Hey does anyone have a match-up analysis against reanimator. If so what would be some good cards to side in against them?
I piloted a Big Zoo list at the Baltimore 5k to a tenth place finish going 7-2. I will write a brief tournament report, if you wish to see a blow by blow play of the deck, I was in a feature match in round 9:4x TarmogoyfHTML Code:http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/standard/22196_Round_9_Kemper_Pogue_vs_Brandon_Leonhardt.html
4x Wild Nacatl
3x Noble Hierarch
3x Grim Lavamancer
3x Knight of the Reliquary
2x Qasali Pridemage
2x Stoneforge Mystic
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Swords to Plowshares
4x Green Sun's Zenith
1x Sylvan Library
1x Elspeth, Knight Errant
1x Sword of Feast and Famine
1x Umezawa's Jitte
4x Windswept Heath
4x Arid Mesa
3x Wasteland
3x Taiga
2x Plateau
2x Savannah
2x Horizon Canopy
1x Mountain
1x Plains
1x Dryad Arbor
SB:
1x Sword of Fire and Ice
1x Path to Exile
1x Karakas
1x Thrun, the Last Troll
1x Grim Lavamancer
1x Gaddock Teeg
2x Chain Lightning
2x Red Elemental Blast
2x Ancient Grudge
3x Tormod's Crypt
R1 I beat Max Walker playing UBR Faeries 2-0
R2 I beat Matt Heaps playing Merfolk 2-0
R3 I beat Elliot Dicker playing Ichorid 2-1
R4 I lose to Thomas Evaristo playing Zoo 1-2
R5 I beat William Kahl playing Zoo 2-1
R6 I beat Chas Hinkle playing Merfolk 2-0
R7 I lose to John Winters playing UW Landstill 1-2
R8 I beat James Goodwin playing Zoo 2-1
R9 I beat Brandon Leohardt playing NO Zoo 2-1
Overall I'm proud of my deck and my performance. I played a similar list but without Stoneforge in GP Providence where I Day 2'd but scrubbed out losing to Merfolk twice! Slower Zoo decks have a tougher time against Merfolk, but Stoneforge for SoFI makes the MU incredibly favored.
Tell me what you think and I'll be happy to answer some questions.
Team Giancoli. Rocking the mediocrity since 2008.
This is clearly not a deck. None of these lists are particularly similar to each other besides running the same obvious g/w cards like StP, Knight, and SFM. Some lists are not running Goyf which is clearly incorrect. Many of them seem to be under the impression that Scryb Ranger is playable in Legacy which is clearly incorrect. It seems odd that in the year of our lord two thousand and eleven I have to explain why Tarmogoyf is a better creature than Scryb Ranger yet here we are.
Based on the last ten decks described as "Maverick" on TCDecks, which was apparently used to justify this being posted as a DTB, the only core of the deck (based on what's actually run in all lists, as opposed to the apparently habitual efforts in this thread to claim a core that is not actually what people play) is:
3 GSZ
1 Dryad Arbor
3 Noble Hierarch
2 Qasali Pridemage
4 StP
2 KotR
2 SFM
1 Jitte
1 Karakas
1 Plains
2 Forest
4 Savannah
4 Windswept Heath
3 Wasteland
And the list posted just before me dropped 2 Savannahs.
That's 18 cards outside of the mana base, 4 of which are StP and which therefore don't count. The only non-ridiculously played spell- in fact the only thing that seems to separate this archetype from any other generic "pile of good cards" strategy in Legacy- is GSZ.
So,
a) Can we at least get this changed to an Archetype? It is clearly that. At best. Like seriously, I have accidentally built probably a dozen iterations of things people would call Maverick on MWS to kick around different variants of some of the best g/w creatures without even being aware that this thread existed.
2) I feel it would increase the credibility of the Source if we did not tell people that Mangara, and certainly Scryb Ranger at least, were Legacy playable cards. Like holy fuck it blocks Merfolk without dying so does Tarmogoyf.
r) ffs people you run a million shuffle effects + Jitte why aren't you running more Libraries?
四) Tarmogoyf is a super-efficient creature you should probably run at least a few.
PS: Elspeth does seem really good with equipment and mana accelerants it is probably correct to run more of that.
PPS: For the inevitable counter-arguments, know that I have a lengthy and mocking response waiting in the wings in which I discuss my new deck U/x Turbulence which runs such core cards as Brainstorm, Force of Will, Mental Misstep, Daze-or-Counterspell, and sometimes Jace the Mind Sculptor and-or Vendilion Clique. Alternate working names include twenty percent of the decks in the metagame.
Oh wait fuck I think I spoiled it n/m go on.
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
That post was hilarious. Hilarious and true.
-Matt
RE Elspeth -
I found through my playtesting that Elspeth is at best a 1-of, and usually in the Sideboard.
RE Sylvan Libary -
Please play 2.
RE Scryb Ranger -
Quirion Ranger is better, and actually is on parity for mana when your short, and generates mana with a BoP.
RE Tarmogoyf -
I agree that 1 should be in the maindeck. Possibly more, but it's more of a metagame choice.
RE Qasali Pridemage -
Should be at least 3, if not 4 in this current metagame. Equipment battles are getting common place. Exalted triggers are also tits when all your creatures are 1/1s.
West side
Find me on MTGO as Koby or rukcus -- @MTGKoby on Twitter
* Maverick is dead. Long live Maverick!
My Legacy stream
My MTG Blog - Work in progress
Potential to be huge, but the above scenario involves Mother of Runes and a 3cc creature staying in play for 5 turns. This kind of deck probably doesn't need such thing, as 5 turns of protected Knight of the Reliquary/Vengevine/Tarmogoyf/equipment madness will do the same.Originally Posted by Tacosnape
Some of my friends sell records,
some of my friends sell drugs.
Spot on, but you don't seem to see the value of Scryb Rangers interactions
with creatures with powerful tap-abilities. I still wouldn't play Ranger without Fauna Shaman, though. And if GWgoodstuff.dec ever has problems with merfolk, it's due to Coralhelm Commander flying over, so that's a minor selling point also for the Ranger.
But yes, this thread is vague. The combination of colors is really strong but the connection between placing lists is somewhat loose. And after people lose to Tarmogoyf beats a bit more, they start to put them back in the deck again. Can't complain about people trying stuff.
Some of my friends sell records,
some of my friends sell drugs.
Normally I wouldn't bother to respond to trolls, but he is apparantly trolling with heavy Mod support which is very odd but certainly makes this discussion inevitable. How can CorpT get moderated but not IBA despite being condescending, insulting, unconstructive and using the word "fuck" every second sentence?
Also he is very much wrong (not that being wrong should be moderated but it makes his post even more annoying).
Hey IBA, are you as sure about all your posts as you were about Batterskull and Jace TMS being unplayable. I remember you posting "you fucks this is Legacy you can't play these crappy expensive cards" about both of them?
Not that people can't be wrong about stuff, we all are, but it just reminds me. With the exact same condescending attitude you sold it as if everyone who thought Batterskull or Jace TMS were even remotely playable in this format was completely retarded.
I honestly can't believe that the mods changed the topic of this thread just because of this. IBA and Zilla have their history but this is still ridiculous. I have not experienced biased Mods on an important topic on this site so far and it is not a pleasant premiere.
And now let me carefully explain to you just how bad IBA's post was:
a) writing style: if you would remove all filler words like "clearly", "in the year of the lord", "obvious", "fuck" etc. and then cut all the mocking then the post would not be very long anymore.
b) core: He is criticizing that there is no core to the list. Which is basically the only statement of his expletive-inflated post.
The base list that he presents is deceptive. He uses only 15 lands which might be the result of statistical filtering but says absolutely nothing. It is just normal that people use different Fetchlands and different fetchable lands for different expected Metagames. He also uses only 3 GSZ, no Mother of Runes, 2 Qasali Pridemages, 2 SFMs and 2 KotR.
But if you followed the discussion over last pages a core list with more of each of the cards mentioned above was clearly visible. If you disect decks like this you would have to rename Landstill, MUC and Zoo to "archetype" instead of "deck" too. It is just the nature of these decks to vary because of the many cards with a similar power level. If Wizards would print a 6/6 Tombstalker for a few Mana more I am sure the same would happen to Team America.
And sure from time to time someone would post a big Zoo list or a list with 2 Jaces but first of all there is nothing you can do about it and secondly it is not bad to have someone who had a good tournament result with a similar strategy inform us about that.
c) Scryb Ranger is better than Tarmogoyf in most Maverick lists. The synergies with Mother of Runes, Noble Hierarch and KotR make Rangers so good. Paying one Mana more to upgrade a Quirion Ranger with 3 very useful abilities and frequently productive abilities is very much worth it.
Flying is evasion which is great with Equipment and Pro:blue is a nice bonus in a format with Merfolk and Jace. Flash is also good because it can snipe Wastelands, attackers (with a big guy) or removal (with MoR).
ATM the correct number of Tarmogoyfs is either 1 or 0. It does nothing that the deck wants a creature to do.
d) Sylvan Library. Yeah, why isn't card draw/filtering an Auto Include in an aggressive Tempo deck without Reach? My goodness. There was a discussion about this and we agreed on the card being good but no auto-include. A final conclusion on such a topic is just not possible because of the high variance of the card just like with Elspeth, Knight Errant.
e) credibility of the site: Everyone agree with me or the credibility of the site is in danger. lol
On a side note, how safe is the credibility of the site if Friend A of Mod B just hijacks a DTB forum thread and changes its topic while having put up neither any kind of results nor a single constructive sentence to its discussion.
@TheInfamousBearAssassin - I think you are ignorant - You post Zoo list in GW Maverick thread, that's first of all, if you don't see difference:
Zoo is three color deck using Nacatl and more removal (Lightning Bolt for example) - it doesn't have many toolbox lands under KotR and can't support too good wastelands.
GW Maverick have more stable mana base, less removal, but more bigger creatures + toolboxes (lands, zenith targets)
Running more than 1-of Goyf is wrong in Maverick - better pick up Scavenging Ooze which is Goyf killer, and also great in KotR fight.
Maverick is a toolbox deck - you pick up meta slots and elements which best fit to your playstyle - it's similar to Survival decks.
Next word about Scryb Ranger - if you don't see its abilities and think its 1/1 prot U vanilia forget about playing this deck - its much more skill intensive than burn/sligh/zoo ;]. This little dude has a lot of great interactions in this deck (so does Quirion Ranger) I think Scryb is more universal not only for Merfolks where its wall and claw vs them, but also vs Cliques, Jaces, Thopters, Trygons etc.
Sorry if I was too personal tell me if you been touched by it.
About new hydra its slow and can't be played out of GSZ, don't see place in this deck for it.
At the end cards vs reanimator:
Scavenging Ooze - its brutal vs them.
KotR -> Karakas - shut down Iona lock/GJCA - u can Zenith it under Iona on White.
Bojuka Bog - also good
Maze of Ith - gives time for next reanimation
Tromod's Crypt under Tutor
Scryb Ranger + Equips (specially with SoLS) can block and attack under Iona Lock.
Mental Missteps (obv).
Tip - never board out STP against them, also never tappout in their turn - be prepared for GJCA to stp them. After you put KotR in play your safe.
This MU isn't great pre-board as mostly combo MU, but after its depends on your SB slots and starting hand - mostly Ranimator players sided Perishes vs us which make them slower.
Yeah, OK, that was fun.
Some comments, such as those about library, make sense. The second major impression of the post is of course that you're a douche, but since that is obviously your intention, let's not dwell on that...
In the thread's defense though, it should be said that the deck "Maverick" actually was indeed a deck, rather different from the lists posted here now, before it got listed as DTB, got the attention of the mob, and mr-know-it-alls like you started posted in it.
It's weird that the mods would support discussions where a claim is subjected to critique. It is like they think this is a forum for discussing ideas and not a masturbatory exercise in mutual congratulation.
I am sorry if you felt condescended to.How can CorpT get moderated but not IBA despite being condescending
If you are insulted by someone saying one of your cards is unplayable, you need to rapidly thicken your skin. I deal with this on a pretty regular basis and I don't think I've ever expressed shock that someone arguing that a card I run is crap wasn't moderated for it.insulting
I made numerous points and cited actual numbers. You are clearly not using this word correctly.unconstructive
Racist.and using the word "fuck" every second sentence?
Well I am glad that intellectually at least, your recognize that people should be moderated strictly because you disagree with their statements. That's progress of a sort.Also he is very much wrong (not that being wrong should be moderated but it makes his post even more annoying).
No. This is for several reasons,Hey IBA, are you as sure about all your posts as you were about Batterskull and Jace TMS being unplayable. I remember you posting "you fucks this is Legacy you can't play these crappy expensive cards" about both of them?
1) Those are two cases of probably hundreds we have discussed over the years regarding new cards. Usually, if anything, I err too much on the side of rating a new card as playable (although of course what is playable is not the same as what is played for a host of reasons). Jace I misvalued for several reasons, many the same as R&D: There hadn't been a reusable Fateseal ability before to gauge against, and there hadn't been a four-function Planeswalker before. Batterskull I did not foresee being played in a pure-control shell, but then neither did anyone else. In those shells it's reasonable, although I'm not sure if it will stand the test of time. In creature-based decks, which is what the SCD thread was about, it has already been largely dropped; most of the successful Maverick lists did not use it, in fact.
2) Scryb Ranger and Mangara are not new cards or unknown factors. They are known quantities. Scryb Ranger is in utility a 2x as expensive version of another card with flying as a big whopping deal.
I think you are exactly trying to say that someone can't be wrong about stuff.Not that people can't be wrong about stuff, we all are, but it just reminds me.
If someone isn't wrong about things then they aren't trying hard enough and they're being intellectual cowards. I fully admit I misevaluated Jace. As far as arguments for why Scryb Ranger is playable goes that one's pretty terrible.
If you think that pieces of cardboard can be condescended to, or you take it as a personal attack that someone insults your card, stop, walk away from the computer, and take a six month sabbatical from Magic.With the exact same condescending attitude you sold it as if everyone who thought Batterskull or Jace TMS were even remotely playable in this format was completely retarded.
I posted actual numbers backing my point. Do you want to make a counter-argument? I mean these are not the Halls of Congress, I do not think the mods consider it a life-altering decision to change the first letter in brackets in the thread's title. The reality is that this was put in the DTB section based on an incredible variance of decklists that fully justifies describing it as an archetype.I honestly can't believe that the mods changed the topic of this thread just because of this. IBA and Zilla have their history but this is still ridiculous. I have not experienced biased Mods on an important topic on this site so far and it is not a pleasant premiere.
You are trying to say that my writing style is bad because if you remove X, Y, and Z then it suddenly doesn't make any sense.And now let me carefully explain to you just how bad IBA's post was:
a) writing style: if you would remove all filler words like "clearly", "in the year of the lord", "obvious", "fuck" etc. and then cut all the mocking then the post would not be very long anymore.
Did you know that if you removal every other vowel and the word 'the' Shakespeare reads like a retard.
Right, which is why I explicitly said that my post was based on the decks that actually performed and not people in this thread saying that X Y or Z was a "core card" based on their own opinion.b) core: He is criticizing that there is no core to the list. Which is basically the only statement of his expletive-inflated post.
The base list that he presents is deceptive. He uses only 15 lands which might be the result of statistical filtering but says absolutely nothing. It is just normal that people use different Fetchlands and different fetchable lands for different expected Metagames. He also uses only 3 GSZ, no Mother of Runes, 2 Qasali Pridemages, 2 SFMs and 2 KotR.
But if you followed the discussion over last pages a core list with more of each of the cards mentioned above was clearly visible.
There is a very viable argument that Legacy is moving more towards archetypes than decks per se, mostly modular decklists dominating, a few exceptions like Merfolk aside. Even under such an argument however, these decks are high offenders. Like there are actually different threads for color combinations of Landstill, and that is a deck that has a clear and distinct core strategy (manlands + Standstill as a draw engine) that differentiates it from the format.If you disect decks like this you would have to rename Landstill, MUC and Zoo to "archetype" instead of "deck" too. It is just the nature of these decks to vary because of the many cards with a similar power level. If Wizards would print a 6/6 Tombstalker for a few Mana more I am sure the same would happen to Team America.
Flash is not relevant on a 1x Scryb Ranger because you are casting it with GSZ.c) Scryb Ranger is better than Tarmogoyf in most Maverick lists. The synergies with Mother of Runes, Noble Hierarch and KotR make Rangers so good. Paying one Mana more to upgrade a Quirion Ranger with 3 very useful abilities and frequently productive abilities is very much worth it.
And since you're casting it with GSZ, 3 mana is much more than 2 mana.
Flying and pro-blue are relevant but not on a 1/1 unless it's equipped in which case it already has much more relevant abilities. And since the slot is utility, not equipment carrying, it seems less than worthwhile to run it over the original.
Winning the game is something I want my creatures to do, but I can understand that if you enjoy piddling around with untap effects for a bunch of turns instead of just killing the other guy that it may not be something you want to do.ATM the correct number of Tarmogoyfs is either 1 or 0. It does nothing that the deck wants a creature to do.
Wow it's amazing how you're arguing my point for me.d) Sylvan Library. Yeah, why isn't card draw/filtering an Auto Include in an aggressive Tempo deck without Reach? My goodness. There was a discussion about this and we agreed on the card being good but no auto-include. A final conclusion on such a topic is just not possible because of the high variance of the card just like with Elspeth, Knight Errant.
If you can't even have a coherent conversation about Sylvan Library then it's not a decktype.
PS You can anyway. Play Sylvan Library.
PPS Most of these lists are not aggressive. Also describing a deck as "tempo-oriented" makes me want to start pulling teeth. EVERY DECK IS TEMPO ORIENTED IT UTILIZES INTERNAL SYNERGIES TO CROSS-COMPATIBALIZE STREAMLINED INNOVATIONS.
You're flailing, I clearly demonstrated that the deck has no core at all beyond "some g/w deck using Zeniths."On a side note, how safe is the credibility of the site if Friend A of Mod B just hijacks a DTB forum thread and changes its topic while having put up neither any kind of results nor a single constructive sentence to its discussion.
I have not actually insulted the deck itself because Zenith is a great card btw, I just think Scryb Ranger is terrible and Mangara-Vial is more cute than effective.
I did not post a Zoo list in this thread, soooooooo...
Running 1 + GSZ is significantly better than running 0, obviously. Winning the game seems to be consistently under-rated.Running more than 1-of Goyf is wrong in Maverick - better pick up Scavenging Ooze which is Goyf killer, and also great in KotR fight.
Survival had a distinct core component. Even then it was an archetype. There were different threads for different builds. With no distinct core component except GSZ, Maverick is clearly then an archetype by your own admission. I'm glad we've come to an agreement then.Maverick is a toolbox deck - you pick up meta slots and elements which best fit to your playstyle - it's similar to Survival decks.
Again, I have accidentally built decks in this vein several times on MWS. GSZ is a really cool card and g/w obviously has a lot of great cards. And certainly if nothing else I'm glad to see a deck playing Witness again. But the deck being described as a DTB is clearly erroneous as it stands.
You're probably not very good with Zoo.Next word about Scryb Ranger - if you don't see its abilities and think its 1/1 prot U vanilia forget about playing this deck - its much more skill intensive than burn/sligh/zoo ;].
I am pretty sure you do not need to pay 2x as much for pro blue if you already have Mother of Runes, SoFI and Jitte. Like if there were a four mana KotR that had pro blue, I would not advocate running it over the 3 mana version, would you? It's like Quirion Ranger has this super relevant ability called hyper-haste where it can enter the board a turn earlier. That is an important ability.This little dude has a lot of great interactions in this deck (so does Quirion Ranger) I think Scryb is more universal not only for Merfolks where its wall and claw vs them, but also vs Cliques, Jaces, Thopters, Trygons etc.
I'm good.Sorry if I was too personal tell me if you been touched by it.
Also Loaming Shaman.Scavenging Ooze - its brutal vs them.
KotR -> Karakas - shut down Iona lock/GJCA - u can Zenith it under Iona on White.
Bojuka Bog - also good
Maze of Ith - gives time for next reanimation
Tromod's Crypt under Tutor
Scryb Ranger + Equips (specially with SoLS) can block and attack under Iona Lock.
Mental Missteps (obv).
This is not what the opening post suggests. If the thread is to be in the DTB section it ought to do so in a manner in line with reality.
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
Alright. /cracks knuckles
1) Content first, niceness second: this is a cardinal guideline for the Source. It doesn't matter how many 'fucking' you put in your post as long as your arguments have meat. We have no intention of forcing people to pretend they respect ideas even when they're convinced otherwise. That way lies MTGSalvation.
This might be an interesting link on the topic.
(Also, there may be a bit of cross-Atlantic incomprehension going on here. Fellow Europeans: lots of Americans love to shout and pretend they're badasses in everyday conversation, it's just part of their culture and to them it sounds normal. What can you expect?)
2) However, what are not tolerated are personal attacks. Call a deck a pile of shit, call a play fucking retarded, call a strategy the dumbest idea since Operation Unthinkable: as long as you also explain why those things are so bad, that's all fine and good and useful. The moment you call someone else an idiot, however, you're not writing anything useful: you're only making the discussion nastier without saying anything. You don't know that guy and as far as you're concerned he might be a genius in every field other than Magic. Shut up.
3) Regarding mod bias: CorpT's post consisted of "You're so smart, IBA. /pats IBA on head." I hope that says everything about why it was deleted while IBA and Tao weren't.
4) As our DTB process currently stands (i.e. follow The Council), there is absolutely no functional difference between a "Deck" and an "Archetype" To Beat. It's a relic of the old system, and a purely cosmetic description of "This deck has more deckbuilding options than usual"; Survival, pre-Vengevine, was the typical example (And yes, I personally don't care about this distinction). So no, the rules haven't been altered.
So: Tao, IBA, Fatal, do continue this conversation. There is a legitimate question of what exactly Maverick is, if for no other reason than that many of our users had never heard of it before it was put under the spotlight and don't quite understand it.
Just remember that, as far as this thread is concerned, and unless there's a really really good reason to disagree with them, the "Maverick" category at TCDecks is the measure of what does and does not belong here.
YOU'RE GIVING ME A TIME MACHINE IN ORDER TO TREAT MY SLEEP DISORDER.
So since my question got overshadowed by shenanigans and asshattery, in my best Cartman voice, "Screw you guys, I'm playing Primordial Hydra."
Mother of Runes plus a 3-drop who becomes a 32/32 trampler in 5 turns is enticing. It makes playing on the defensive an actual strategy.
Also, while I agree Scryb Ranger is garbage in this deck, so's Tarmogoyf. The deck has very little means to pump him, and he's very often a vanilla 2/3 given that your creatures don't die, you exile theirs, your sorceries shuffle themselves back in, and graveyards tend to end up with lands and instants a lot. Basically, Goyf's only good in matchups where you sacrifice a Pridemage. And in those matchups, just run more Pridemages.
No, I said that your post would still make as much sense as before and would be more pleasant to read if you would remove the 99% filler words and expletives.
If you draw it you cast it from your hand. And tutoring for a flying creature is not rare.
We had a coherent discussion about Sylvan Library. The result was that it is good, but not an auto-include. It is somewhere around the 58th- 63rd card of the deck, some value it a bit higher, some a bit lower. A more exact evaluation is impossible. Go ahead and play it if you think it is good enough.
Capslock doesn't mean that you are right. If I call a deck Tempo oriented it means that it cares for Tempo plays much more than other decks.
BUGstill does not care about Tempo at all unless you force them to do something. If you wouldn't act then they wouldn't act on their own except for dropping Standstill to prevent any Tempo. They play cheap spells and counters to stay alive and to clear the path for Standstill but they do not care about creating a Tempo advantage in the slightest.
Many Zoo decks for example care more for life totals than GW and less about Tempo. Which is why they use PtE instead of Swords to Plowshares and high P/T creatures instead of utility creatures (Steppy Lynx over MoR, Goyf over other options). Which leads me to this:
More filler words and sentences. Every card is played to win the game. And I am sure that in Maverick Scryb Ranger wins more games than Goyf.
Whenever I discussed this topic with the other people in this thread I knew they had played the deck. With you I just know that you don't have more than a couple of games on MWS as experience with this. Goyf is just not good in this deck atm, not even close or worth a discussion.
Your deck does not care about tempo more than most decks. All decks care about tempo, or are unplayable in Legacy. How they try to gain and maintain tempo is what varies. It is tempo to kill your land or counter a spell or Wrath the board or play a big threat.
Also there is a difference between "filler words" and "things you disagree with", unless you glaze over everything that doesn't fit into your narrative in which case I concede they are pretty much the same thing.
I would be interested in hearing what the explanation is for this "tempo oriented" deck not wanting huge creatures incidentally.
Also as far as I can tell this archetype is something the Hatfields have been fiddling with for quite a while. It would also include most NO-Bant variants. It is not an archetype I am unfamiliar with, which was my entire point; it describes a host of things that are different and already exist, ranging from big Zoo to Bant to I guess even Junk variants and D&T and numerous other things.
But I mean your arguments seem to mainly be describing things you don't like as filler and a badly thought out courtier's reply so
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
I guess I made a mistake posting my list in this thread. I was under the impression that Maverick was a GWx Midrange deck that supports a Stoneforge package, not a GWU Midrange Deck. I decided not to post in the Zoo thread because they are currently discussing Glittering Wish which is just not worth my time, I was hoping that this thread would be a little more constructive. Now I find out this thread refuses to play Tarmogoyf, the best creature ever printed, along with Wild Nacatl, the best one drop ever printed, Stoneforge, the best white creature ever printed, in conjunction with Knight of the Reliquary, the best three drop ever printed, and Lightnting Bolt and StP, the best removal spells ever printed. But you'd rather equip to feeble 1/1's instead of 4/5's. Someone mentioned that one should start playing more Goyfs depending on your metagame, I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. It's a sad day when people start to forget the power of Tarmogoyf. You don't need a GSZ toolbox when you can just play 8x Goyfs, 8x Nacatls, and 7x Knights.
My deck cuts the cute tricks brought to you by Mother of Runes and the Rangers, and instead just plays big dudes, good removal, and practical equipment. And I got 10th at a 300 person tournament.
Sorry for posting a list with results. I suggest this thread gets its shit together and starts playing good cards.
Team Giancoli. Rocking the mediocrity since 2008.
Alright, to everyone who is too ignorant to accept that this is, in fact, a real deck that is actually putting up huge numbers (albeit in Europe, not in America), and too lazy/stubborn to actually read through this entire thread (yeah, i know, reading through like ten pages is such a tiresome task) and actually look through successful decklists, here is the core of GW Maverick. These cards are directly based off of the discussions in this thread and the decklists that have placed on TCDecks.
Creatures:
4 Knight of the Reliquary
3 Stoneforge Mystic
3-4 Noble Hierarch
3-4 Mother of Runes
2-3 Qasali Pridemage
1 Scryb Ranger
1 Eternal Witness
1 Terravore
1 Dryad Arbor
Spells:
4 Green Sun's Zenith
4 Swords to Plowshares
1 Umezawas Jitte
1 Sword of X and Y
1 Batterskull
2 Sylvan Library/Elspeth split
Lands :
4 Windswept Heath
2 G fetchland
3-4 Savannah
2 Forest
1 Plains
2-3 Horizon Canopy
1 Karakas
3-4 Wasteland
1 Dryad Arbor
0-1 Gaea's Cradle
Now, on to the discussion of the absence of GOyf, it isn't played because 2/3's for 2 aren't good enough for legacy play. We play four instants and 4 sorceries that get shuffled into our libraries. Relying on our opponents playing spells to make our creatures better just isn't a good idea.
Now, please, either show me another deck that plays these 50+ cards or stop trolling in our thread and allow us to further discuss the improvement of our deck.
Thanks, seems like a fine core.
Maybe we can discuss the new Shapeshifter from M12? He has the evasiveness the deck wants, while also being able to act as a wall. One more nail in Goyfs coffin? Maybe it could even replace Terravore?
Also, since Commander is already legal, are there already some experiences with Scavengig Ooze?
I played 2 tournaments and a lot of testing on Cockatrice with Scavenging Ooze and I can say it is MVP in Goyfs/KotRs war, also its auto-include hate vs Dredge/Reanimator/Loam based decks it will definitely be one MD.
New Shapeshifter looks promising but since it's not legal or even in virtual play (Cockatrice/MWS ect) we can't say anything more about it.
But it's a slippery slope. If x = U, it's Bant; if x = B, it's The Rock.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
