just try to beat them to death the old-fashioned way, you run out of gas and get creamed.


I don't consider U/G much of a meta-concern, and while it may be good against ATS, so is Goblin King.

Well, I do, and Goblin King mostly helps you kill ATS, which isn't nearly as much of a problem as killing their creatures is.


How can you say the situation where there's more than 4 goblins on the board doesn't come up often in the mirror? All they have to do is play a handful of goblins and suddenly your Sparksmith does more damage to you than any of their critters.

Well, the Goblin mirror is all about card advantage and maximizing your mana, and the person who gains control is probably going to win barring unusual circumstances. If you play your Sparksmith on turn two, and then kill their two or three drop at the cost of four life, that's a fine trade, because now you're up on tempo and cards.

Besides, typically the board doesn't get clogged with all the Fanatics, Incinerators, Pyromancers, Sharpshooters, SGCs, and occasionally combat running around.


Prospector, in a vacuum, isn't awful. He is by far the weakest card in the deck, which makes him, relatively speaking, awful.

Okay, that's basically what I was trying to say.

mackaber
07-20-2005, 11:22 AM
Nice to see a little debate arising again.

Another thing I wanted to bring up was the addition of 1-2 Ancient tombs as lands 21-22. I have tested the ports but found them to be okay but not stellar. Ancient tombs on the other hand might be really nice, in combination with some jitte or to cast turn 2 matrons fetching turn 3 ringleaders... I've been fiddling around with 1 but one offs don't show up too often so I can't say for sure. It would also make the pyromancer more castable...
Sparksmith is rock solid and I bet you if there was no such thing as incinerator he'd be an imediate 4 of, he really is the second best 2-drop available and since he quite often enters play with haste I wouldn't call him all that slow!

dsg123456789
07-21-2005, 01:34 PM
I want to know how everyone else plays this scenario (it comes up often for me):

Its mid-lategame, you and your opponent have even boards, you have have the ability to cast Matron with reasonable assurance it will resolve and not be stifled. You already have somehow got a ringleader into play. Finally, you either have the mana to cast any goblin in your deck. Do you grab Kiki-Jiki and start drawing 3-4 cards per turn, and hope for a huge alpha strike, or do you grab a piledriver, and try to beat down quickly? What if your opponent has multiple/recurring 2/x blockers?

Rishadan port has been awesome in testing for me, and I'm going to test ancient tomb (Although I think the pain of 8 fetches+tomb will hurt, and I may have to cut some fetches.)

SpatulaOfTheAges
07-21-2005, 02:02 PM
Kiki-Jiki; unless you're positive that the Piledriver will kill them that turn, or that you don't have another turn for whatever reason.

paluschke
07-21-2005, 02:13 PM
Kiki. She/He sends copies of your Goblins in the Red Zone, and thus creates card advantage. If you can manage to copy matrons and Ringleaders, even better. Why should you use a non-copy Piledriver for smashing into your opponent's defenses??

MattH
07-21-2005, 02:54 PM
Kiki-Jiki, immediately copying the Matron to get whatever else I want. ^_^

frogboy
07-21-2005, 03:36 PM
When you can kill the opponent, do that. If you can play out Kiki, do that if you can't kill them. Otherwise get Ringleader or some utility guy like Sharpshooter.

awesomeawesome
07-21-2005, 07:04 PM
I have a question that I don't think has been adressed yet. Assuming you're not running Chrome Moxes, what is the better first turn play; Lackey or Vial? Getting that Lackey through asap is important but is it more important than getting started on your Vial counters?

mackaber
07-21-2005, 07:30 PM
@awsome awesome: Generally i prefer the lakey play mainly since it's so broken if it hits and trading it for removal turn 1 is okay. Playing lakey turn 2 isn't too hot either. On the draw against landstill I'd always go with vial so you can't get screwed out of the game right there via sword standstill.

djfu2002
07-28-2005, 05:03 AM
@awesomeawesome:It all depends, if your on the draw and your opponent played a creature first turn that you excpect him to beat with. Then go with the vial and hope he attacks so you can get a Lackey through unblocked.

Djinn
07-28-2005, 12:13 PM
is there an updated list with needles? I haven't read the 12 pages of thread, but you don't need the splash anymore if it was designed to fight survival

calosso
07-28-2005, 12:16 PM
There are 3 Pithing needles in the sideboard but in Northern Virginia there really aren't that many survival players.

My sideboard is

3 reb
3 pyrostatic pillar
3 pithing needles
3 flaring pain
3 metagame slot ? ???BUTTSEX???

Djinn
07-28-2005, 01:47 PM
is flaring pain any needed? and isn't anarchy better (it takes care of pro red + worship/pariah)

Capitalization and punctuation please. (http://mtgthesource.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2590) -Zilla

Slay
07-28-2005, 02:14 PM
Flaring pain is definitely a metagame choice, it depends on whether you see Fog locks or lifegain in your meta. I'd rather the slot be Sulfuric Vortex, myself.
-Slay

awesomeawesome
08-04-2005, 10:07 PM
A guy over in Open just invented Vial Goblins. He also invented the white splash. Why does no one here have any new ideas?

I have a question about which is a better sideboard choice against Solidarity; Sirocco or Pyrostatic Pillar. Sirocco seems better since it can be used against some control decks but a resolved pillar is a bitch for a Solidarity player to play around. What does everyone else think?

Sims
08-04-2005, 10:20 PM
In a high Solidarity Meta I would run the Pillar in Conjunction with REBs or Pyroblasts, because they're just better against the deck I.M.O. Some decks, 3/2 for example, have a very low curve and are unable to effectively use Pillar with no ways to circumvent it (read: Lackey and Vial), thus Sirrocco is immediately a better choice for them. We have ways to bypass our own Pillars and a more stable mana base to support REBs, thus it's the superior Hate Package.

HBspulse
08-09-2005, 06:47 AM
I found rishadan's ports are priceless in the deck. It's a much needed addition to beat landstill.

I won a 33 player tournament last weekend with R/W vial goblins. Report and decklist :
http://mtgthesource.com/cgi-bin....0;t=296 (http://mtgthesource.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=1838)

However, I didn't needed the white splash a lot, due to the needles.

The pithing needles proved to be very good. (landstill : flooded strand, mishra, cop, disk,...) I was doubting between them and flaring pain, but I found they have a broather application. What do you guys think?

Zilla
08-09-2005, 06:59 PM
Your list looks very similar to mine, except I don't run the white splash for the very reason you mentioned; Pithing Needle answers most of the problems that Disenchant does. The ones that it doesn't, Anarchy will (with the exception of Chill, which isn't that big a problem). I'd say that in most metas, the stability provided by the mono-red manabase is the best way to go, and a great number of the better Vial Goblins players seem to be leaning towards that trend as well.

Jitte also seems to be a popular addition to the deck, as a two or three-of. Seems decent to me. Some would argue the negative synergy with Ringleader, but honestly, 2 cards really aren't going to make that big a difference, particularly when those two cards are downright broken.

I was skeptical about the Ports when I first heard about them, but in testing so far they have been rather strong. Because you cheat costs with Lackey, Vial, and Warchief, you often have open mana. No reason not to be doing something disruptive with it. Combined with Wasteland, it certainly seems to improve the Landstill matchup, which you proved rather handily in your last tournament.

My main suggestion to you would be to try dropping the 4th Gempalm for a single Goblin Pyromancer. He flat out wins some games you shouldn't win, providing a combo-esque finish.

I see you're not running any Prospectors at all... have you been missing them at all? I've been considering removing them completely also (I'm running two now). Occasionally they're strong accelleration for Warchief or an early Jitte equip, but other times they're just crappy Mons' Goblin Raiders. Tough call.

HBspulse
08-10-2005, 07:20 AM
Pithing Needle answers most of the problems that Disenchant does.
Probably you are right, I was still afraid having an auto-loss against scepter-chant decks, if you don't find the needle in time.
The swords prove useful sometimes vs R/G beatz etc, but ok that's a decent matchup already and the king rules here :)



Jitte also seems to be a popular addition to the deck, as a two or three-of. Seems decent to me. Some would argue the negative synergy with Ringleader, but honestly, 2 cards really aren't going to make that big a difference, particularly when those two cards are downright broken.

Indeed, it's outright broken sometimes, very good against any aggro deck, ideal for killing birds and elves and strenghtens your sligh/burn matchup. True it's slighty worsens your ringleaders, but they should print another killer-gobbo to take it's place then. Another decent choice is armageddon...
In all cases, having 6-7 non-gobbo card next to vial, is a maximum (after boarding), so I often took them out.


I was skeptical about the Ports when I first heard about them, but in testing so far they have been rather strong. Because you cheat costs with Lackey, Vial, and Warchief, you often have open mana. No reason not to be doing something disruptive with it.

Indeed, I also learned to appreciate them when I played them. It looks crappy on paper, being a 2 for 1, but is incredibly good with the mana cheating.


My main suggestion to you would be to try dropping the 4th Gempalm for a single Goblin Pyromancer. He flat out wins some games you shouldn't win, providing a combo-esque finish.
I'll try it. Most of the time, I tutored for ringleaders to have extra punch. Isn't it a bit of a risk if they magically pull a fog or swords or something out of their sleeve?


I see you're not running any Prospectors at all... have you been missing them at all?
No, you have enough turn 1 drops. Like you said, this deck uses so much manacheaters that you don't need the extra mana of the prospector and it is card disavantage in the end. They do rule in goblin-bidding decks :). Flunkies also suck by the way, but everybody found that out probably :)

Zilla
08-10-2005, 07:33 PM
I'll try it. Most of the time, I tutored for ringleaders to have extra punch. Isn't it a bit of a risk if they magically pull a fog or swords or something out of their sleeve?
You only want to use him if you know your opponent doesn't have something that can screw you this way. Incidentally, in most matchups this isn't that hard to determine. Most decks are going to blow their proverbial load on your early threats to keep themselves from dying. You will find yourself in pleny of situations where your opponent has an empty hand and you just need the extra damage to win the game right then and there. If you don't like the Pyromancer after testing, I might suggest a second SGC over the 4th Gempalm. While the Gempalms are very, very good, sometimes they're simply dead or not very strong in the early game. Might as well get the most bang for your buck. 3 has always seemed optimal to me.


No, you have enough turn 1 drops. Like you said, this deck uses so much manacheaters that you don't need the extra mana of the prospector and it is card disavantage in the end.
Mostly true. I just like the ability to accellerate a turn 2 Warchief or to do combat tricks with Prospector and Sharpshooter. Probably not a good enough reason to run more than one of them, though, if any at all.

frogboy
08-10-2005, 07:40 PM
You can Gempalm, Sharpshooter, or SCG your Pyromancer away before the end-of-turn comes around so you avoid Wrathing your squad.

Goblin Replica is technically tech for the UW Scepter matchup if you want to run it. I found it was awful in Extended, but I havn't tested against a UW Scepter Legacy list yet, so YMMV. (It's probably good against Disk if anyone still plays that.)

How good was maindeck King for you? Pyromancer is retardedly good in the mirror, and every time a King hits it just dies instantly, so the evasion almost never comes into play. (Yes, technically, you can kill a Pyromancer before it Wraths your opponent's board, too, but you're supposed to play it after they tap out to play a Ringleader or a five-drop. Setting up a lethal Goblin King is a lot harder.)

HBspulse
08-11-2005, 12:04 PM
Goblin Replica is technically tech for the UW Scepter matchup if you want to run it. I found it was awful in Extended, but I havn't tested against a UW Scepter Legacy list yet, so YMMV. (It's probably good against Disk if anyone still plays that.)

Yeah, i thought of that too, however it's like playing rgsa against scepter-chant. If the scepter is there, you are already too late. But ok, who plays scepter-chant anyway in a landstill-meta?

The king...hmm.
Not particulary good. It is golden against RGSA or any deck playing mountains and perhaps burning wish/pyroclasms. Didn't see any of those however. And indeed, it's no combo finisher against other matchups.
I preferred it over pyromancer since it is playable on it's own and only costs 3. It's not a bad drop, but no killing machine either. Maybe if you play more cards like SCG, it will be.

:cool: I just like playing with 'the king'. Now getting a beta one...

scarface
08-18-2005, 04:11 PM
Has anyone tested Goblin Legionnaire in the r/w version? He just seems too good to leave out. Plus the deck needs more two drops, and the sparksmiths aren't as strong as I'd like. I know the casting cost doesn't work well with warchief, but I think the card's just too crazy to be ignored.

Destavi
08-18-2005, 09:23 PM
Getting the White mana is the problem. The deck is mana HUNGRY. It doesn't need getting Wasted on the 3rd turn and having one land in play. Or worse yet not having the White mana to cast him cause you have a Mountain and a Waste as your land.

scarface
08-18-2005, 11:35 PM
Thats true, but it's possible to run twelve white sources (8 fetches plus 4 plateaus), not to mention that color is irrelevant once you draw a vial. I know that most r/w versions avoid running a full set of plateaus just cause of the potential target for a wasteland, but you have to play them anyway once you go and board in the disenchants/StP's. I don't see why you can risk the plateaus game 2 but not game 1.

Destavi
08-20-2005, 03:54 AM
Are most Goblin players even sticking with the White splash? I assume that many people are switching over to Mono Red because Pithing Needle and Goblin King take White's place.

scarface
08-20-2005, 02:14 PM
Are most Goblin players even sticking with the White splash? I assume that many people are switching over to Mono Red because Pithing Needle and Goblin King take White's place.

It's true that the white splash is becoming less common (I actually prefer the monored build anyway), but I just thought it was interesting that the legionnaire hasn't shown up in any of the decklists i've seen with the white splash.

By the way, could someone tell me what's a safe number of non-goblin cards to board in without significantly weakening the ringleader? The other day I boarded in 9 cards against a landstill deck and ended up getting a total of one goblin off three ringleaders. I probabably would have won the match if I hadn't boarded in anything at all.

drizzt
08-21-2005, 05:38 PM
Pithing Needle makes the white splash indeed a bit obsolete. However I wouldn't really like want to cut swords to Plowshares and I also think the deck can easily afford the white splash. The only have color requirement is for Kiki-Jiki. Enchantment removal remains highly suggested in my oppinion. Needle is good against alot, but there are some really nasty enchantments like Chill, Engineered plague, Reverence and Moat that are increasing in popularity.

I have been playing against HBSpulse in Mol with almost the same deck, the biggest difference was that he ran Jitte and I ran Armageddon. And that made his deck better in the mirror of course. The first one is broken against other aggro decks, while Armageddon improves your game against Landstill alot.

edit:
About the Goblin Replica thingie: Why not go for Goblin Tinkerer instead?

scarface
08-21-2005, 05:57 PM
Okay, I have another question. In my current meta, there is very little solidarity (if any), so I think its safe to take the pillars out of my sideboard. What would a descent monored sideboard look like in a meta with mainly landstill, ATS, RG survival, 2-land belcher, sligh, reanimator, gro and a bunch of random aggro decks (angel stompy, ug madness, wg threshold, etc.) look like? Currently I've found that reanimator and belcher are my worst matchups, though I have some trouble with landstill and survival decks.

mackaber
08-22-2005, 08:53 AM
@drizzt: What do you wan't the STP for sooo badly? I can't think of too many matchups where I#d wan't to board out goblins for it.

Generally I think that this dec, as a dec that relys so heavily on synergie can be severly weakend even by boarding in good cards for the matchup. I think affinity is a good comparison here. Besides Solidarity I can't think of any dec against which I'd like to bring in 8 cards.

Whenever I start boarding heavily I tend to remove some, if not all ringleaders.

@White Splash: Who is still seriously considering this? I have found that being subject to wasteland can flat out lose you games against Landstill(crucuble). I doubt that Disenchant out of the board is worth the risk of getting locked on 2 mountains. The only enchantment that is truly a problem is engineered plague, and atm there is no viable black dec.