I guess he includes Snapcaster too.Originally Posted by Koby
He also replaced Chain Lightning with Vexing Devil
- AriLaxBrainstorm is only useful in certain situations? Brainstorm is useful when you hand is not the stone cold nutter butter blade Ranchington Q. Farnsworth Esquire best. When Brainstorm is "dead", the game is already over.
i haven't read the article, but i'd love to see your old play-by-play reporting style being implemented on the new decklist. Those are the articles i've enjoyed the most in the past.
I can't belive the people complaining that it's premium content. No one is forcing you to buy it, and neither do we care about the endless possibilites about how you can spend $3.
I'm not complaining it's premium content. I'm complaining he is trying to market his $3 Legacy breaking breakthrough here. TM subject was already heated enough on the boards I don't think we need additional hype-up just to sell premium content.
Still waiting for DragoFireheart to pay the $3 and post the list in the Avacyn Restored thread.
I'm not a SCG member, so I can't speak directly to your list, but this is what I've gleamed thus far from reading this thread...
You think Temporal Mastery is superior to Thunderous Wrath in a UR build. I was thinking the same thing. They take the same setup (BS or Ponder topdeck manipulation), but one allows you to get an extra attack outta 2 creatures. Now my understanding of math is pretty limited, but it seems the average damage dealt by 2 attacking creatures in this deck will be higher than the 5 from Thunderous Wrath. When you also account for the extra card drawn it clearly gets pretty backbreaking pretty quickly. You used to have to keep your life total above 6 versus UR to avoid the Bolt>Bolt or Bolt>Snap>Bolt kill. With Temporal Mastery the limit is basically 8-10, since extra attacks = free damage.
TM also allows you to trump Mom, which has to be fun. And since you're winning in the red zone already you can basically clear out blockers with Devil and swing through an open board after the TM. That's what a lot of people haven't yet realized, I think. Activated abilities just got worse, blockers just got worse, and fast, dumb beaters just got better.
Man, I can't believe Wild Nacatl is already outdated...
Back on topic, TM is going to mess up understood and accepted math in a big way. How does SFM know what to fetch now? Or, more succinctly, how does a creature with a 1 turn lag compete with a card that turns that into a two turn lag?
I hope to see the full decklist you proposed soon (hint, hint, *cough* it's a free forum *cough*) because it seems like turning guys sideways is what TM really wants to enable.
And please, forgive the haters. They are, after all, gonna hate.
Why would we be haters? I read a lot of his articles previously, especially on Vintage and learned a lot. But since I became a member of this forum I don't agree with the intent of this thread and I'm voicing a perfectly legitimate objection, if you have a problem with that go check forum rules. I guess suck ups will be suck ups.
Hmmm...Still waiting for DragoFireheart to pay the $3 and post the list in the Avacyn Restored thread.
The only combination of creatures with a power greater than 5 consists of 2 flipped Delvers (Vexing Devil won't be attacking, as I explained in a previous post).
So how often do you get two flipped Delvers on the board? In most cases you will do less than five damage in your attack phase, which renders Wrath superior in the average case, unless you absolutely need the draw and land drop.
Of course, we can theory craft and jizz about perfect board-states, where Temporal Mastery would be so broken, but then again...let's keep it real.
@Drago
Weren't you the one praising Mastery's imbalance and talking about how easy it is to come up with a broken list?
I was on the "Vexing Devil is ZOMG OP" train until I did some testing and having some good advice from a friend explaining why aside from hyper aggressive decks like burn, the Devil is a shitty card.
If you can open Devil turn 1 and he sticks as a creature, your opponent can deal with it or has a peabrain. If you open Devil turn 1 and your opponent takes 4 in the face, it's a strong bolt to the face BUT in this very situation where you're playing a deck that relies on creatures to win the game aka the combat phase, you have just lost 2 turns (losing your creature drop on turn 1 due to devil getting 'burned', and 2nd turn you are casting a creature without haste unless you're playing Guide turn 2, which now doesn't look as threatening, and lastly by turn 3, your opponents would have dug 2 more cards for a removal to deal with the Devil).
These are scenarios, but the most common scenario would be: If I don't have an answer for Devil, I'll take 4 to the face and you lose 2 turns of tempo. If I do have an answer for Devil, I can CHOOSE to cost you tempo or to deal with the Devil anyway depending on my gameplan.
I think Smmenen is a little caught up with the testing that he can easily stick a Devil/Delver in play into a Temporal Mastery and swinging for two times. It is true that if such a situation arises, it is ideal and amazing. However, I do agree that TM is only good in an aggro-control deck that plans on winning with creatures. TM/TW is all about maximizing what you can do with the extra turn. E.g. playing TM/TW just to draw a card and untap your lands and play a land drop is the worst thing you can do. If you have a few creatures in play with TM/TW, it is very certain a powerful play, but that is assuming that the format is incapable of adapting or dealing with creatures.
Decks that I care about:
Steel Stompy
UWx Landstill
Dreadstalker
DDFT (10% practice)
Mangara on MWS? You must be masochistic. -kiblast
At this point I've lost interest in all of the testing and arguments both ways. If it's broken, it'll be dominating top 8's before long in some form at SCG Opens. If it isn't, it'll just fall off and next time a card gets this much hype people will be pointing to this as an example of a card people thought was broken but wasn't. Only thing to really do is wait and see.
Annoying thing is that it's the SCG closest to me that'll probably be one of the prime candidates for testing out these decks, so if it is broken I'll be a victim.
I've asked the editors to update my article and cut Vexing Devil. I played four more hours of testing tonight and was consistently impressed with Lavamancer. Turn three Temporal Mastery + Lavamancer is a great play despite the fact that Mastery removes itself. Chain Lightning is obviously great. These decks are sick. My teammate Demars thinks that Stoneforge might be nuts with Mastery. UR Delver is Strongest I've tested. It's very strong and very annoying to play against.
@SMenendian on Twitter
Check out my podcast!
My Eternal Central Article Archive (new articles)
My Star City Games Article Archive (300+ Vintage articles since 2002) r on GUSH, check it out .
So what made Lavamancer that much better?
I want to comment on this. Stephen wrote a Legacy related article that he (rightly) thought would be of interest to members of this community. The fact that it happens to cost a couple bucks to read doesn't affect its relevance to the format or this site's interests in the slightest.
If Stephen's sole goal were advertisement, I suspect he'd have just left a link here and forgotten about it. Instead he's taken the time to have thoughtful, lengthy discussion with people here about the subject matter, despite the fact that most of them haven't even read the source material.
There's never been a rule against posting links to premium content here. Premium SCG articles have been linked on this site for years. So long as the articles are relevant to the format, and the author's goal is the furtherance of the format and its community, there's no reason whatsoever that they shouldn't be allowed them here.
If you choose not to pay for them, that's all well and good, but I don't think it hurts you in any way to know they exist.
Advertisement can be done the wrong way (just post a link) and the right way (make people believe it could be ground-breaking). I guess we don't need to discuss which way you'd choose, if you want to sell views.
I am not implying anything, but just pointing out the flaws behind this thought process.
Steve, I *do* respect your opinions in regards to Vintage, and I do greatly enjoy your podcast. I really liked some of the premium content you've released in the past, such as the exhaustive coverage of Gush.
However, the decks you put forth as 'breaking Legacy' are really sub-par. I think the games that they are winning in testing are in spite of Temporal Mastery's inclusion, not because of it.
I have been dabbling with the card since it got spoiled, and while I haven't done hundreds of test runs, I think I've at least come to the solid conclusion that the card is not that great in RUG, especially as a 4-of. I could potentially see it being run in some number (perhaps 1 or 2 as a nice mid/late-game top deck), but not as a marquee card that is run in the full 4 copies.
I think the card does have some potential, but more likely as 2-3 copies in some sort of deck running Planeswalkers and/or pro-active disruption (such as Hymn to Tourach and other discard spells). I'm actually surprised that you didn't give a BUG build a chance, since the card could slot into a tempo Team America list somewhat easily. Swinging with Tombstalkers, Tarmogoyfs and Delvers multiple times is definitely something worth considering, even if it's not ultimately that good. Or perhaps just try developing a solid Bant list that runs Hierarchs, KotRs, and some number of Jace, possibly Elspeth, etc. Another potential direction would be to try running it in a mono-blue build that runs other stuff to hate on the format like maindeck Back to Basics.
The UGW list is just poorly constructed in general, regardless of whether or not TM is in the deck. Swords to Plowshares is one of the worst removal cards for an aggressive deck that is trying to win via combat damage -- why not take the Zoo approach and run Path to Exile instead? Or hell, even try running Vapor Snag and drop white entirely, since you're not utilizing the color otherwise (I don't think white opens up great SB options for tempo either). In that case, a straight UG build with a more stable manabase might be more capable of casting Jace on time, but I HIGHLY doubt that you had 'no trouble' resolving Jace against RUG.
Also, I don't think it would have required THAT much testing to figure out that Devil is not that great in RUG, and that Nimble Mongoose is an essential card for the archetype. The card is integral towards winning against opposing control decks, and cutting this slot for Vexing Devil (a card that's just.. bad in general, but especially against control) says to me that you haven't done serious testing.
UR is definitely a strong deck, but I don't think TM is the card that you're looking for to push the deck over the top. If you are looking to maximize damage output against the tier 1 of Legacy, I would consider just running Price of Progress or more burn here.
What matchups are getting so much significantly better with TM in the deck? RUG will disrupt your lines of resolving it, Maverick will mostly not care, and UWx isn't particularly hard for UR or RUG decks to beat even without additional attack phases. If it's not improving the matchup against the current tier 1, I really don't see why the card is worth running other than for the novelty factor. It seems to me like you assembled these decklists devoid of consideration for what's going on in the format right now.
Yes, there will be games where you just so happen to get a nut draw and can chain several TM's over the course of a few turns, but I've personally play-tested far more games where the card either did very little or was left stranded in hand. You aren't *really* drawing an 'extra card', since setting up TM for the Miracle cost is going to be your draw for that turn.
The reason you are getting flak for this article from people is because you posited the argument in such a hyperbolic, exaggerated way. You make claims like 'these decks will dominate SCG Open Top 8s', 'brainstorm might need to banned', etc and don't actually deliver any decklists that can come close to rivaling Flash's absurd power level (your comparison, not mine). You frame the article as containing 3 legacy decks that are broken/on their way to being broken, yet you even come to the conclusion within the article that the UGW and RUG builds are mediocre/bad and really only seem to be confident in the UR list. You say that TM is 'broken', but then admit that the decks don't have really favorable matchups across the board. I think that if TM *is broken* (something that seems very unlikely to me now), it will be in a deck that is very different from the lists you provided.
I think the article is still worthwhile for the REST of the content, which covers the new set and contains an updated Vintage checklist. The Griselbrand Oath deck looks sick! But as for the article's Legacy content, I think it's lacking in a huge way. Regardless, I still enjoyed it overall because you are an entertaining writer -- so please see these criticisms for what they are: attacks on your stance on TM, not personal attacks on you.
While I may not have framed this article as a set review for this forum, that is actually it's content and purpose. Yet, I did undertake testing for a number of cards in this review, not only in order to get a better sense of how they might be best abused, but also to have a more firm and confident impression of their utility and overall value.
Temporal Mastery was such a card. Initially, I undertook my testing with Temporal Mastery in a far more limited fashion: I simply wanted to scrutinize the criticisms that this card has received, especially on these boards. I wanted to measure the critiques of this card against actual experience: to see if this card would increase the difficulty or frequency of mulligan decision. I wanted to see if it would cause me to "waste" or underutilize Brainstorms. I wanted to see if Temporal Mastery would be a highly conditional or relatively easily executed play.
Having satisfied my initial curiosity, I decided to try to test a swath of possible homes. I began in several places, but dismissing other options, converged around Delver decks. I don't think my UGW Delver deck is as bad as you claim, since it's pretty much a Standard Goyf deck, and I"m being entirely sincere that I didn't have much trouble resolving Jace. The problem wasn't resolving Jace, it was often the relevance of Jace, or keeping it alive.
A good deal of testing with the UGW list quickly led to a RUG list, which only after a minimal amount of testing, gave way to UR Delver. The Vexing Devil change was made late in the testing, and did not get receive the full treatment, which I tested much more of today.
I appreciate the sincere, if not a bit strident, feedback. But I think that you will find that Temporal Mastery will indeed highlight the Legacy contributions not only from this set, but will be a star in the evolving metagame. I may have exaggerated in suggesting that there were "three decks" in this article, when actually those decks were merely an evolution of a testing regime in one direction or path -- but it is not an exaggeration when I say that I believe Temporal Mastery Delver decks will be lighting up SCG Open Top 8s.
Also, I should say that I have been running Price of Progress in my latest UR Delver list, on top of the four Temporal Mastery. It's not just that the UR Delver deck has performed very well, but that Temporal Mastery has contributed to broken game situations. As Temporal Mastery slowly takes hold in the format, I am confident that others will see what I've seen. In short, it's my view that Temporal Mastery basically makes extant decks less interactive, more abusive, and less fun. I've improved my UR Delver deck since I wrote this article (rest assured there is a lag between writing and publishing), and I made the mistake of makiing a late change by adding Devil -- but the core of my testing is -- I believe -- more than worth reading, if for no other reason than addressing the initial criticisms that were launched.
One need not agree with my ultimate conclusions that Temporal Mastery is broken to concur in my judgment that Temporal Mastery does not suffer from the limitations ascribed to it by its harsher critics. And, if I were to aspire more as a persuasive writer, I would just ask that the reader also agree that I've demonstrated that Temporal Mastery functions and synergizes well in these lists. I assure you Temporal Mastery is not a win more card. It's winning games.
Last edited by Smmenen; 04-28-2012 at 04:00 AM.
@SMenendian on Twitter
Check out my podcast!
My Eternal Central Article Archive (new articles)
My Star City Games Article Archive (300+ Vintage articles since 2002) r on GUSH, check it out .
This paragraph embodies what I believe are a number of misconceptions, although mostly well-founded, understandable ones, regarding not just TM's brokenness, but potential.
First of all, the reason TM is broken isn't because you can chain 3-4 TM's together -- which, btw, you can do -- but because, you take, on average, 1-2 turns more per game than your opponent. This advantage is very difficult to overcome in general, and almost (although not entirely) impossible to overcome if you have a clearly superior board state.
Second, of course you don't draw another card in the draw step that turn, but you do draw a card on the Temporal Mastery (Time Walk) turn. That makes this a bona fide cantrip.
The brokenness of the card is a function of both the fact that it leads to uninteractive or blow out games, but also because it's so easy and simple to set up for such a huge advantage.
It's easy to blithely dismiss the card as "simply giving you another attack step," yet when such a card offers such tactical flexibility (i.e. late game advantages, setting up summoning sick activations, double Planeswalker activations, blow out spells like Hymn in succession, etc), on top of being a blue cantrip, that, on average, deals at least 3 damage (sometimes alot more, and sometimes 0 -- hence the 'average'), I think that safely qualifies as "broken."
Imagine Wizards printed a blue Lightning Bolt that cantripped -- such a card might seem innocuous, yet it would be obviously broken in tournament settings. Temporal Mastery does much more, and is far more flexibly abused. If it helps to view Temporal Mastery that way, please do so. The card is broken in any format where you can run 4 Brainstorm and 4 Ponder. But in a format like Legacy, where Delver decks are already dominant, this card is more than simply another useful tactic. It's abusive.
@SMenendian on Twitter
Check out my podcast!
My Eternal Central Article Archive (new articles)
My Star City Games Article Archive (300+ Vintage articles since 2002) r on GUSH, check it out .
Ok, I won' t lie, I do speculate on cards. IE snapping up foil preorder Snapcasters because they were clearly good. In Temporal Mastery case, the card is clearly very good to bonkers. The card is clearly good in most blue control decks but inherently broken in delver. It is so good, I have put off buying them until the SCG results gets flooded with TM and the June banlist addresses it by either banning Brainstorm-esque cards or TM itself. I got burned on Mental Misstep (Jap foil Missteps :( Cry!) so I'm going to wait this time.
It will be in every interactive Blue decks ala Misstep and push non-blue decks out of the format. Sure Mav got the counterspell hosing land, but blue just got a tremendous boost as well. IMO the format will degenerate into a UW Control vs RUG again, this time Stoneblade vs Delver (rather than NO).
What makes the card so good in Delver is because the deck has plenty of early drops that can fully utilize the time walk. In slower blue decks like UW, it is the most an explore early and pretty bomby late with multiple Jace activations/Stoneforge + Batterskull. However, that assumes you get a SFM/Jace to stick, which makes it a parity breaker or win more card. It also dilutes threat density/answers in UW control so I'm not too sure how TM is good there.
In RUG, it is a 0 mana cantrip which gives you an extra attack phase and an explore. RUG abuses this the most because the deck has the best 1 mana bombs to take advantage of TM's walk. It has multiple ways of getting down a T1 delver/mongoose. Or if you are behind, you can drop a Creature + TM on the same turn to get a free hit in etc. Decks like UW want TM towards Turns 3++ especially after they stick a bomb, which is win more. RUG can stick an early creature easily and ride multiple TMs FTW. The chaining thing is what makes TM such a scary card and you can do it rather easily.
At worst, it cantrips, giving you more mana/ramp to fill up the yard for mongoose.
Even then, I still can't condone charging for an article and advertising it here.
As a Stoneblade Player, I want to assure you that most of the time, at least against other blue decks, I would not be happy to see TM in the early to mid game. Everybody taking about it being a free explore in the early game misses the point that you actually have to pay 2 mana and resolve the spell to get that effect. As a control player, you would look pretty stupid to pay 2 mana in your draw step on turn 3 or 4, just to get it Spell Pierced or Counterspelled, now being (almost) tapped out passing the turn to your opponent. Especially in control mirrors, that would be a horrible play. Even more so if you "wasted" a Brainstorm EOT just to set up that brilliant move.
Things might start to get interesting once you put SD.Top in the mix. Being able to play it on your opponent's endstep is indefinitely better than during your own turn.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote