I haven't played enough post-ban Pile vs. Moon Stompy to say for sure, but my match notes from before the ban definitely had it as favorable for Pile, and any reasonably prepared Delver player (i.e., they understand the matchup and have useful but not dedicated sideboard cards) should be favored against most Stompy decks. Daze and discard are total bombs in those matchups.
This is an interesting point, and mathematically I have to agree; weirdly though, I still feel like intuitively it makes sense that a deck with cantrips should have an easier time in a longer event. I'm not sure why I feel that way - I'll have to keep mulling it over. It definitely feels like the agency that someone mentioned earlier is a big part of it.
Nah, just that it's closer to 50-50 than it is to, say, 70-30. btm10, above, is surely a more trustworthy source though, as I love to play decks like storm that just roll over to chalice a good percentage of the time.
Cheers guys! Hope you enjoy the other episodes, though be forewarned: they're way less substantive than this one, and mostly involve us bullshitting about bullshit.
As Sam mentioned, there's a good chance we'll have a new episode out next week to discuss any Legacy or (more likely) Vintage bannings.
I read some of the ideas about DRS preventing GY decks from taking over the universe. I am not sure that I got the true meaning of those comments correct because, ya know, text. So don't jump down my throat here...
The central point I wish to add is that DRS definitely, certainly, absolutely ruins gy-dependant decks just by its very existence. That card is largely responsible for moving some previous great decks to the outskirts of Legacy and I presume also prevents some from making inroads. I remember the threads bemoaning the difficulties encountered when the opponent opens with fetch into DRS. Do not discount the effect of 5-star grave hate in the main.
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
"Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason."
"Governing is too important to be left to people as silly as politicians."
"Politicians were mostly people who'd had too little morals and ethics to stay lawyers."
I disagree that DRS stops GY-dependent decks in their tracks. Snapcaster Mage is heavily played. BR Reanimator is in and out of tier-1. Dredge can easily beat a lone DRS.
DRS is very good against the specific mechanic Threshold and other cards that depend on a raw high volume of cards in the GY like Knight of the Reliquary. That certainly has implications for the format. It is also good at slowing down some other GY strategies, given the right draw, until more powerful GY hate can get online.
But the question is whether or not that is something to be lamented or accepted. That's still very much up in the air as discussed in this cast. Do you want to play against people trying to stick T1 DRS 40% of the time or people trying to stick T1 Griselbrand 40% of the time? Do you want to have to build your deck with DRS -- a 1/2 with summoning sickness -- in mind, or with 4-5 pieces of GY hate in your sideboard? That has a real impact on deck construction.
The card is powerful and unique. Same is true for many cards that have come and gone in Legacy. It has a wide variety of answers in all colors too. I would prefer the cards that are hard to interact with get banned first and we see if DRS can be more of an enabler than it is a detractor.
IIRC, Snapcaster definitely saw an uptick in Modern after DRS was banned - which isn't too suprising, considering it was designed to counter Snapcaster in Standard, hence it being over the top.
Without DRS, we're definitely going back to more GY-based shenanigans. I wouldn't be suprised if the blue lists would simply run more Snapcasters in place of DRS if it was actually banned at some point.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)