Which one of you is LeoLunkhinho[BRA]?
Like sure, you say you don't count it against testing results, but then why bother post it? Games where an Ichorid player dredges to with an Ancestral Vision actively counting down shouldn't be referenced at all in a thread about a deck you think is competitive.
Nice jorb reading, now you look much smarter.
It basically comes down to whether or not you think I'm lying. Obviously you think I am, but you think your time is better spent trolling this thread than actually investigating.
I know that I'm not lying, so I offer you this challenge: Play the deck and then post how you did. In less time than it takes you to get reading comprehension lessons, you'll be able to see for yourself.
Win
EDIT: I played against a variant of this deck at Game Empire some time ago... Which one of you guys was it?
If I recall correctly, I did some smashing with an old Uwr landstill list that day... But hey, I win like over 80% of the legacy events I attend, so its not a big surprise.
EDIT!!!!: Holy Shit! My rating has taken a HUGE hit since I last saw it... Im only at 1793 now... It used to be over 1850!
Maybe it was because I took a total pile and lost a bunch at that LA tournament.
EDIT556: You know... That must have been it, because I remember just scooping to some kid that had never played the format before, but assembled counter-top, and I was really hungry... I think that would have hurt it a lot, but where on earth did all those other points go?!!!!
I think Ima go kill myself now.
Im a little embarrassed now... just editing non-stop... Looking at things that used to be much prettier, wondering when this thread will turn into an all-out flamewar... Well, w/e (see, I can do it too!) I'm going to bed... Tell me how it all turned out in the morning will ya?
THX
EDIT4: ignore those last few sentences...
I think this deck could have some merit if it ran something to actually turn sideways... Jotan grunt could be a decent addition (deals with opposing goyfs, feeds more wastelands into your deck, makes you feel better when you're lonely)
EDIT5: Oh thank GOD! I have at least! A better eternal rating that Adam Barnello (sp?)... At least I don't feel too bad now.
EDIT#7:
Another thing you could consider doing is run some decent creatures aside from the wayferer (sp?)... splashing green wouldn't hurt in the least... I mean, the rest of the format does it... Why can't you? But in all honesty, I can't see this deck ever winning through the red-zone, as everything else in this format is either larger than you, or sweeps you easily (explosives, firespout!, deed (not as much anymore, but its out there) and the dreaded dread of night)
@thefreakaccident
This is just a comment about your sig.
Do you have any proof of any of your claims?
And if you win 80% of the tournaments in our general area, what is your name?
@the deck
The reason people are saying your match-ups are bogus is because you're saying you are a blowout against almost every single deck.
Zoo runs about 340925345072398793482750120 removal spells. You have 4 Moms and 3 Jitte to fight against them, and all their creatures are bigger.
CounterTop completely lock this deck out.
Daze gives this deck fits.
Cute Vial tricks with Knight are not hard to play around.
Merfolk has a clock, you don't.
Goblins is fast a s hell, you aren't.
Fathom Seer costs three mana to play. Extremely slow.
Visions is extremely slow.
Two Vials is not the right number. Vial is broken early and is terrible later.
How do you Daze when you get all your lands bounced and Wasted and whatnot?
Not personal attacks, just comments about the deck.
glad to see this is finally up.
seriously for those of you trolling, play with it enough and once you are a GOOD PILOT you'll seriously kick ass. ive play tested against forbiddian probably 4 or 5 times with different decks and got my ass handed to me each time. it doesnt look all that hot on paper honestly, but the synergies work so well. the only time i legitamately won that i can remember was via a turn 1 Pact SI when he didnt have force. otherwise, he stabilized, visions resolved and he took the upper hand. seriously give it a go and see how it does. to tell the truth, i thought he understated its matchups. playing with it ive won more games than ive lost and those that i lost more from lack of play experience then just not drawing the right shit. its really well cut out to deal with a majority of the meta game. it just has a ridiculous number of jitte bearers that once you get jitte down, it wins you the game.
the only change i have made to it with my testing is ethersworn cannonist over thorn. ive preferred another jitte bearer to the thorn.
Capitalization is required on these boards. Please use it in the future. Thanks. - zilla
I just think this deck is cool because it uses Weathered Wayfarer. And I'm just gonna leave it at that, because all this controversy isn't all that interesting one way or the other.
Bless your heart, we must consider Blue/White Tempo's strategy and win percentages in an entirely different deck thread. -4eak
This deck is pretty cool. With Grunt you just put on the bottom of your deck your Wastelands, then fetch them with Wayfarer, and annihilate your opponent's manabase. I was thinking about building a similar deck with Standstill and Mishra's Factories. The list was pretty rough, but this was my original idea:
I did not finish the sb yet, but it would have certainly involved Jittes/Canonists/BEBs and such. Good move by Forbiddian. Creating this thread was an awesome idea.Code:4x Flooded Strand 4x Tundra 3x Wasteland 2x Mishra's Factory 2x Island 2x Plains 1x Mutavault 1x Hallowed Fountain 1x Windswept Heath 4x Knight of the White Orchid 4x Weathered Wayfarer 3x Steppe Lynx 3x Fathom Seer 2x Jotun Grunt 2x Serra Avenger 4x Force of Will 4x Brainstorm 4x Swords to Plowshares 3x Standstill 3x Daze 3x Aether Vial 1x Crucible of Worlds
0.05.14 [Digital Devil] <Digital Devil> Ach! Hans, run! It's the Tarmogoyf!
0.05.17 [Hans (GER)] <Hans (GER)> ...
0.05.20 [<System>] <System> Player Lost
Oh yeah, I remember playing you like all night one time. I think I got a bit lucky on some of those matches, but I'm glad you like the deck.
Here's what I did today (only posting games against people who claimed they were from the Source):
2-1 against Tamariz on Aggro Loam.
Game 1 no land mulligan. Keep a weak hand with 1 land. He goes: Fetchland, Double Mox Diamond, Life from the Loam. I untap, draw. No second land. Shit. Brainstorm? Shit shit shit. Miss my land drop and pass the turn.
He plays the Wasteland and I scoop it up before he knows what I'm playing.
Game 2 no land mulligan (again, what the hell?). I have a good 6, though. His play is Mox Diamond fetchland, Life from the Loam, but I’m able to ignore it since he doesn't have a broken play. He gets a Countryside Crusher and two Bobs on the table. I get a pair of Moms and Angel out and stabilize at 11 life (although his CC is like 15/15). Mom walls the CC, so he can’t profitably swing with anything. He keeps Bobbing up lands and Chalices (damn) as I go beatdown from the skies with Angel and using one Mom to get through with Knight for 5/turn. I don't know what he's looking for, but on the last turn, he double Bobs 2x 3cc spells from 6 life. GG. I think I still had that one anyway, but it was pretty bad luck of him.
Game 3 it’s his turn to mulligan and I keep a really strong hand except for no white mana. I open with Island and Relic. Turn 2 Wasteland and sit on Relic. I choose not to Force his Burning Wish and he gets Loam, but Relic keeps him down. I play a second relic and he asks if I switched decks, since he didn’t see Relic or Island either G1 or G2. Yeah, the deck plays weird games like that.
He only comes up with Seismic Assault as I resolve Ancestral Vision, Serra Avenger + Jitte, and Grunt. He has a turn to topdeck Life from the Loam to potentially stay in the game (and does topdeck the loam), except his next turn dredge doesn’t turn up any land and he dies to my beats.
2-0 Morivictus playing some Urb Welder deck. I didn't think it was good.
Game 1: On the draw, I mulligan again, wtf, no lands. I open the god 6, though: fetch, wasteland, wayfarer, mom, vial, knight, ancestral visions, so I forgive the RNG. Wayfarer mana screws him after he plays a turn 3 City of Traitors after Synod and City of Brass. First wasteland took City of Brass, then I’m able to vial in Wayfarer endstep and tutor up a Wasteland to knife Synod. So he’s down to City of Traitors against my Weathered Wayfarer, ticking AV, mom and Vial. I beat him down pretty quickly. He plays a land, but when I point out that it would kill his City, he scoops them up.
Game 2: I mulligan again, wtf, no lands. I keep a pretty soft six with Aura of Silence. I manage to ramp up to it properly with Mom + Jitte. He casts Tangle Wire. This deck really doesn't care about Tangle Wire. I have two Moms and Jitte on the board, so I’m able to tap random permanents, swing in for 1, and shoot his Goblin Welder. It took all my permanents, so both Moms were tapped. He probably should have blocked. In hindsight, I probably should have boarded out the Moms. Aura comes down as he gets Tangle Wire + Smokestack going, but I have more permanents than he does, so it doesn't really matter as Jitte hits him for 5 a turn he goes down.
2-0 Acroma on Goblins.
Nice guy.
Game 1 from the play. I drop mom and he plays Mountain Lackey. I look at my hand. He loses. I have Jitte, Knight of the White Orchid Serra Avenger, Force, Ancestral Vision, and a second land. He taps Mom with Gempalm and swings in with Lackey, but only has Chieftain, so it doesn’t even make me sweat. He casts a second lackey as I play out Jitte and Knight. He gives me an >.< when he reads that Knight has first strike. I stabilize at 17 life with a Force of Will and a blue saved up the whole game that I don’t even need to reveal. Blowout.
Game 2, he opens lackey but I have BFT. Mom comes down turn 2 and he stumbles on a second land, gg. He says he probably shouldn’t have kept the hand, but with Gempalm and SGC on board, if he drew the land, I would only have Swords or Force on the lackey to survive that one. Mom would have just gotten burned out by Gempalm. He didn’t know I also brought in BFTs, which gave me 50% more outs, but I couldn't really argue with his play esp if he didn't know that I had a 12 outer instead of just an 8-outer, and he could still win if I don't block with Mom or Wayfarer (which he didn't see, yet) instead of playing the Swords or Force.
1-0 Acroma on White Stax
Game 1 from the play. I keep a 1 land hand double brainstorm and Force. He took a long time deciding to keep, so I thought he might be combo (thinking about turn 1 play) and the Force would get me there. I probably would have kept anyway, but I was actually pretty convinced he was on Combo or had a very weak hand that Force would chew apart after the 1-2 minute wait for him to say keep. Turns out he had a great hand and he was just tricking me or taking a shit or something. He opens Mox Diamond (pitching Plains), Flagstones, Chalice.
Ugh, tough matchup. I kneejerk the Force on Chalice and play Brainstorm finding me a land. He gets Tangle Wire and Ghostly Prison a few turns later, but this deck flies over Tangle Wires. I just played out a half dozen lands and artifacts off of Knight of the White Orchid.
He has to go, so no game 2 or game 3. I probably should have lost this set, though, but I'm happy to be 1-0.
Total: 7-1, 4-0 matches (one cut short).
Hopefully people with better decks will play me tomorrow after my Physics exam and I can get a few losses as well. I know people think that I'm just lying about the testing results, so I'm actively looking to lose.
Nah, TFA is full of shit. You can tell if only from his sub-1800 rating that he doesn't have that kind of win percentage. I'm 1750 rated and I only won about 66% of my matches, and only went 4-0 3 or 4 times in 14 weeks playing there. If you go 4-0 80% of the time, that's like a 95% win ratio. But yeah, we'd all like to see his DCI number.
I'm not saying that they're blowouts. Favorable is like ~60%. Very favorable is like ~66%. Slightly favorable is between 50 and 55%. A blowout is like 80% or better, and frankly, some of the matches are blowouts.@the deck
The reason people are saying your match-ups are bogus is because you're saying you are a blowout against almost every single deck.
If you try counting one of these days, we actually run more creatures than they run removal. So :-P. They also run a completely non-basic mana base and their creatures rely on having the correct lands out (in addition to their spells). We win a lot of the games just off of lucksacking the double waste (or Wayfarering it).
Zoo runs about 340925345072398793482750120 removal spells. You have 4 Moms and 3 Jitte to fight against them, and all their creatures are bigger.
Yeah. It also locks every deck out. So how come it sucks in the current metagame? Oh yeah, because actually getting the CB/Top lock out early enough to win it clean is pretty rare. It happens much less than half the games, especially through our Countermagic and potential Vial draws. I say CB/Top is unfavorable, so I agree with you in that sense, but CB/Top is run in about a million decks, so it's tough to talk specifics. I will say that it's very hard to take advantage of the lock against a Wayfarer.CounterTop completely lock this deck out.
Huh? It just counters target spell like it does against every deck. We run Daze. It's a good card. It's actually much worse against our deck, because the most expensive spell it can possibly get costs 3 and legitimately it will only ever get a 1cc or 2cc spell.Daze gives this deck fits.
Again, huh? It's actually very hard not to play a second land. I've seen very few people be able to pull off playing with just 1 land the whole game (unless they're a combo deck or something, but then Knights/Vial tend to get at least partially boarded out).Cute Vial tricks with Knight are not hard to play around.
Two things: 1) What the fuck? We're basically a control deck with creatures. Do you post in the Landstill thread, "Goblins has a clock, you don't." 2) We're not that much smaller than Merfolk. Merfolk can occasionally goldfish, but most decks run some form of spot removal which removes the lords from combat. If you have two removal spells or more, we're functionally bigger or equivalent to Merfolk.Merfolk has a clock, you don't.
But yeah, I agree we're much slower than Merfolk, but that's just a conceptual change, it's not actively hurting any matchups.
Goblins isn't that fast when you have blockers in the way, and lately it's been slowing down to try to beat control more. The only fast hands are unanswered Lackey or Instigator, really, and we have Swords, Force, Daze, Mom, Wayfarer chumping, Knight turn 2, Fathom Seer turn 2. Games 2 and 3 we get BFTs as well. Goblins goldfishes in like a second, but we run 20 creatures and Goblins doesn't goldfish nearly as fast against blocking potential. Very quickly, attacking becomes not profitable, even in situations where they outnumber us. Imagine: Knight, Mom, vs. Chieftain, Lackey, Lackey (happened earlier today). There's no profitable attack in that situation. Effectively we're up a card (or 2) and we're also up between 2 and 3+ mana-tempo because even though their side is stronger, we're still at board parity. They can't advance board position, so they're forced to pass the turn with no attack.Goblins is fast a s hell, you aren't.
Obviously they're not out of the game or anything, but I hope you can see from that example how keeping up with Goblins is simply not needed when you have Jitte/Swords. It's just about making their attack not profitable and then waiting for Umezawa's Jitte or a pack of Gushbears to kick in. If I have Swords or Force backup, I can stall that board position out for an extremely long time.
For some other examples: Fathom Seer, Knight of the White Orchid, Serra Avenger vs. Goblin Piledriver x2, Goblin Matron, Goblin Ringleader, Goblin Lackey. The two Piledrivers are 9 power in the all-in, but you can block and kill both and kill the lackey, trading a Serra Avenger and 3 life for two Piledrivers and a Lackey. If you have a Swords, you can trade a Swords and 1 life (and 1 life for him) for 2 Piledrivers, a Ringleader, and a Lackey.
By any measurement, he's got WAY more board presence than you do, and he's invested a ton more in getting that on the board than you have. And the board looks one sided as hell. But if you look closely, you're still at parity since he can't attack profitably. In fact, you're hitting him for 3 a turn, so he's actually got to find some gas.
And just for kicks, let's see what he'd need to turn a profitable attack if you have a Jitte on Serra Avenger with two counters: 3x Piledriver, 2x Ringleader, 2x Goblin Matron, 1x Lackey. Let's see... in that situation you'll trade 6 life and Angel for 3 Piledrivers Goblin Lackey, and two Jitte Counters, which can shoot the two Matrons or gain life back, leaving only 6 power in the board which won't get it done against two creatures and a Jitte. If you're at 7 or more life, he still can't attack in that situation without a combat trick (which would be game winning, but more likely than not he doesn't have one or you have a trick of your own). So your Jitte and 3 "small" guys are holding off 3 Piledrivers, 2 Ringleaders, 2 Matrons, and a Lackey, even without a Swords.
So you can see how it's so hard to win through a Jitte and how this deck can stall the game long enough to resolve one. Even though it has no chance to "race" goblins, it can continually play creatures to ensure that blocks and double blocks are profitable, while relying on the fact that Jitte will come (eventually) and be able to turn the tide.
Instead of running some shitty bear, we have an endgame out that will win the topdeck war. Again, we're not an aggro deck, primarily because Fathom Seer guarantees that we'll win the topdeck war if we can get to that point.Fathom Seer costs three mana to play. Extremely slow.
I wish that Fathom Seer was cheaper. It would definitely make the deck better, but there's nothing for less than 3cc that generates so much card advantage or guarantees the topdeck war win like Fathom Seer does.
Yeah, I agree. It's also countered by Standstill, Stifle, and Counterbalance, the first two are weak against our deck and then suddenly strong. I wish it were ancestral recall, but damn Wizards banned it. I could explain how we try to slow the game down anyway to take advantage of it, but you'd continue to pretend like we're an aggro deck and we never get to turn 5. Really, how hard is it to get to turn 5?Visions is extremely slow.
Since you haven't even played the deck, I don't think you have any authority to comment on what the right number is, but if you'd like to run 3 or 4, be my guest. I like Vial a lot, it's a very fun card.Two Vials is not the right number. Vial is broken early and is terrible later.
There's a mechanic in the game that allows you to move a land from your hand into play during your mainphase. Typically if you use it every turn, you're good.How do you Daze when you get all your lands bounced and Wasted and whatnot?
We run 4x Fathom Seer, 3x Daze, and 3x Knight of the White Orchid in terms of things that let us cheat in or step behind on Land drops. If you're used to playing decks with Daze, this shouldn't be a tough transition.
I didn't think there were any personal attacks, just that you've never played the deck and have some questions about how the deck functions in certain situations.Not personal attacks, just comments about the deck.
Other people have had similar questions for me. It's part of why I started this thread is to answer questions like that.
EDIT: Fixed some typos and stuff.
I would respond to your post. But I've realized your deck is unbeatable, there isn't any option but to bend over and take it.
I'm done with this thread.
Just one thing about Vial and Fathom Seer. You cannot cast it with Vial under its morph body, right...? Vial "only" allows you to put it in the table from your hand, it does'nt allow you to cast it as a morph for free. It means putting it in game with Vial won't let you the possiblity to unmorph it, then you won't draw the two precious cards, right...? ( I'm noob and I'm not sure ( but I'm sure I'm noob ))
Sorry for my very bad english. I would like to add some jokes to make my post more "english" or something like. Anyways... Tell me if I'm wrong about Fathom Seer and Vial.
God bless you, guys or something like.
The fact that your criticisms are easily refuted proves nothing. If you had well-thought criticisms instead of making a laundry list of strategies that NoGoyf doesn't attempt to have, then you might have made more progress (I assume that your overall goal is to convince me that I'm a terrible player, intentionally bad, troll me, etc. etc. because you responded extremely negatively to my response).
Just some more friendly advice: Because I'm the only one out of the two of us who has played the deck, I will automatically look down on your criticisms as being borne of ignorance and stupidity. Especially after reading them. If you played the deck and then thought up criticisms based on your observations, you'd be much more helpful and overall more successful at convincing me that I'm terrible.
You can only Vial Fathom Seer into play as the 1/3 blue creature (i.e. face up), and only when Vial has exactly two counters on it. The morph is a special ability that allows you to cast it from your hand for an alternate cost.
Some other interesting stuff: It is colorless (can block Piledriver) and its CMC is 0 (so Counterbalance players should try to put land on top). You don't have to pay extra to play it under a Trinisphere.
Please don't tell me this is how you're getting your new testing results. You have to realize that people on MWS are 90% of the time testing new decks, testing odd deck tweaks, or just practicing with something they have no idea how to use, and 10% of the time playing a deck that they play normally for the fun of stomping on someone in the 90% column (and 85% making up percentage statistics).
Mainly, the only good MWS does is to make you get a feel for how a deck runs and whether it is going to perform somewhat well. The getting real playtesting statistics will only come from playing against people who are good at decks that they are currently playing.
I mean the whole percentages thing was funny in the beginning because the majority of the decks you listed were played by you, and pi4meter played the NG deck repeatedly. He even told me after I got a game on him (after 3 tries) in the mirror match that he was really surprised because you had never beaten him in the mirror before.
Now that is something we can all see a problem with.
Wait what? I never said it was a problem, so how is it a problem? And how does it matter if our group tests IRL or on MWS. BUT OMG THE SHUFFLER IS BAD SEE LOLOLOLOLOL THAT WAY YOUR TESTING RESULTS WILL BE SKEWED BECAUSE ALSO THE SHUFFLER IS BAD AND FAVORS NG, YEAH! I WIN.
Okay, I'm not retesting crap. It's amazing that you still need proof that this deck is as advertised. (about 65% win against the current field) Nobody has actually provided a reason why the matchups should be bad, we've provided the reasons why the matchup should be good, and in case reasoning can't persuade you we've also played thousands of games against each other and maybe hundreds against other source members. But in case that wasn't enough, we also said we even played more games just now. Then everybody forgets that we already presented our main argument and are just adding icing to the cake, and focuses on what's lacking in like our 10 most recent games. "We even did..." usually signifies that we've already presented our crushing argument. Now we're just interested in putting the nail in the coffin so to speak. Even that is too loose of an analogy, because the nail was already in the coffin when we played thousands of games and reasoned our list through.
As such, I may decide to play more games with this list, but I'm not testing anymore except against new builds. You can ask me how I'm doing and I'll respond, but I'm not making a point of tabulating my wins against the known decks anymore because I already know it's precisely what is listed. The argument that it would be lower for pros is retarded. It's true, it's just a horrible argument. Everybody would do worse if their opponents were better. Nice red herring. You may assume all our results were played with nonpros. But if a deck can do even 50% against pros when played by mere paupers such as Matt and I, that too is an equal statement of strength of the deck. So why is it that having a lower matchup against pros is a good argument? You won't be able to answer this question because it's not well-formed: it's a horrible argument.
Matt may have the temperament to tabulate results again but we agreed to post this for the evolution of the metagame. If the players won't proliferate the deck, then I doubt logical reasoning is the way to forward the case. Maybe you just need to see it for yourself to debunk some superstitions or something.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)