[Deck] Angel Stompy

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Against Solidarity you might want to try a mixture of Rule of Law and Defense Grid; Defense Grid doing double-time against control.

[robd]

So, maybe I'm being a serious newb, but wouldn't Gaea's Blessing be a good card against Solidarity? Just looking back over the thread, it seems that Armageddon is a weak sideboard card and the space could be made there. Solidarity (at least, the versions I've seen) is only running one Stifle as a Wish target, and if you boarded in 3 Blessings would have a serious boatload of trouble decking you. Any copies you draw can just be discarded to Mask of Memory.

It is a very narrow sideboard card, but if Solidarity is the worst matchup, it seems it would be worth dedicating 3 slots strictly to it.

RobD

[CavernNinja]

Armageddon is a very strong card against control. The card is a must counter even if all you have on the board is a Silver Knight. Plain and simple Geddon isn't there for Solidarity, it just happens to help a little.

[robd]

Armageddon: The most tentative SB slot. It improves your control matchup some, but I'm not sure it's necessary, since you already have a pretty strong game in that regard. Furthermore, the recent unrestricting of Moxen and Petals makes this a slightly less reliable strategy. Its strongest function is as an additional tool against Solidarity, allowing you a second means of disrupting their win, in conjunction with True Believer.

This states Armageddon's primary purpose is for Solidarity, and it just happens to also be something that can come in for control. Yes, it is a must counter for control of all sorts. But I've been seeing a lot of Moxen and Crucibles, and they weaken its overall effect unless you've got a very good board presence. In which case you should be winning the game, and not toying with your opponent. ;)

Removing this from your sideboard will weaken your game 2 and 3 versus Landstill and BBS. But, I don't believe critically. I haven't tested, so I can't say. I can say that I've resolved Armageddon only about 10%-15% of the time I've cast it. When it resolves, it ends the game. When it doesn't (or I don't draw it), I've still managed to win frequently.

Given that, I think Blessing is worth a try. If I slightly lower my percentages against other control decks in exchange for making my worst matchup significantly better, that's a trade I'm willing to make.

I suppose, looking back at my previous post, I shouldn't have used the word "weak" in describing Armageddon. But, I've had it countered so frequently that all it really seems useful for is tapping a lot of mana for nothing. By the time you can effectively bait out the counters to cast Armageddon, you're beyond the time it would have been most effective. Or, maybe I'm just not playing it right. *shrug*

RobD

[hellfire1134]

I dont believe Gaea's Blessing is good for this deck. You can't hardcast it and if you don't play solidarity then it just sits in the board. Plus if you draw it it does nothing.

[robd]

Again, I say *shrug*. This would be a total metagame call, because it would be three slots devoted to a specific deck. If you aren't expecting any Solidarity, I'd certainly go back to Armageddon.

I introduced the idea only because that matchup is both very, very hard, and Solidarity is very popular in some places.

Versus Solidarity, you don't want to cast it. It's in there strictly for the graveyard ability. If you draw it, it would be the first card chucked to Mask of Memory. Drawing one would suck. But, you need multiples, and 3 seems best. Every build of Solidarity I've seen has access to exactly 1 Stifle. You want to make sure you have the best chance of having 2 Blessings in your library when they go off that you can.

That said, when I get home this evening, I'll try testing it out and see what happens, since this is all theory at the moment.

If the inability to cast it really bothers you, try to think of it as the equivalent to Rebel Informer in the old Masques Block rebel decks. Another example of a card you didn't want to draw, couldn't cast if you did, but was a sliver bullet versus a specific deck.

RobD

[lynxcat]

You have to keep in mind that once they start going off successfully, the Solidarity player can do almost anything they want, all at instant speed. Gaea's Blessing is easy to play around since they can just Brain Freeze again with the Blessing trigger on the stack. The key to beating them is to not allow them to begin going off in the first place, which is why I think Armageddon and Rule of Law are the best answers. You need pre-emptive, rather than reactive answers.

[LockDown]

Solidarity is a very hard game to win.
Has anybody tried using Gilded Light to stop them from going off.
Works like True Believer but it can't be bounced. It can be countered though.

[Peter_Rotten]

Alright already. Enough with the Solidarity match. It's not good for the deck. It's not likely ever going to be good.

But wait, maybe if you equip True Believer with the SoFI giving pro blue... blah, blah... [glare]
We've spent nearly 2 full pages discussing that match that as of now will happen rarely. How many T4/8 appearances has Solidarity seen? More importantly, how many people are really playing the deck?

We are belaboring the point. It is time to move on.

[skyline_186]

Alright already. Enough with the Solidarity match. It's not good for the deck. It's not likely ever going to be good.

But wait, maybe if you equip True Believer with the SoFI giving pro blue... blah, blah... [glare]
We've spent nearly 2 full pages discussing that match that as of now will happen rarely. How many T4/8 appearances has Solidarity seen? More importantly, how many people are really playing the deck?

We are belaboring the point. It is time to move on.

I agree

its time to move on to other matchups although this discussion may pop up here and there. I think that the solidiarity will truly need to be discussed once it makes some more T4/8 performances and more people play it.

[Carney2k4]

That's what I've been trying to say. WE should be talking about the ATS matchup, because in testing, it needs a little work. I've found that they just stomp on your face with an active SotF.

[TeenieBopper]

Against Solidarity you might want to try a mixture of Rule of Law and Defense Grid; Defense Grid doing double-time against control.

I know we've moved on past the solidarity match-up, but I wanted to comment on this. I ran Angel Stompy before the bannings, and because there's brainfreeze here, I asked Godzilla what he would board for it. At the time, he said Chalice of the Void. I also didn't own any, so I was randomy searching for something to board, and I came across Defense Grid. I ran with it. It actually worked out pretty well, especially since he didn't see it coming. They can still go off, but like everythign else, the hope is to stall them long enough so you can kill them.

About ATS. This deck has enough disruption (both enchantment and creature removal) to stall out ATS long enough for you to win. Remember, you're the aggressor. Kill their first turn birds, nail survival, and bash.

[Carney2k4]

About ATS. This deck has enough disruption (both enchantment and creature removal) to stall out ATS long enough for you to win. Remember, you're the aggressor. Kill their first turn birds, nail survival, and bash.

There's only 3 Disenchants MD, so I might get 1 in 1 out of 3 games in my opening hand. The first game is very rough, but you can board in the 4th Disenchant and that helps a little bit. But if they untap with a SotF in play it doesn't look good for you.

[Zilla]

Original post updated to reflect current list. Thorough testing has shown Chrome Mox to be an extremeyl strong choice, mainly because it makes your white mana consistency much stronger, and because it allows for first turn Angels & SoFI's. In my opinion, it's defintely the better choice for the deck. Thanks again to Ezrengel for the suggestion.

[banky]

Question: If this deck has good match-ups versus four of the five current decks in Legacy Metagame Forum and match against a majority of other stronger contenders, wouldnt this deck deserve a move to LMF since we're basicly down to nit-picking the SB (True Believre, Armageddon) and one MD choices (Issamaru)?

[Artowis]

It hasn't posted results anywhere really.

The Adepts and Mods keep track of this stuff and when we feel it should be moved, it'll be moved.

Post cleaned up and nonsense removed.

Peter_Rotten

[Sims]

No, but I can speak for Artowis that the comment wasn't warranted directly at you. Since the bannings people have been itchy to see what the new Tier 1 is and have been bugging for every pet deck in the world to be moved to the LMF (former EVR), and frankly it had gotten quite annoying. The Adepts and Mods have been discussing decks that have been meeting a few guidelines extensively for worthniess to the LMF and voting on each deck, hence the movement of some threads to the LMF for the time being until suitable restarted threads are created (such as Quicksilvers revamp of the Survival Advantage thread for the LMF).

For reference, this deck has been putting up strong testing results, but is currently not widely played. When it starts becoming popular and puts up solid results in various meta's and large tournys, then we will bring it up for consideration as a deck to be placed in LMF.

[Zelyon]

I threw together and played the deck for the few days and here are my thoughts.

I highly recommend you test out these changes before commenting on them.

Chrome Mox isn't that good in this deck. Yes it lets you play something one turn earlier. But rarely did I not miss that card I had to remove in order to play it. A card has to be downright broken to make a 2 to 1 card disadvantage worthwhile. Being able to play something one turn earlier is worth losing a key white spell. The main reason you seem to play it is because it ups the white mana count. But if you cut a few Tithe and City of Traitors and up the plains count, you wouldn't have that problem at all.

Parallax Wave should not be a maindeck card. It's great in some matchups but near worthless in others (against just about any decent control and combo deck for example).

Considering that...

A.) The matchups Wave is good against aren't really this decks weakest matchups.
B.) This deck already has plenty of other maindeck cards against creatures and aggro.
C.) Wave can be near dead against certain matchups.
D.) Wave is a very high casting cost cards.

I just don't see the justification for not playing as a sideboard card rather than a maindeck card. There are definately better choices for such a high casting cost main deck slot. Tangle Wire for example is helpful against a lot more decks and is cheaper to boot.

You should definately up the Isamaru, Hound of Konda count up to 2 and may want to consider even 3. The fact is, you shouldn't have more than one of these guys in play, if you do, you're overextending and walking right into a wrath or deed or keg or disk etc. The extra toughness over the Lions helps a good bit against many of the 1 toughness goblins goblin sligh runs since it forces them to use up yet another burn spell here to be able to attack and they will thus be that much less likely to be able to burn away your Angel, Mother of Runes (two burn spells) or another more important critter. Test it out, I think you'll like the results.

Tithe is a poor replacement for lands. Running such a low plains count makes you too vulnerable to mana screw to be worthwhile. You should replace the Chrome Mox with Plains (highly recommend) and replace some if not all of the Tithe with Plains. The deck thinning isn't much (you can get the same effect by throwing in 4 flooded strands in it's slot) and I almost always had something else I would rather play in my hand until it's too late in the game to matter much. The deck has a low enough curve especially once you cut a few Waves that it's not needed. Afterall, this is meant to be a relatively fast deck. Tying up mana during the first few turns hardly seems worthwhile. And playing both Tithe and Chrome Mox together is counterintuitive since they have almost exactly opposite effects. Chrome Mox speeds you up at turn at the expense of card disadvantage. And Tithe slows you down a turn for a land that you would have had if you played a plains in Tithe's spot in the first place.

That freed up a lot of slots. When considering replacements, Whipcorder was most appealing...

A.) It's a great utility creature against everything from goblins to ATS.
B.) It can be played face down for it's morph cost to draw out any burn/hate that was meant for the Angel. And after the first time your opponent makes this mistake, they will be hesistant to burn or keg/disk/deed away morphs keeping your angel that much safer. This is especially useful against BBS where playing the Angel face down is the only real way to avoid having it countered but the morphed creatures are vulnerable to Keg.
C.) It's a rebel. I mention this because it opens up the ability to play a few Ramosian Sergent in the deck. The uncounterable card advantage that Sergent allows for in the deck is nuts against various aggro decks and mirror or WBBS match ups (which hate having their own angels, goblins, mongrels and other creatures tapped by multiple Whipcorders) and it often becomes yet another creature your opponent must throw their burn yet in order not to lose. It can even allow you to keep pace with an active survival. The more burn you're having thrown at one drops, the easier time you'll have against a lot of decks. The success I've had with the Sergent makes me think it may warrant a full 4 slots.

Cut a few pro red guys. This deck has a very solid match up against goblins. With the creature destruction, 15 Pro Red guys (counting SOFI, Mother of Runes etc) is just overkill. You really don't need to have more than one or two pro red creatures in play to screw up their attacks.

Phyrexian War Beast is a card I've had a great deal of success with in this deck. The 4 toughness makes it seem like a mini Angel for the purposes of dealing with Aggro. And you can consistently lay it down second turn thanks to the nonbasics. I think it certainly warrants a few slots.

Here's my current list...

12 Plains
4 Ancient Tomb
3 City of Traitors
3 Tithe (I'm keeping these in for now just because I wanted to test with them a few more times before cutting them for good.)

4 Mother of Runes
3 Ramosian Sergent (May want to up the count to 4)
3 Savannah Lions
2 Isamaru, Hound of Konda (Can also opt for a 2 Lions/3 Isamaru ratio)
3 Whipcorder - Taps everything from Goblins to Angels to Arrogant Wurms and shows up in uncounterable multiples thanks to Ramosian Sergent
2 Soltari Priest
2 Silver Knight
2 Phyrexian War Beast
4 Exalted Angel (The card is just too good to play any less.)

4 Swords to Plowshore
3 Disenchant
3 Mask of Memory
3 Sword of Fire and Ice

Test these changes out and lmk what you think. If you disagree, please tell me which assertions above you disagree with and why rather than just claiming that I'm wrong.

[Zilla]

Zelyon:

I feel qualified to comment, as I have thoroughly tested every card in your proposed decklist over the course of several months of development on this deck. I'll go over my thoughts card-by card:

Tithe: One of the strongest cards in the deck and one of the deck's 3 card advantage engines. Anything less than 4 is folly, although I'm unsurprised that you're not liking them, because your white mana consistency is likely to be off, which leads me to my next point:

City of Traitors: The deck used to run 3 of them over Chrome Mox. They were replaced for several reasons: First, Moxen serve a similar purpose, in that they are accelleration. Second, they drastically increase your white mana consistency. Third, they have excellent synergy with Tithe, in that Tithe can either be pitched to Chrome Mox, or Tithe can be played first turn with only a Chrome Mox on the board, thereby netting you immediate card advantage. Fourth, they allow you to resolve a first turn morphed Angel, followed by a second turn attacking unmorphed Angel. Because you lose City after playing another land, they are inevitably going to cost you the same card advantage that Chrome Mox does. In short, Chrome Mox is the superior choice.

Ramosian Sergeant: Only good with Whipcorders, which brings me to...

Whipcorder: Used to be in the deck where the Priests are now. They were important as a bluffing technique in conjunction with Angels. With the loss of Mana Drain, they are much less effective against control, and aren't nearly aggressive enough for the deck's overall strategy.

Lions/Isamaru: The 4:1 ratio of Lions to Hounds has already been discussed in this thread. In theory, a 3:2 ratio can work, but it's essentially irrellevant. Most often, these guys are used for early game chump blockers, burn magnets, and Mox fodder. They're there to smooth your curve and not much else. As stated previously, I personally don't feel the one extra toughness is worth the risk of having dead cards in my hand, thus the 4:1 ratio. Furthermore, Isamaru sucks in the white aggro mirror. In the end, the difference is small enough not to debate. Run 2 Hounds if it makes you happy.

Soltari Priest: With the addition of Swords and Masks, their evasion is extremely important. I would go so far as to say that they are the most important creature in the deck, even over Angels, because they facilitate your draw engine. Running any less than 4 is a horrible, horrible mistake.

Silver Knight: In conjunction with Priests and Swords, Knights are singularly responsible for the deck's overwhelmingly strong game against Goblins, Burn, and RG Survival. Running any less than 4 significantly weaken's the deck's chances against some of the most prevalent decks in the format.

Phyrexian Warbeast: Card disadvantage in a deck that hates card disadvantage. Provides absolutely nothing that the deck's other threats don't already provide. You've offered not one shred of compelling evidence to suggest that these are of any value to the deck's strategy.

Parallax Wave: You've removed half of the deck's creature removal, a card which is vital to your ability to win ground wars against other aggro decks, and to protect your threats from mass removal. This alone makes me wonder if you've actually tested the deck against a wide variety of archetypes. 4 StP's and 3 Swords will not be enough to keep the deck alive against aggressive creature strategies. Removing Wave is preposterous.

In conclusion, my opinion is that you've made drastic changes to the deck which do absolutely nothing at all to improve its weak matchups, but which weaken many of its strong matchups. If your suggestions improved any matchups at all, they might be worth considering. As it stands, I see no benefit at all to these changes.

[Carlos El Salvador]

Zel, although you make good points, you are really diluting the deck's power. And I beleve the reason for theith is to always have your WW for exalted Angel/Soltari Preist/Silver Knight. I would love to see how your doing without tithe though, but it seems kind oflike it's very iffy. As far as chrome mox goes, You should be able to overload on cards that the loss of some bad card (One of the other Isarmus, for example). Plus, this deck wants to beat control as fast as it can.