Article ..... Constructed Criticism..... "look at Legacy RUG"

[catmint]

Todd Anderson claims that he is going to play a RUG Tempo version until people learn to beat it and I think it is about time. It is so painful to see many players just net decking SCG winners, which gives the deck even more good results... simply because more people play it. Especially because he stops playing BUG control, which even I recently learned to adapt to beat RUG Tempo.

Also a lot fools are already talking about Delver and Daze beeing the best cards in legacy after Brainstorm and Fow.

Here the article
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/s...egacy_RUG.html


I hope some competent RUG players join this thread as well, because I think this list is really easy to beat, because they don't play nimble mongoose and try to support 4 snapcaster with 18 lands.

So how to beat it:
1) play a lot of lands
2) play a lot of removal
3) have a better late game than them
4) play land destruction and blue/black disruption yourself.

I cannot talk about other decks SB strategies, but for all BUG players I can say the following: Against a list without Nimble Mongoose, but goyf and snapcaster I play the following list postboard and it will be very hard for them to beat us (altough G1 is slightly in their favor)

2 Thoughtseize
2 Inquisition
4 Hymn to tourach
3 Spell Snare
3 Spell Pierce
1 Extirpate

1 Darkblast
4 Ghastly Demise
2 Dismember
1 Go for the throat
1 Pernicious Deed

4 Tarmogoyf
4 Snapcaster Mage
3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor

24 Lands (4 Wastelands)
1 Life from the Loam

[I am the brainwasher]

As much as I see the benefits from playing your sample deck against most RUG lists that became popular in the US, oddly it is still not THE solution some players might search for because of the nature of Tempo decks in general.
Even if many cards are high value against RUG and nearly each card represents a thread to it, that doesnt change the nature of Threshold itself, which is quite threatening for every deck.
Even if you are able to have X+1 solutions for each of X threads, you might still end up loosing the game simply because of the lack of time to really get a benefit from it.
I do not want to talk neither your list nor you theory down but the way you presented it is a bit of wishful thinking.
Sure, RUG isnt any kind of godlike deck, but it is well known for beeing able to beat any deck, any hand by simply having each answer for each opposing thread or simply having a advantage in, unsurprisingly, tempo.
You still can get screwed randomly, getting outplayed, removal could get dodged and you are still left with the feeling "Wat should I have done? He had it all."
As much as I apprecieate your work on the topic in general, (and I am definetly sharing your opinion on metagames and flavour of the week/months) I think it is also very important to get to know how to play against Tempo-decks at first before choosing potent weapons to fight them.
Anyway, completely understanding the purpose of this thread and like the idea behind finding lists that are able to punish players for weaksauce lists.

[Grollub]

So how to beat it:
1) play a lot of lands
2) play a lot of removal
3) have a better late game than them
4) play land destruction and blue/black disruption yourself.

I know this isn't BUG viable, but couldn't you just play something with Back to Basics or Blood Moon - RUG's manabase is pretty much always nothing but non-basics. I can't help but wonder if a mono-blue board control list ala Kronenberger's latest proposal could actually be well-poised in the current metagame.

Something consistent with Chalice and Back to Basics is looking stronger and stronger in my opinion, basically steal the tempo and render Tempo.dec a subpar aggro-control list.

(traditional) Sligh is also looking like a strong contender in Tempo.dec infested metagames, every single creature but 'Goyf/Tombstalker (which Dismember can handle) dies to every single viable burn spell (plus Lavamancer and Scroll), and Blood Moon + Price of Progress are both exceptional at punishing the non-basic heavy manabases. Sligh additionally have the sidebonus of practically having a bye versus Fish.

[Tammit67]

So how to beat it:
1) play a lot of lands
2) play a lot of removal
3) have a better late game than them
4) play land destruction and blue/black disruption yourself.

I've found hardcore control strategies to be very good against them (so long as they aren't running mongoose, who is amazing). These decks meet the first 3 of your conditions easily and are decent at holding out long enough to surive the first wave of spells

[catmint]

Thanks for you feedback brainwasher. Some comments to your post.

As much as I see the benefits from playing your sample deck against most RUG lists that became popular in the US, oddly it is still not THE solution some players might search for because of the nature of Tempo decks in general.

Sure - this is just how I adapted my deck, not THE solution. It is especially easy because the list is cutting nimble mongoose, so it's no problem to overload on removal. I do not agree that my list is bad because of the "nature of a tempo" deck. No real argument in there.

...
I do not want to talk neither your list nor you theory down but the way you presented it is a bit of wishful thinking.

You say my strategy is wishful thinking but the arguments you bring are not good I think. Also I would not post it if not backed up by a lot of testing and a very positive win%.

1)RUG isnt any kind of godlike deck, but it is well known for beeing able to beat any deck, any hand by simply having each answer for each opposing thread or simply having a advantage in, unsurprisingly, tempo.

This is not a very specifc argument!
beat any deck with any hand? wow that sounds like godlike. I am sure you did not mean it literally.

"right answer at the right time" I guess because of 8 cantrips... that makes sense.

But what do you mean "unsurprisingly, tempo" - Obviously their plan is to use Stifle, Daze and Wasteland to keep the opponent from reaching his late game. However that is a normal magic strategy that can work out or not and still other decks can as usual adapt to make this strategy less effective.

You still can get screwed randomly, getting outplayed, removal could get dodged and you are still left with the feeling "Wat should I have done? He had it all.

Again not a valid argument in my opinion. That can happen against any tier deck in legacy if they have the nut draw right? Especially against BUG you can also have that feeling sometimes

My argument why the postboard build I posted has a big advantage over the specific list of Todd Anderson is, because it does not necessarily have to play anything proactively. I just say land-go very often and that's it. If RUG has to start playing cantrips and playing treats because they do not have natural land drops this is where there dilemma begins, because it is harder for them to keep mana open for stifle. That and the fact that I play 24 lands make it much easier to make the black disruption work and reach the late game.

...I think it is also very important to get to know how to play against Tempo-decks at first before choosing potent weapons to fight them.

I totally agree and especially if you played a 18 land Stifle deck with many 2 and 3 drops yourself, you know that they need to "jump through some hoops" if they want to leave mana open for stifle/spell snare, play threats and make natural land drops at the same time. (Its much easier though if all creatures are 1 drops - that's another reason why I think nimble mongoose is much better).

From the BUG perspective you have to play around stifle as good as possible and often hold thoughtseize and hymn back until the time is right. Since I learned to play against RUG and adapt my sideboarding my win% increased significantly. I guess also because a lot of bad players just netdeck SCG and have no real clue how to play the deck properly.

[cuthbertthecat]

I've had no problem wrecking these decks with loam based decks. I've done most of my testing against it with lands, and they simply can't deal with everything that lands is doing. The games usually go: get an exploration/manabond forced, play a maze that gets wasted, get a loam spell snared, resolve a loam, eat your opponent's manabase and tolaria west for tabernacle, stabilizing at around 5-7 with the option to transmute for zuran orb. If they play mongoose, it's a slightly harder match, but ensnaring bridge, glacial chasm, and EE lock take care of that. Also, ghost quarter is a strip mine against most RUG builds.

[catmint]

yes of course lands should have an easy game. Not exactly a very common deck though.

[cuthbertthecat]

yes of course lands should have an easy game. Not exactly a very common deck though.

True, but it could spike in popularity because of its easy game against tempo style decks. Also, although I haven't tested it, aggro loam should have a pretty decent tempo matchup in theory, and is much easier to build than lands.

[I am the brainwasher]

Nice to get some feedback on a level which can be worked on.
Even if some of my declarations which I made in my last post might seem a bit wishiwashi at some points, became the common sense of those rather clear (at least I hope so).
What I was trying to say is that regardless of what your hand may look like the deck often creates some kind of jaw-dropping effect when played against it because of the ability to dig or naturally draw each answer.
The point I wanted to touch with these statements also were that whole topic of: "If they got the nuts, they got the nuts".
Sure, it isnt that obvious as getting turn 2 Hive mind spitted in the face with double counter-backup, but I played with and against the deck for long enough to know that some draws dont let the opponent get into the game at nearly each point and have the same effect just over a longer distance. Why I mentioned that?
I wasnt aware how much you tested with the presented list, how your boarding plans are, what feeling you had while playing against it, maybe with it to recognize what bothers it the most, and all that jazz.
You didnt mentioned that and just "24 lands" also left some questions pretty open, so it was a kinda natural response to point out that this gun might backfire, especially because of playing 3 colors, which are not that indisruptive in general.
I wasnt (and logically I am not right now) convinced 100% that this will work out as good as it looks in theory, but if you tested it thoroughly thats nothing to sneeze at and a good approach to really punish some players for playing extremely weak lists and/or just dont know how to play the deck correct (I for myself still dont have the impression of beeing able to play the deck at its best).
So yes, if that lists runs also well against the rest of the american meta I could see a chance of grabbing that one up, thats for sure, and as said above, I am a supporter of developing and presenting effective metagame-weapons, so dont get that wrong as a whole.
Greetings

[catmint]

Thanks brainwasher!

So if you play RUG yourself can make a statement about how good the deck plays with snapcaster mage?

[I am the brainwasher]

I think to really having the ability to make competent statement about that (with which I would feel comfortable of telling to others, knowing that its the most true thing which can be heard of mine about that topic) it is way too early since the RUG-decks "revolution/creation/update/whatsoever".
Innistrad has just been playable for a couple of weeks and it is really hard to figure out which impact those changes might have for a longer run.
I for myself just can tell that I got very mixed feelings about the different builds of RUG.
At the moment I am testing the new Snapcaster build (4 Delver, 4Snap, 4 Goyf) with Life from the Loam in the maindeck (basically the list that won last SCG with changing the Temporal Spring for a basic Island and playing only 3 volcs. and one more fetch) and I am quite impressed/depressed with it, depending on what I play against and how the games play out in general.
I think that Snapcaster has a place in the deck if you really want to go that route (which is mostly personal playstyle) and yes, it is quite good if you do know the deck well enough to play super-tight in every matchup and every round of a tourney (which can be quite exhausting), BUT those builds work a lot worse if you punt a single time (which is very hard to figure out in some games, mistakes are rather small and less obvious if you play the deck well) and confront players with a whole lot of different problems than classical builds.
I can not tell right now what is the better version of it, especially because I see a lot of different players doing well with so many different versions (which might lookalike but are indeed very different) but a few things can be said which might be helpful when it comes down to Snapcaster in RUG:
- If you play Snapcaster, dont fool yourself that 18 lands are enough to constantly beeing able to cast it flashbacking a card.
- You'll loose to some awkward opposing draws which contain tons of lands (basics at worst) and much removal, the lack of Mongeese is quite depressing at some points
- Have at least a single life from the loam in your 75 if you are planning to play without Mongeese

@How the deck plays with it: Different
Now that you are able to Stifle more and also having a random Life from the loam in the deck gives you the opportunity to grind out games (which sounds awkward respecting that you are playing a tempo-deck).
I think it is very important to understand which plan the opponent is following by understanding his plays.
Normally it can be broke down to 2 routes: Beeing very aggressive, throwing counters at removal to push through early damage to finish the job with boltcaster, or trying to be very disruptive with the mana-denial plan to a point where creatures can walk through unmolested.
The most important thing (for playing against RUG) might be to understand that you are just in the comfortable position to play around cards like Daze or Spell Snare if you really can afford to do so and beeing able to understand that the biggest advantage is taking Tempo away from the deck.

[catmint]

very wise words brainwasher.

My odds for winning are lower if the RUG deck has the "play threat after threat and defend it plan", because you are often forced to play into stifle/daze/snare.

However, that only happens if they play Turn 1 delver. A turn 2 Tarmogyof is much less scary and they have to tap out for it. I think the RUG player cannot necessarily choose on which plan, because the deck does not mulligan well (I suppose...).

[I am the brainwasher]

"(...) because the deck does not mulligan well (I suppose...)."

I would be careful with that statement. I've beaten the crap outta decks with Mull to 5/6 but also got crushed tremendously with a lot of mulls from my side.
It is amazing how the deck can still handle some games fairly easy because it has still the most important temporary answers to the opposing hand or simply has the draw that kinda dodges/punishes the opposing one.
With that beeing said, I have to agree that you really have to activate your topdeck-skills if you go below 6, which could lead to the most epic wins and fails with the deck. I hate that feeling of gamble when it really comes down to that, but it is also just hilarious drawing Stifle and Wasteland (Bolt, Snapcaster) after your opponent tries to hide himself behind a topdecked Maze of Ith, just for example.
I think it varies very remarkable how powerful the hands with Mulligans of RUG are, most tending towards the extremes of pure crap or godsend.

[catmint]

Yeah I don't really know about mulligans of RUG, I just assumed if you need 1 out of 14 cards in your 5/6 that the times where you just don't have it is higher compared to other decks.