Depends on the person reading it. The only thing that counts is the correct play, no matter whether it ends up losing or winning.
What I'm actually interested in is how you go about weighing the odds of just "going for it"; like when you made your opponent discard his last protection spell but still have to wait for a turn in which he plays Ponder and doesn't shuffle even though you look like you're about to go off. Do you go for it? What influences this decision? Against both blue and non-blue decks. Do you cantrip for additional protection even though you're at 12 life and the opponent has a flipped Delver? It's questions like these that I'm most interested in.
The seven cardinal sins of Legacy:
1. Discuss the unbanning ofLand TaxEarthcraft.
2. Argue that banning Force of Will would make the format healthier.
3. Play Brainstorm without Fetchlands.
4. Stifle Standstill.
5. Think that Gaea's Blessing will make you Solidarity-proof.
6. Pass priority after playing Infernal Tutor.
7. Fail to playtest against Nourishing Lich (coZ iT wIlL gEt U!).
*pew pew*
Shots Fired.
I mean I agree to the extent that figuring out the correct play is always right. Regardless of W/L. I played against miracles an got him to 3 with Goblins but they got terminused and he got a CB with a fetch open. I ended up winning by playing an unneeded chrome mox (he thought it was important) and it revealed a land so I went for it. He fetched hoping to blind flip but missed and I was able to make a 3 storm with Chrome Mox, Burning Wish, Grapeshot, which really was luck dependent. So plays like this that are probably still the correct plays would be alright to post about.
And I agree. Sometimes you just have to try and if it doesnt work, it doesnt work. Despite the feeling of invincibility that this deck can sometimes give you, you are still a combo deck that can be disrupted with enough counters/discard and it is inevitable that they will just have the right combination of disruption + pressure to just force you into a horrible spot.
Last 30 MTGO games with TES leaves me with a 63% win ratio 19-11. I am not playing the deck perfectly but I am definitely becoming more comfortable with it. The only deck I am consistently worried about is Esper Stoneblade, other than that it's pretty good against the mtgo meta. Here are the match ups.
Tournament Practice
19-11
2-0 vs BG Pox
0-2 12 Post
2-1 Unsorted Countertop
2-0 Deadguy Ale
2-0 Jund
0-2 RG Aggro
2-0 GW Enchantress
2-0 GW Enchantress
0-2 Omnishow
1-2 Junk
0-2 Esper Stoneblade
2-1 Esper Stoneblade
2-1 Death and Taxes
1-2 TES
1-2 UB Stacks
2-0 UR Delver
2-0 Burn
2-0 Goblins
2-1 Death and Taxes
2-0 Small Pox
2-1 Junk
1-2 RUG Delver
0-2 Burn
0-2 Esper Stoneblade
0-2 Esper Stoneblade
2-1 BUG Agent
2-0 Bad Lands
2-1 High Tide
2-0 Esper Stoneblade
2-1 Mono Black Dark Depths
0-2 Burn
A lot of people are talking about the Esperblade match up. Is that really a problem? They don't even play that many counter spells. Preboard, they have 3-4 FOW, 0-2 Spell Pierce and 1 Counter spell. They also have 4 discard spells, but they aren't Hymn to Tourach. Post board, they bring in the 1 Cabal Therapy, the 2 Spell Pierce and the 1 FOW. Some might bring in Fluster Storm. To me, this is very similar to the Tempo Thresh match up, except they don't play Stifle on fetch lands and they don't have a faster clock. I think the usual, discard/Chant combo just crushes them. Discard spells don't mean much to a deck that's both fast and can replenish its hand with a big spell...
Meddling Mage is terrifying. I don't know why more people aren't playing it. Some Euro lists are also playing Flusterstorms in the board.
I'm never incredibly unhappy to see Esperblade, but it's not the greatest matchup ever. They have a reasonable answer to Goblins in the form of Batterskull (and sometimes DSphere), which definitely makes it harder.Originally Posted by jin
I've played a lot of different combo decks against a lot of Esperblade and it always feels like they're generally disadvantaged because most of their cards are blanks, but not by a whole lot. Very draw dependent.
Languages and dates for every set. For all you true pimps.
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
Considering that 1/5 of the decks I've played were burn and Monoblack, and that the number of Esper Stoneblade decks was the same, I'd say that I was paired with a semi diverse field of decks to test against. Agreed that compared to a real life event I wouldn't see many of these decks, but again it's still only 6 out of 30 matches.
I also think Esper Blade is one of the toughest matchups, just because EtW isn't a viable plan half the time (SFM + Bskull), plus the disruption + counterspells. I'd still put it around 50/50 though.
Game 1 it's not as hard as they have plenty of dead cards, but one of the strengths about esper is the sideboard to shore up any matchup post boards - basically the deck scarifices some win % game one to have a shot against each deck type and can tune the deck to beat any archetype with the sideboard.
Tendrils is the main win condition here. Just because Empty the Warren is cut off doesn't mean it's a bad match up. They also have to get the batterskull on the Table first before ETW is bad. ETW for 12 goblins first turn can still get there..
I would too consider the match up is so bad for them. That just sounds like a player who knows his Esperblade decks. If he's not packing hate bears along with his counter magic and discard, I wouldn't think it's such a bad match up.
My suggestion would be sneaky show I guess.
Super Bizarros Team.
HUEHUEHUE BRBRBR. VIVA DILMA!!! EM NOME DE JESUS CRISTO!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)