- Alright, but I think many of us will agree the meta is shifting towards more combo with the printing of Griselbrand.
-It's a land. But I disgress.Karakas isn't white? Really?
- The part I bolded was the point Bryant was trying to make.The deck is split, sort of down the middle. Against the fair decks, white is amazing. Lingering Souls, Swords and SFM are there to win wars against fair decks. Against unfair decks, white is bad. But that's what Black and Blue are for. After sideboarding, you get to pick which direction you go. You can side out slow cards and discard for more removal against fair decks and removal out against unfair decks for more discard and disruption. Other colors can do similar things, but that doesn't mean that White is wrong to play.
Before the tournament I spent days trying to talk my testing partners out of EsperBlade because I was buying into the hype that it was terrible. Literal days spent arguing this. In the end, I was completely wrong. EsperBlade was a fine choice. It handled both fair and unfair decks fairly well.
Esperblade is not terrible. U/W Blade is probably terrible. Esperblade is more middle of the road. Which is fine in a mixed meta, but if the meta continues to be Griselbrand combo, I don't think it will cut it.
I would have thought so too. In fact, that's exactly what I argued in the days leading up to it. And yet, I played all sorts of fair decks. I started Legacy at 3-1, so I wasn't playing chumps for the most part. In order, I played:
Merfolk (3-2)
Affinity (4-2)
Reanimator (5-2)
BW Stoneblade (6-2)
Then I managed to 1-3 Standard, so the competition might have been a little softer.
7-5
UR Delver Burn (8-5)
BUG Still (8-5-1) (Unintentional draw)
EsperBlade (9-5-1)
Goblins (9-6-1)
Total Legacy:
5-2-1
The Reanimator I played was Brad Nelson who managed to 0-4 Legacy with Reanimator.
Looking around the Legacy Open showed many fair and many unfair decks. I don't think the format has shifted to all combo all the time yet.
It was split. 4 rounds of Standard, 4 rounds of Legacy, 4 rounds of Standard, 4 rounds of Legacy. You could do a break down of the actual Legacy results, but it would be difficult.
What I personally don't understand is why W (and SFM) should be bad because SneakShow and Reanimator got stronger and are played more often. W has so many tools to fight them: Karakas and Thalia are the universal cards. Phyrexian Revoker (not W, but strong in W decks) and E-Tutor from the SB. M@verick has posted a Aether Vial Maverick deck, that has increased MU chances against the two mentioned Combo decks. And Maverick without W is kind of pointless. DnT, a mono W list, has a very good MU against Reanimator and a good MU against SneakShow.
I'm pretty sure the reason why Esperblade/Stoneblade was doing so well at the Invitational was because RUG Delver decks were cutting Spell Snare in favor of Stifle and Spell Pierce maindeck, which significantly increases the chance of a Stoneforge Mystic resolving. With all of the basics that Esperblade and UW Stoneblade run, it would be easier for them to hardcast the Batterskull or Jitte even if their Mystic gets countered.
I ran into that exact issue when I played Esperblade in Day 2 of the Invitational. I ran Pierces instead of Snare. All of the RUG Delver players I talked to also excluded Spell Snares from their list too because the metagame was shaping up to be Sneak Show, Reanimator, and Dredge. Spell Snare doesn't do anything in those matchups, at least nothing that Spell Pierce couldn't do either.
Magic: the Gathering players in Arizona, click here!
@mtgtwin1 on Twitter
3 SCG Open Top 8s
GP Denver 2013 Top 64
GP NJ 2014 110th/4001
AZMagicPlayers.com Legacy Series Tournament Organizer
Random Brews/Decks Galore!
As much as I agree upon most what I've red from you so far, I am a bit confused how you can stand behind, in terms of pure logic, what you said in this thread.
When there are quite a few people out there who play those so called subpar decks at a single event, hasn't the actual meta then temporarily changed to something that doesn't fall under the rules for choosing decks that appear as a good choice?
It's a bit like wearing that normal decadent clothe when going to the Country Club, just to find yourself sorrounded by the majority of people wearing swimsuits. They felt like doing so or its the trend of the month, and they make yourself look like an idiot, even if you mainly did nothing wrong.
(New) Decks are often created as something to beat the known or popular decks of a given time, but this does not change the disposal or misinterpretation (even decisions based upon pure emotion) of players of the format.
This variance can fart in your dinner pretty harsh and I got shafted by that exact variance quite some time, also/especially in large(r) events.
It is true that the most players who decide to do so are bareley seen ater the 1st three rounds (which is a spur to get your byes), but no one is save from getting out-metad, blanked by innovators or gettting horrible pairings, and yes, good players of course have the ability to drive those mediocre decks to victory by skill.
In response...Hypothek!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)