I'm not familiar with this new version yet but was wondering about this, also thinking that Prelate and Chalice seem very good - and Choke. With Top around they used to be able to use their plains to spin top while looking for the Wear/Tear but since all their library manipulation is now blue a Choke is more efficient vs them than it used to be. If Wear/Tear is out that is really good news for Choke as a hate card. No longer do you need to expose yourself to 1-for-2's to be able to put pressure on them. Also I was thinking that Loaming for Ghost Quarters seems inevitable now that they lack the one-sided Chalice for any CMC.Originally Posted by timmyod17
Strangely it's the opposite.
The deck has a much easier time handling non-creatures than older lists. One of the things my friends like about it the most has been how much stronger it is at answering cards like choke, planeswalkers, etc...
But you're also correct at how good it is versus Prelate on 1 + Teeg. Most versions can't win from that board state. There are some splashing red for Kozilek's Return but apart from that it's struggling.
The increased card draw + increased density of hard answers (as opposed to Counterbalance) has made them a lot better in the "normal" control role. It's also a lot slower because, without toplock or Storming off with Mentor, it's actually fairly weak to at transitioning into closing out the game.
Edit:
For clarification--effects of permanent based disruption is more impacting because they lack top. The difference is that they are more likely to have an immediate answer now, because they have to. In the top days they could run 1-2 answers and just Top for 4-5 turns until they get it. This version just runs out rite more of answers and card draw in the 75 making it more likely they already have te answer. But if they tap out into a choke--they're effectively dead.
Played a bunch of practice games against the deck, and the above is very true.
I won a game with prelate on 1 prelate on 2 and teeg, and they couldn't cast any noncreature spells at all.
Also with regards to non creature permanents, they lean hard on unexpectedly absent to deal with them, which makes teeg very very good.
Over the past couple days of playing this deck online I've discovered that people just scoop to Sigarda, it's pretty hilarious.
http://www.ovinotournament.com/legac...-4c738e69-9a63
Very interesting Maverick list got 1st at this event. Notably it's running 8 dorks with lots of 3 drops. 4x KOTR 2x New Thalia 2x Aven Mindcensor and a Tireless Tracker
8 dorks + 3drops is the start of the Reid Duke list isn't it? Interesting to see it in a more all in shell: 12 mana dorks, 9 3drops
That is pretty interesting indeed. Especially in a world full of Fatal Push. Personally would love to see some Sanctum Prelates in a list like this instead of the Mindcensors, but pretty sweet list.
I've only been playing this deck for a few weeks, but I'm just about to put in the money for a Cradle. Im wondering what the advantages are to playing the Cradle and Canopy over the Dark Depths package? Do you guys ever switch?
In my experience there is equal advantages for all three options (Cradle, Depths, or Neither)
The best mana base doesn't run either card, the worst mana base with a biggest upside is Deths, And cradle is the lovely in-between where you mana is better so long as you already have a board out, but has zero upside if you don't have a board out.
Do you want the minimum amount of drawback? Don't run either.
Do you want something that works when you already have a bunch of guys out? Run Cradle.
Do you want to have an out should you be on the backfoot no matter what position you are in? Run Depths.
Not everyone agrees with my thoughts on this topic--and it would be best for you to let play-testing decide which one you want as opposed to some guy in a forum.
I've had most success with the Dark Depths plan--I can walk you through why I'm such a fan of Thespian Stage. But you really need to have a more specific thing you're looking to do with said lands more than just "they're really powerful I should run them."
This is certainly a little bit biased. But i do agree that depths can win you games you should have no business winning. It does however come at a cost, you need to mulligan several hands that would've been made much less awkward without stage/depths. The combo can be a quick way to close out combo match-ups, but i do feel it's best against fair decks where even the threat of the combo forces your opponent to try to play around it. Additionally lots of fair decks have no answer to a lage and it just wins on the spot. It also happens to win boardstall's quite nicely, especially the ones where you can't feasibly attack without dying on the crackback.
Cradle has significant upside as well, and at a lower cost. I generally find that cradle is best in helping to cast two two-drops turn 2 or to power out equipment. Without cradle equipment generally feel far slower and kinda clunky. Equipment become significantly better with cradle. The downside to cradle is that in match-ups where your board is more likely to be under pressure it's a bit lackluster. Mainly match-ups where your opponent is trying to kill everything you play.
I do agree with the assessment that depths provides the biggest upside at the largest cost, where as cradle still provides significant upside while still having a cost.
I switched to cradle a little more than a month ago and have found it better in my current meta. Used to be mostly made up of grindy fair decks, but combo decks are now far more represented and I feel like cradle is generally more consistent.
There was some discussion from this post and one page forward too:
http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...l=1#post986461
I personally tend to play Depths based on meta considerations only and with Cradle as the default. Cradle allows you to use KotR to triple waste an opponent and then get Cradle after that for a very strong mana advantage. It also allows you to ramp into a quick GSZ for a 5-drop or play an equipment, equip and attack in the same turn, both those plays feel like cheating and can be game winning. While Depths is often a dead draw, it thus reduces your consistency and that's why I tend to play it only if the meta seems weak to it.
No substantial disagreements with me on your analysis as well. For example--I've won majority of my elves matchups primarily because I run the Dark Depths package (which is combo) but I immediately side it out vs D&T specifically because they run 2-3 Karakas 4 Flickerwhisps 4 Swords to Plowshares, 4 Wasteland and 0-1 Palace Jailers (a fair matchup); but I also know that both of those are anomalies compared to the rest of the meta.
The main thing I would like to re-emphasize is that no matter which package you lean on, you need to build with that card in mind. Cradle is useless without equipment/fatties/clue Tokens to use all that mana on while Depths Package is pointless if you cram too many black spells in the main due to having less lands that produce colored mana.
Have a purpose you are aiming for, don't lean on just card power alone.
I appreciate all the info, I have a lot of elves in my meta, as well as a lot of combo-ish decks and I think that it would help with those difficult matchups. Is there any fatties you guys would recommend if I do decide to play cradle? I've heard Titania and Sigarda are bombs most of the time.
TBH if there's a lot of elves/combo I wouldn't run a big creature MD. Sigarda and Titania are both great for different reasons. I tend to prefer Sigarda for just how much of a house it is against certain decks like BUG. Titania is more vulnerable but has speed and can be absolutely nuts.
Additionally I run cradle without a big 5 drop. I find that I rarely ever have 5 mana without a cradle, and the presence of a 5 drop seems really inconsistent. I rather just have the equipment which cradle can then turbo-charge by both playing and equipping in the same turn.
My favorite fatty with Cradle is Batterskull.
I think running Cradle -with- a 5-drop can be compared to running Stage with Depths:
- The Depths is dead without a Stage in play, similarly the 5-drop is dead without 5 mana.
- Depths can be tutored for by KotR and the 5-drop can be tutored for with a GSZ.
- Depths with Stage can end the game quickly, so can Titania. Sigarda takes a few turns but can do that too.
Major differences are that a 5-drop doesn't need any "combo" to be assembled, getting to 5 mana is usually quite easy (Deathrite, Scryb Ranger, KotR all help with providing extra mana). Also while Depths + Stage give you card disadvantage when you go for the combo, Titania gives you card advantage both by providing both an extra land and multiple free 5/3 creatures. Titania is turned off by Rest in Peace and Leyline of the Void. Also Titania is easier to interact with than Marit Lage, but it's worth mentioning that with Karakas you can protect Titania while creating a quasi Loam-loop without investing cards (tapping Cradle + Karakas is usually enough to replay it every turn due to the extra tokens you're getting).
Edit: I think playing Cradle exposes you to sweepers and makes your manabase less stable, but it is outweighed according to most of us by enabling powerful plays using equipment primarily but also other manadumps such as Tracker and Ooze. The question is if you want to add the inconsistent element of a 5-drop to win fair matchups. As results published in this thread seem to have been indicating a stock list is just fine, which means no 5-drop or Depths should be needed. Now with the conclusion that Cradle is worth running because the tradeoff between power and consistency seems to be worth it, giving up Cradle in order to play Stage seems to be a second disadvantage of the Depths + Stage package in addition to the often dead draw of the Depths in itself. Personally I'm used to playing Nic Fit and I find it just absurd to be able to ramp as hard as that deck, by fetching Cradle, while staying on a mana denial Wasteland strategy. I tried a stock list and didn't like it. Also I play in a relatively fair meta and I think the 5-drop gives me an edge in fair matches. I rarely have a problem with getting to 5-6 mana in fair matches and whenever I get there the opponent has to present a FoW or lose on the spot. In a more combo oriented meta I could see skipping it, but e.g. vs Sneak and Show or Omnisneak, Titania kills them if they try to attack with Emrakul. It's vs the fast combo decks that it's pretty useless. But it's not like I would change the 5-drop into a card that is great in the fast combo-matchups anyway..
Last edited by pettdan; 06-06-2017 at 06:19 AM.
Technically, DD doesn't disrupt the manabase since it takes a spell slot, but Thespian Stage makes the manabase worse indeed.
To make a prairie, it takes a clover and one bee. One clover, a bee, and revery...
In defense of Stage--I have won lots of games because I've used the stage to copy other lands than just Dark Depths. Double Maze vs reanimator, double Arbor vs miracles, extra card draw when flooding by copying horizon canopy and saccing both, etc...
Its not just a card for the combo.
I like your analysis, I agree with just about all of it, which is also why I'm not running either depths or a 5 drop currently. Meta just seems hostile to it. If the meta shifts I may try running a titania. I also do believe that the reason to run depths over cradle + 5 drop is that it just ends the game on the spot. Plenty of those fair decks don't actually have an answer to a lage, whereas generally those same decks do have an answer to titania (however probably no answers for a sigarda). Also as TMagpie has mentioned depths does just win you games that a titania or sigarda wouldn't.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
