Hey, I didn't say I didn't like your list. It's a good deck. I just said it's not W Thresh: it's Bant Aggro with Wastelands. If we're posting about Bant Aggro I might as well post my Bant Aggro list, right?
But apparently it's me vs. the world, so I guess I'm wrong. I'll shut up now. Please continue
If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's probably delicious.
Team ADHD-To resist is to piss in the wind. Anyone who does will end up smelling.
I agree that 4 Elspeth if an odd choice but hell he top'd 8 with it at a decently sized tournament.Originally Posted by mossivo1986
Aside, are 8 cantrips really necessary? As much as I like Ponder in tempo, I think you could put a few of those slots to better use. If I were to play it, I think I would cut 2 ponder and a QPM for some Nimble Mongoose actions. Especially since you lack equipment, I would expect you to be running a few Geese.
Luck is a residue of design.
I'm an aspiring Psychedelic Trance musician. Please feel free to enjoy my sense of life:
http://soundcloud.com/vacrix
Expect me or die. I play SI.
It's not you versus the world. I felt as though you were just attacking the entire integrity of the deck from start to finish. If you want to be apart of the establishing of this arch-type to the top then be my guest. I think your a fine pilot. But if your going to be nasty from the start then obviously I don't want to argue with you, your a nice guy.Hey, I didn't say I didn't like your list. It's a good deck. I just said it's not W Thresh: it's Bant Aggro with Wastelands. If we're posting about Bant Aggro I might as well post my Bant Aggro list, right?
But apparently it's me vs. the world, so I guess I'm wrong. I'll shut up now
Also just because someone does well in a tourney doesn't mean their list is insane. It simply means a number of factors went right for them. Personally I think a large part of that tourney had to do with skeggi's ability as a player, with very little in terms of negative drawbacks from his deck (i.e. drawing 3 elspeth in an opener etc.)
The geese are good, but the cards you suggest cutting are part of the reason that nimble mongoose is good. With less cantrips and less exalted, nimble mongoose becomes a 3/3 much later, allowing your opponent to recover from the tempo you spent your early turns setting up.
On a side note, I would never cut ponders from a tempo oriented deck list such as this. The package of 4 brainstorm and 4 ponder drastically improve your odds of seeing your other dudes, which are among the top power level in the format, while allowing you to have a much more reasonable chance of seeing key sideboard cards.
EDIT: It seems that the needles are meh in the sideboard, and that your grave hate is a little lacking. Wheel of sun and moon is quite good against both reanimator and dredge, and might be a good swap for the two needles.
+1 QFT. Redundancy in this arch-type is one major position for it's success.On a side note, I would never cut ponders from a tempo oriented deck list such as this. The package of 4 brainstorm and 4 ponder drastically improve your odds of seeing your other dudes, which are among the top power level in the format, while allowing you to have a much more reasonable chance of seeing key sideboard cards.
Needles are to equalize match-ups like 43land(maze) and goblins(vial). Though you side in needle against goblins it doesn't mean you side it in against every deck running vial. It's particular to that match-up because of Ringleader. Overall needle is quite solid and I don't think i'd toss it out of the sideboard.EDIT: It seems that the needles are meh in the sideboard, and that your grave hate is a little lacking. Wheel of sun and moon is quite good against both reanimator and dredge, and might be a good swap for the two needles.
Everyone keeps mentioning not enough graveyard hate. While I understand that Dredge is a real deck and requires extensive testing, is it really that necessary to bring in specific hate, rather then generalized and hope for the best if the match-up isn't that much stronger regardless? With relic as strong as it is against a variety of decks it seems like the better plan. Recursion is already a decently favored match-up with the disruption package presented and honestly I feel like if you incase yourself with mass gy removal options (6 slots or more) you fall into this abyss of testing the wrong match-ups.
Last edited by mossivo1986; 05-22-2010 at 04:34 AM.
Revised primer. Thanx to Jak for such a fantastic layout!
Updated the Primer with new testing results. Unsure if relic should or should not be replaced at this point. Anyone crunch any numbers on how much recursion is showing up in larger tournaments and finishing well? I need to test this match-up specifically and also establish the combo match-ups actual numbers.
Pheonix. I need to get some numbers crunched against zurr as well. I know that sounds weird but I consider the deck relevant still because your playing it. :)
I think 3rd rhox,4th spell pierce, and a 4th Relic are all considerations for the board. I just need to organize my thoughts a bit more.
Report Time. Played another tourney and got 3rd. Click here for a report. I'm now 8/8 in tournament play (t4,split, or just win)
So the tournament report I put up has been locked. All constructive criticism, additional questions about playing the deck, as well as any other information well nature d comments about the deck will be placed here.
I talked to Paul today and noting from the tournament I should not have played teeg, and I probobly should have cut krosan grip instead of the ee and relic. The krosan grips should have turned into ethersworn cannonist if I was afraid of combo, which I agree on; I just wanted more universal hate. Obviously siding in ee with teeg is such a nombo, but its all hate non the less.
Nice work mossivo. Your 8 for 8 record so far is impressive.
I'm still a fan of replacing PtE. Has any progress been made on finding a replacement for that slot? Or are you satisfied with it? Its so anti-tempo..
I agree with everything you said. What if other cards were cut to make room for geese? Exalted triggers and goose are a pretty sexy combination.The geese are good, but the cards you suggest cutting are part of the reason that nimble mongoose is good. With less cantrips and less exalted, nimble mongoose becomes a 3/3 much later, allowing your opponent to recover from the tempo you spent your early turns setting up.
On a side note, I would never cut ponders from a tempo oriented deck list such as this. The package of 4 brainstorm and 4 ponder drastically improve your odds of seeing your other dudes, which are among the top power level in the format, while allowing you to have a much more reasonable chance of seeing key sideboard cards.
Luck is a residue of design.
I'm an aspiring Psychedelic Trance musician. Please feel free to enjoy my sense of life:
http://soundcloud.com/vacrix
Expect me or die. I play SI.
In the match-ups your bring in P2E your not really worried about playing the tempo roll as i've tried to explain. This is really P2E's biggest argument. Although I would like to note that the original lists that Paul had contained 3x Path. I have since cut one in favor of EE. As EE is so universally good against a variety of match-ups you really need it in.
I talked to Paul last night about a 3rd pithing needle in the side as there are soo many decks that are trying to abuse mother of runes/ maze/ vial/ etc. I'm thinking that this may be a good idea. I don't know about cutting ee #2 though.
Pfft, mother of runes? Who would play such a terrible card? You shouldn't even worry about such a marginal creature
As for the path, I think they are decent enough in the matchups they come in. Condemn would probably be better in the goblin matchup (hitting the most important targets in piledriver/lackey/instigator), while being slightly worse in the merfolk matchup. They would also be worse in the zoo matchup. I think path answers the comination of those three decks the best, however.
You mentioned elsewhere that other people are playing this deck to success. I haven't seen anyone play this deck other than you, and Doug Linn (who I don't think plays in tournaments). Not saying they don't exist, but where do you get your information?
Also, would you like to play some exhibition games against UW Tempo?
More in this vein, Mossivo, can you explain how you have a highly unfavorable matchup against UWT game 1, but then because of the controlling aspect of 2 EEs you become highly favorable? I usually think of highly favorable as like >70-75%. So assuming you're making the least substantial claim possible, you still have to at least show that you can go from 30-70% with just 2 EE. I don't really see how you can even draw EE 40% of the games, and that's assuming that every time you draw it a lose becomes a win. More realistically, for a number N of EEs to have a 40% swing, N probably has to be such that you draw EE almost 100% of the games it's in your deck. I can imagine (Barely) the matchup with a deck like this being highly unfavorable for me on UWT if you were guaranteed to start with EE every game.
I had a small stint with it, I'm not that experienced with the list (combat math + playing with dudes for the first time is a little awkward). Not a lot of results, just two four round swiss tournaments, 3-0-1, then 3-1.
The 3-0-1 outing I beat Zoo (2-0), White Weenie (2-1, fuck Mother of Runes
The 3-1 outing I beat Burn (2-0), lost to New Horizons (0-2, probably could have played better), and beat Bant Aggro (2-0). I got paired down twice this tourney, so my buddy at 1-2 scooped to me to try to get into T4, and I didn't quite get there. Two 3-0-1's and two more 3-1's that tournament.
So yeah, I'm probably going to pick this deck up after the 5K this weekend, I have Goyfs but I haven't been using them. Still really new to the deck, as I mentioned I've been playing Landstill, the transition to playing with dudes, interacting in the red zone and stuff is still a little odd for me.
Delver enthusiast and avid practitioner of blind flipsmanship.
Follow me on Twitter: @AllSunsDawn
Actually, I'm not even sure I'd care if my opponent started with EE, I thought about how I'd play against EE and realized that any good player would just follow within +/- one step of you. It's not hard to ensure that:
for 1cc creatures I have no more than 1 more 1cc creature than you do.
Same for 2cc.
Say you play a noble hierarch and a tarmogoyf. To maintain board parity here, I can play mom, or even swords. If you add hierarch, then I have to play double mom, or mom grunt, or mom avenger, mom jitte, mom swords, etc.
I can't imagine a situation where you can somehow force me to overextend in the crazy ways that you mention, since UWT plays the control role and only has to respond to your threats. (When in the hands of a competent pilot who realizes this.) Unlike the situation, say, UWT vs. landstill where UWT plays aggro, here UWT plays control and doesn't overextend.
But even in the hands of a bad player, I don't see why you were so excited to hear that EE went 4:1. The 3:1 is much much more devastating than the 4:1 you gave. The 3:1 was mom mom vial. If that happened without anything dying from your side, I could see that swinging the game. But the "4:1" was jitte, avenger, fathom seer, SFM. Okay, so SFM got a jitte, so that's really just -1. If you do the math, it's card advantage parity. The UWT player invested an SFM, an avenger, and a fathom seer, and came out with 2 cards. (Net: -1)
The W thresh player invests 1 EE (-1).
And then, according to you that's supposed to be like the shining pinnacle of EE plays. It's not a good trade for the UWT player for tempo issues, but it's not even like a good sideboard card, for kind of the same reasons UWT itself does not run EE, even though we considered it.
Pre-board your mother of runes kick my ass. This should come to no suprise. Mother of runes wins attrition match-es quite handily as you already know.More in this vein, Mossivo, can you explain how you have a highly unfavorable matchup against UWT game 1, but then because of the controlling aspect of 2 EEs you become highly favorable? I usually think of highly favorable as like >70-75%. So assuming you're making the least substantial claim possible, you still have to at least show that you can go from 30-70% with just 2 EE. I don't really see how you can even draw EE 40% of the games, and that's assuming that every time you draw it a lose becomes a win. More realistically, for a number N of EEs to have a 40% swing, N probably has to be such that you draw EE almost 100% of the games it's in your deck. I can imagine (Barely) the matchup with a deck like this being highly unfavorable for me on UWT if you were guaranteed to start with EE every game.
Post-board you throw in EE, Needle, and Path and woops all of a sudden I run UWT over because I have redundant answers to Mother. The strategy is simple.
Team Technology is the team which designed the deck. This is the team that runs the arch-type. They don't really care about who all knows about the deck etc. I am doing it because I wanted to see if the deck had similar results across the board as it has with me and the Team Tech. Crew. Morbid has his results. There are several others who have done fairly well.You mentioned elsewhere that other people are playing this deck to success. I haven't seen anyone play this deck other than you, and Doug Linn (who I don't think plays in tournaments). Not saying they don't exist, but where do you get your information?
Exhibition matches? I have no interest in playing you Forbidden. Now Jeff, if you wanted to throw down a couple of matches for old times sake thats absolutely alright. get on your damn aim every once in a while and we can talk.
Last edited by mossivo1986; 06-05-2010 at 02:16 PM.
If you are stricly looking at card advantage, this "4:1" isn't really card advantage. However, in terms of mana spent, the EE player gained a ton considering it cost 2 to play and 2 to blow up. The UW tempo player spent 2 for SFM, 2 for Avenger, 3 for Fathom Seer(bouncing 2 lands), 2 for jitte and 2 for equip. Thats 4 mana vs 11 which is quite a bit of difference. Now some of that could have been paid with vial, but atleast 3 from fathom seer and 4 for jitte which is still 7 vs 4 in the best case scenario.
Without context it is impossible to determine how deeply that mana difference effected board state, but it's definately not a terrible play regaurdless.
mossivo1986, I love this deck. I have been testing my own version on MWS and I am trying to pick up the cards in real life (hopefully i can make some trades at GP Columbus). I completely agree that this deck plays differently than bant aggro decks. Here is the deck I've been testing:
1 [IN] Island
1 [OD] Forest
2 [A] Tundra
3 [U] Tropical Island
4 [TE] Wasteland
4 [ON] Windswept Heath
4 [ZEN] Misty Rainforest
1 [FUT] Horizon Canopy
1 [OD] Plains
4 [CFX] Noble Hierarch
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf
4 [CFX] Knight of the Reliquary
3 [ARB] Qasali Pridemage
4 [AL] Force of Will
3 [NE] Daze
3 [ZEN] Spell Pierce
3 [JGC] Stifle
4 [R] Swords to Plowshares
4 [MM] Brainstorm
3 [LRW] Ponder
I love stifle in here. It just feels like this deck was meant to play it. Combined with early wastelands, spell pierces and dazes, it keeps your opponent off of the board for much of the early game. I really love Knight of the Reliquary, but 4 may be too much and I am probably going to replace 1 0r 2 with Rhox war monk. How are vendilion cliques working for everyone? I haven't tested them yet but I may get around to it. Are they important for the deck?
Indeed, I mentioned this fact and even recognized that the EE player is favored in this interaction, but not by enough to get even close to this being a GG play, especially since no sane UWT player would have this kind of board pressure and then still equip jitte. I hope you were just pulling that out of nowhere. And then this is like basically the optimal EE situation. If the EE player has even 1 2 CC creature, then this exchance has a much different outcome. Let's count mana spent to play all creatures, since vial is inherently a tempo boost in my computations. Thus it is 9 mana. You list returning 2 lands just to list one more thing to make it sound like you have more I guess, but it's not really even a drawback UWT cares about on average. So the EE player gains 5 tempi. The problem is the W thresh player is much more hardpressed to convert tempi into card advantage or pressure, the way UWT does, so it's probably the equivalent of +2 cards or so, whereas the UWT player could easily convert 5 mana into 3 or more cards. So it's a pretty good play, but it's not like it's game over.
Now if we take this unbelievable situation where the UWT player overextended (because he was retarded) into an opposition of 0 2cc creatures, and replace it with even 1 qasali or 1 tarmogoyf, the exchange becomes UWT player gets +1, loses 3 relative tempi. The UWT player is used to getting 3 mana for +2, and then your sideboard card made it 3 mana for +1. There are even situations where I'd want 3 mana for a +1.
If the W thresh player has 1 qasali and 1 goyf, then it's not even close. The UWT player spends 1 relative mana to get +2 CA. There's a card that does this. Its name is ancestral recall.
I can't imagine why the UWT player would play that much even if he didn't know EE was coming in, unless the W thresh player had some stuff as well.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote