[Deck] Deadguy Ale (B/w Confidant)

[DrNojman]

It is clear that neither of us isn't near of an expert like you, but doesn't TES run sumtnih' like Burning Wish that can grab win conditions and things like Shattering Spree, Deathmark, Eye of Nowhere, and so on? Pretty versatile, doncha think? Besides that, I think it's really dumb to compare TES to Deadguy..
Also, care to explain how a Counterbalance doesn't stop you from winning? If they have a Daze in the top 3 cards, you can't really cast much, can you?

On Vindicate, there are certain situations where they don't do much, and where we board them out, like against tribal aggro you are better off with plagues, against Threshold you'd rather see Gatekeeper of Malakir od Diabolic edict, against Belcher... If your metagame consists of Elves, Goblins, Threshold and so on, then you're better off with Smother, but against anything else Vindicate shines.

[Namida]

I look at Vindicate as a way to Stabalize the board or answer threats and if that doesn't need to be a done, as a solid way to disrupt my opponent (ussually blasting a Land). It also gives you the flexibility and outs to not scoop to almost any deck game 1 and a way to deal with everything from problematic Enchantments, Artifactss/Equipment and Planeswalkers.

However, this Vindicate argue seems to be going nowhere. If someone doesn't want to play Vindicate, its their loss. I already think calling this deck Deadguy without running Sinkhole is a stretch. If you take out Sinkhole it is definitely a whole nother thing. A deck is not the same as another one if card choices vary greatly and/or the "path to victory" has changed a lot (and it has).

Is it a mistake then, to assume that the deck can be built with a threat density that makes you the person that needs to be answered instead of the other way around? Can we build this so that we have a enough raw power that we don't require a card to stabilize the board? Is attempting to go this course a futile effort? Is it straying too far from what Deadguy is supposed to do? What was the path to victory before, and how has it changed?

It is clear that neither of us isn't near of an expert like you, but doesn't TES run sumtnih' like Burning Wish that can grab win conditions and things like Shattering Spree, Deathmark, Eye of Nowhere, and so on? Pretty versatile, doncha think? Besides that, I think it's really dumb to compare TES to Deadguy..
Also, care to explain how a Counterbalance doesn't stop you from winning? If they have a Daze in the top 3 cards, you can't really cast much, can you?

On Vindicate, there are certain situations where they don't do much, and where we board them out, like against tribal aggro you are better off with plagues, against Threshold you'd rather see Gatekeeper of Malakir od Diabolic edict, against Belcher... If your metagame consists of Elves, Goblins, Threshold and so on, then you're better off with Smother, but against anything else Vindicate shines.

There's no need to try to insult me, is there? I'm clearly not an expert; I'm not making myself out to be an expert. I'm merely explaining my opinion, and attempting to ask questions to facilitate a conversation that is more complex than the shouting match that was ensuing prior. I'm literally so far from being an expert that I'm literally begging you to answer my questions so I can understand where you're coming from. I'm not entirely sold on cutting Vindicate either, but before he got all pissed off and left, CorpT made a more compelling argument for trying it his way than others did by basically repeating the text of the card over and over again and flipping out, acting like people who are willing to try the deck without Vindicate are illiterate or something.

Maybe my comparison between TES and Deadguy was dumb. Keep in mind that I just asked you what Deadguy is supposed to be doing. Please answer that so that I may have a better idea of why my comparison was dumb to you. Until then, however...I don't think my comparison is completely dumb in the sense that I'm not comparing the decks card for card and acting like they try to win the exactly same way. I'm comparing the two decks in the sense that I assume they both aim to win, and as a result should have more cards that make you win instead of help you not lose. In this way, I was hoping to make the train of thought more understandable, that you don't want your deck filled with reactive cards just because they're versatile. TES plays Burning Wish. Yes, you're right, it's versatile. I suppose my analogy fell short if all you see is that Burning Wish exists and is versatile. However, I'd like to point out that Burning Wish is played because it is four cards that when played will cause you to win--not because it is four cards in your deck that are devoted to killing hatebears and Trinispheres. It'd still be a good card for the deck if it couldn't grab Tendrils or Empty the Warrens, but it probably wouldn't be in the main deck.

Counterbalance doesn't stop you from winning if you're already ahead, if you've resolved an Aether Vial, or it's in your opponent's graveyard because you made your opponent discard it. The point is that your opponent can't just drop Counterbalance and go "Oh you lose no matter what else is going on because *this* is in play." You can fight though a Counterbalance. You still have to fight through a Counterbalance if you have Vindicate in your deck, too, so I'm afraid that I don't understand what your point was as it concerns the inclusion of Vindicate.

I'm also not understanding how Vindicate shines against the "everything else" you mentioned. How does Vindicate "shine" against these decks more so than Thoughseize or creatures would? How big of a percentage is the "everything else" to warrant inclusion over all of the other spells that are better against the decks you outlined Vindicate being bad against?

[Rebirth]

Unnecessarily rude remark removed. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean they're stupid. Keep it civil. - zilla

Cutting Vindicate? wow... I'll cut vindicate when Merfolks cut FoW

Anyway, are there people who don't waste their time with trolling and coming up with stupid ideas (aka CorpT) and do something productive?

I think we should be talking about Mirran Crusader, Phyrexian Crusader and Vampire Nighthawk.

Phyrexian Crusader survives 90% of the removal spells out there, though when you have beaten your opponent to low live with other creatures it can be worse than a nighthawk or mirran crusader.

Mirran Crusader eats bolt, chain, helix, path and swords like nighthawk and has no lifegain, though it is a 2 turn clock with equipment attached to it and it dodges goyfs etc.

Nighthawk still overal strong and balanced.

[Tao]

I am sure CorpT was not trolling. His arguments against Vindicate in his list were good. One problem is that his list is not Deadguy Ale but most of the lists aren't anymore. In a Hymn to Tourach/Sinkhole/ style with tons of disruption and only a few synergetic but weak win conditions deck you certainly want 3-4 Vindicate, there is no doubt.
It functioned as flexible removal for whatever your opponent had left after the onslaught of Discard and LD was over. You could get the Vial or Goyf while Confidant drew you cards and the LD part was obviously more often useful when backed up by Hymn and Sinkhole.

But as soon as you move to a more creature based list with Mother of Runes, Stoneforge Mystic or similar creatures like most people seem to be doing it is a good idea to test if Vindicate is still needed. The LD part is obviously worse once you remove the other LD spells from your deck and it is certainly not obvious that the versatility is worth enough to pay 2 more Mana if you use it as an additional StoP ~90% of the time anyway.

His list actually looks good. I don't think Tidehollow Sculler is good enough though. In my previous testing with that card it is almost never a 2 for 1 because it can't fight. It is usually just a 2 Mana Thoughtseize that more often than not can be undone by Removal if he chooses so. Tarmogoyf, Rhox War Monk, Nacatl, Qasali Pridemage, Lavamancer, Silvergill Adept, Mishra's Factory, Trygon Predator, Tin Street Hooligan, something is way too often preventing it from doing what you want him to do.

[CorpT]

His list actually looks good. I don't think Tidehollow Sculler is good enough though. In my previous testing with that card it is almost never a 2 for 1 because it can't fight. It is usually just a 2 Mana Thoughtseize that more often than not can be undone by Removal if he chooses so. Tarmogoyf, Rhox War Monk, Nacatl, Qasali Pridemage, Lavamancer, Silvergill Adept, Mishra's Factory, Trygon Predator, Tin Street Hooligan, something is way too often preventing it from doing what you want him to do.

Sculler is very good. It does sit back and do not much a lot of the time, but the ability to flash it in during a players Draw step is very powerful. It works well in two ways against decks though:

Against aggro creature decks with removal: You can take their creatures to slow down their progress and leave removal in their hand. This forces them to use their removal on it instead of Goyfs or Bobs. Not only are you slowing them down, but they're using removal on one of your weaker creatures.

Against control decks, you get to take their removal and make all of your creatures better. Or you can take their Jace or something, but you're going to take their removal a lot of the time.

Against combo, it's just another thoughtseize that gets to attack. That's pretty sweet.

I was really surprised how well Sculler played out. But that's when you back him up with Thoughtseize and IoK and curve into him beautifully.

[makochman]

Sculler is very good.

There is a caveat though: he really needs to be in a list with Vial. But yes.

Many people are suggesting Phyrexian Crusader. Consider this: most of the time, he's a wall. A resilient wall, certainly, but all too many decks have ways of dealing with it, or attacking past it. Consider this also: so far we've had four Swords giving protections from enemy colors: Swords of Light and Shadow (WB), Fire and Ice (RU), Body and Mind (UG) and Feast and Famine (GB). A new Sword is bound to come out in the next set (whatever it's called) to complete the cycle, one that will give protection from white and red. Do you really want to experiment with Phyrexian Crusader as a stopgap measure, when it's almost certain a far superior solution will become available in a few months?

[eternaldarkness]

Whenever I play B/W Deadguy, I always use 4 Vindicates. But after reading through the past few posts, I have been reconsidering whether Vindicate is truly needed. Yes its flexible, but honestly most of the time against Zoo and Tribal, I've just been using it as a 3cc spot removal for creatures...which is far from efficient. People saying that it can hit problematic stuff like Moat and Humilty, well you don't see those cards that often nowadays leading me to think that Vindicate is better used in the sideboard.

The pro-Vindicate stance is certainly not helped by the flippant attitude over anti-Vindicate arguments. Most of the proponents of cutting Vindicate give well-reasoned thoughts behind the change while most of the pro-Vindicate posters are borderline flaming. People are treating Vindicate like it's a sacred cow and it's getting annoying. I personally love Vindicate and, like I said, I have always played this deck with Vindicate but in this aggro meta I too am beginning to question if 3cc removal is the optimal choice.

[Justin]

Well said. Also, the choice is not necessarily between four Vindicate and zero Vindicate, which is how it's being framed on this thread. You could cut Vindicate, say down to two, and use those free slots to improve your deck. This way, your hand won't get clogged up with a bunch of 3cc removal spells, but you will still have "outs" in your deck if you need to kill Moat of Humility, etc.

[FieryBalrog]

Vindicate is good for the same reason FoW is: it serves as a maindeck "out" to many things which are otherwise huge problems. I agree that it might not be needed as a 4-of in an aggro-controlish deck like Deadguy- the question of whether you're running Vial or not also changes things, although maybe we don't want to call it Deadguy if it is running Vial. More of a semantic issue.

However Vindicate is more relevant than ever with the rise of Jace 2.0 decks, and I think running 2 maindeck is still a good idea. There's also an interesting choice of adding Mangara with Vial and moving towards a D&T shell, which definitely allows you to cut Vindicate maindeck.

[maximumcarnage]

I've been able to do some testing, although not that extensive yet, with a 3-3 split between Mirran Crusader and Nighthawk.

So far Nighthawk seems better overall. The Crusader is sooo explosive when equipped, but Nighthawk is more dependable and has been better when not carrying a stick.

The heaviest testing so far has been against Goblins, which has been about 50-50. I think Nighthawk as a 4-of is where I want to be in this match-up. However, Crusader did turn the tide for me in one game where I started out in a huge hole. Double trigger on SoFaI spells disaster for Gobs.

Anyone else done any testing with this?

[Uly Van Hammer]

I thought I'd throw in my 2c on this vindicate discussion. The cards a catch-22. I almost always side them out game 2 for my hate cards. The only match-up I dont side them out is against Counter Top (I take out bobs and put in tombstalkers). Let's look at your average match ups. N.O. Decks. You will be taking these out for Perish every time. TES... What the hell are you going to Vindicate, I take it out for Extripate (it's not the strongest card in this match, but it's slightly better than vindicate here). Ichorid... out for Extripate. Merfolk/Goblins, out for either STP or plagues.

I guess what I am saying is that it's a very good rounded card to have game 1 where it's going to be, at very least, decent. But depending on your board, you will replace it with much more focused cards.

My board right now:
4 Tombstalker
3 Perish
3 Engineered Plague
3 Extripate
2 Pithing Needle/ STP (Depends on if the field looks CT, or aggro heavy)

The real question that you have to ask yourself is this: What will I run that is better than Vindicate, game 1, every time?

Edit: Please keep in mind that at large tournaments, each round is a gamble. You may go in expecting the turnout to be 40% aggro, but get crushed by a moat 1st round. Vindicate is sort of like insurance in the 1st game. It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

[Kolhell]

I thought I'd throw in my 2c on this vindicate discussion. The cards a catch-22. I almost always side them out game 2 for my hate cards. The only match-up I dont side them out is against Counter Top (I take out bobs and put in tombstalkers). Let's look at your average match ups. N.O. Decks. You will be taking these out for Perish every time. TES... What the hell are you going to Vindicate, I take it out for Extripate (it's not the strongest card in this match, but it's slightly better than vindicate here). Ichorid... out for Extripate. Merfolk/Goblins, out for either STP or plagues.

I guess what I am saying is that it's a very good rounded card to have game 1, where it's going to be, at very least, decent. But depending on your board, you will replace it with much more focused cards.

My board right now:
4 Tombstalker
3 Perish
3 Engineered Plague
3 Extripate
2 Pithing Needle/ STP (Depends on if the field looks CT, or aggro heavy)

The real question that you have to ask yourself is this: What will I run that is better than Vindicate, game 1, every time?

I agree wholeheartedly. People argue about versatility vs focus... that's what the SB is for. Even if you side out vindicate in 100% of the matches you play it does not make this card replaceable.

[chegvr]

I thought I'd throw in my 2c on this vindicate discussion. The cards a catch-22. I almost always side them out game 2 for my hate cards. The only match-up I dont side them out is against Counter Top (I take out bobs and put in tombstalkers). Let's look at your average match ups. N.O. Decks. You will be taking these out for Perish every time. TES... What the hell are you going to Vindicate, I take it out for Extripate (it's not the strongest card in this match, but it's slightly better than vindicate here). Ichorid... out for Extripate. Merfolk/Goblins, out for either STP or plagues.

I guess what I am saying is that it's a very good rounded card to have game 1, where it's going to be, at very least, decent. But depending on your board, you will replace it with much more focused cards.

My board right now:
4 Tombstalker
3 Perish
3 Engineered Plague
3 Extripate
2 Pithing Needle/ STP (Depends on if the field looks CT, or aggro heavy)

The real question that you have to ask yourself is this: What will I run that is better than Vindicate, game 1, every time?

Great post .. pretty much sums up everything essential about vindicate

SB can always come in game 2/3 .. but vindicate improves your game 1, which is the difference between winning and losing the match

One of the advantages of playing BW together is to use the power and vesatility of vindicate. In my 7 or so years of using the card, I cant recall a situation where I was upset to see it in my hand/topdeck it .. and that cant be said for many other cards (if any at all).

With that said, I do see what the others are saying however. 3 mana creature removal is not good (especially at sorcery). Its neither good as an enchantment/artifact removal. If you know your meta well, and feel that an additional set of Path to Exiles will serve better, than so be it. But in a deck as a whole, facing uncertain metas in its lifespan in various tournies, I would always want vindicates in there.

[makochman]

My board right now:
4 Tombstalker
3 Perish
3 Engineered Plague
3 Extripate
2 Pithing Needle/ STP (Depends on if the field looks CT, or aggro heavy)

No matter what you play in the main, 4x Tombstalker in the sideboard is not a good idea.

[Elvtyrr]

I have actually found that the four vindicates were not doing enough for me either, though my meta is absolutely aggro dominated. it is my intention to go into the next tournament cutting down to 2 vindicates and finding another card to cut for a 3-pack of Retribution of the meek. In order to make it as one sided as possible I have cut my equipment down to just the jittes. Testing will tell but As others have said In my meta Vindicate is a nice catch-all but usually ends up being a worse StP.

[Uly Van Hammer]

No matter what you play in the main, 4x Tombstalker in the sideboard is not a good idea.

Um thanks for the very vague advice. Any reasoning whatsoever? Or did you just feel compelled to say this with no actual explanation.

If found it to be a great way to beat the very poor counter-top match up.

[CorpT]

Um thanks for the very vague advice. Any reasoning whatsoever? Or did you just feel compelled to say this with no actual explanation.

If found it to be a great way to beat the very poor counter-top match up.

Because you're taking out a good card for a mediocre card. Bob against CB is very good. Tombstalker is ok, but still dies to Swords after a fairly substantial investment of card in GY.

[makochman]

Um thanks for the very vague advice. Any reasoning whatsoever? Or did you just feel compelled to say this with no actual explanation.

It's obvious it's a bad idea to waste 4 sideboard slots on a beater that can't normally be cast before turn 5 and sucks in multiples. You're just making other matchups worse for yourself.

[eternaldarkness]

Then go replace it with w.e you want, just don't come preaching to us that we should do it aswell. If you want to play a shit deck and call it deadguy, you are free to do so.

I'm not preaching. All I'm saying is that your stance is not supported by statements like this. Why would cutting vindicate turn the deck into shit? Is Vindicate the defining card of this deck such that cutting the card automatically makes this deck not Deadguy? Which match-ups will vindicate help in? I'm asking because the top decks right now are Merfolk, Goblins, Zoo, TES, Bant aggro. Do these decks run the previously cited cards which are the usual Vindicate targets such as Moat, Humility and Solitary Confinement? I can only make arguments based on my experiences, and in my experience Vindicate is almost always overcosted creature removal.

Of course, I could be completely way off-base and Vindicate may actually be necessary. Care to enlighten us with your own experiences which has lead you to believe that Vindicate is 100% required? I'm genuinely curious and I truly wish to hear your side and not engage in a flame war with you as you seem to wish.

[JadeOberg]

There is a caveat though: he really needs to be in a list with Vial. But yes.
?

About Sculler, I have to respectfully disagree. I played him without vial for months and still found him absolutely back breaking for my opponent. First turn Thoughtseize into a Sculler is so huge. First turn mom to protect a second turn sculler is equally huge. I believe he has application in this deck even if you can't vial him in during the opponents draw step.