[Article] The Case for Board Control

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/16217.html

I actually thought it was a pretty good read. I have no idea if the list is any good, but at least it seems he's outgrown the "Conclusions far exceeding the data" phase of his writing.





Personal note; I love the switch from "Landstill doesn't play any good cards" to arguing in favor of board control. As a wise man once said;

"In the long run, the Elgins are always right(unless Jack is disagreeing with Matt, in which case, he's wrong)." - David Gearhart.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I sincerely doubt he added that addendum, and/or I'mma punching him next time I see him.

[Whit3 Ghost]

I thouroughly disagree with Anusien's assesment of Canadian Thresh. Other than that, I thought it was a pretty good article. In my limited testing experience against the presented list I thought his manabase was poor. However, his list does have some interesting parts to it and Intuitioning for Demigods is a really cool play.

[Pinder]

What is this feeling? I....I think I.....like this article?

But it was written by Anusien. Oh God, I feel so conflicted. Hold me.

Seriously though, it was of a decent length and filled with decent content. Good show, old chap.

[Ewokslayer]

What is this feeling? I....I think I.....like this article?

But it was written by Anusien. Oh God, I feel so conflicted. Hold me.

Seriously though, it was of a decent length and filled with decent content. Good show, old chap.

I agree. Anusien's last few articles have been a vast improvement over his previous fair.

[Anusien]

But it was written by Anusien. Oh God, I feel so conflicted. Hold me.
Now THIS is the sort of The Source bonding I've been missing out on all these years.

By the way, considering how much I've hated Standstill, it was as much as shock to me as anyone that I was actually playing Standstills and liking it! But the only similarities between modern Standstill (and by that I mean Vorosh) are Standstills, Force of Will, Brainstorm, Factories, Wasteland and some spot removal. The mass removal is far superior, there are reasonable creatures that don't take 100 mana, and you get mother freaking Counterbalance. Man, if I loved Jotun Grunt that spell is even better.

And preferring Standstill to the more exciting Intuition. But I always liked the board control elements of Landstill (go go Wrath!). I think the difference between now and 2004 is that with the addition of Counterbalance, it's reasonable for Landstill to keep a threat from ever hitting the table, and the addition of Tarmogoyf means that not every 2/2 is a game stopper for your Factories.

Interestingly Wasteland is the worst part of the Landstill decks in my opinion; you basically only want them to remove opposing man lands.

Anyway thanks for the feedback. In the same way it helped when you all stopped saying "lol anus sux" and started saying "lol anus sux bc blahblahblah", I'd be really interested to know the sorts of things you liked about this article. Personally I feel like the material could have been rewritten in a more clear, straight-forward way but I'm not sure how. I was also hesitant to post the list since it came about Tuesday of that week, and most of the week was spent just refining it and making it not pure dross.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

But I always liked the board control elements of Landstill (go go Wrath!). I think the difference between now and 2004 is that with the addition of Counterbalance, it's reasonable for Landstill to keep a threat from ever hitting the table, and the addition of Tarmogoyf means that not every 2/2 is a game stopper for your Factories.

I'm not arguing against the power of Counterbalance, but it's useless against Goblins, a matchup that was one of Ought-5 Landstill's critics biggest criticisms against the deck.

I think the reality is that board control is always viable, but it has to be carefully tuned to the meta-game. Voroshstill and ITF are examples of that.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Basically, yeah. I've been advocating for years that the entire concept of an RPS metagame is illusory, and there are only two fundamental strategies; offense and defense. Defense wins when it's prepared for the threats it's facing, and offense wins when it catches defense with it's pants down, either because those answers are too slow or don't address the actual threat (via recursion, alternate win conditions such as combos, etc). Whether or not this strategy is acchieved piecemail or through a long chain of spells forming a "combo" is irrelevant to the basic principle.


Did anyone else check out the forums? I like how the quality of Anusien's articles is inversely proportionate to the praise they receive. I'm really half-tempted to log onto my fourth account and defend you, Kevin.

[Volt]

.

[Silverdragon]

But it's possible I like Top more than most people; I've seriously considered playing it in Goblins just to stop drawing lands.

This was the only part that irritated me during the article. (I immediately looked over the part with Crusher because it felt too much like a joke.)
Seriously from the few hundred games I played with and against Goblins unless my opponent was drawing Mountains for the whole game I always got the impression that what Goblins needed was not less lands but more lands... You have Ports and Wastelands, Ringleader and Siege Gang Commander that require quite a few landdrops especially if something isn't going according to plan (i.e. you couldn't kill your opponent on turn 4 and now he has a solution for your Vial/Lackey).
Anyway imo this was your best article so far. Keep it up. None of that "I'm so hip look at my famous quote at the beginning", no "this decklist is vigorously tested and should win every tournament" and I feel like you structured your thoughts very well.

edit: Almost forgot to mention, somewhere in the article you jump from ranting about Blood Moon right to the idea of playing it yourself. Maybe it was a misunderstanding on my part or just bad phrasing but it kinda came up in my mind.

edit2: found the part:
So I tried taking a cue from Threshold and including the fifth color. You can easily make room for a Magus of the Moon in the deck; sure it tears your manabase up, but at least you're prepared.
Could you please explain what this is supposed to mean?

[Anusien]

If the opponent plays Magus of the Moon, you can't win. In this deck you have Demigods and possibly a basic Forest. Plus, if you can't play Goyfs and they can't play Goyfs but you have a 2/2 beater, you're in reasonable shape.

[Silverdragon]

Ok so I understood it right. Thanks for the clarification. Anyway what I wanted to say was that I'm fine with the idea of playing Magus of the Moon in a "5color" deck (I'm the guy who had some moderate success with Chalice, Goblin Welder and Pyroclasm in the same deck^^) but I didn't like how the idea was formulated in your article.
Maybe because 5c Thresh doesn't play Blood Moon effects (to my knowledge) or maybe because that "making room for it" suggested cutting some of the "better" (like in "not actually crippling yourself") cards.
Sorry for nitpicking here but that's all I can do when there are no big flaws to be found ;)

[Anusien]

I appreciate it, and it wasn't clear. Probably because by the time I had a decklist I felt at least somewhat comfortable posting, I had moved the Magus of the Moon to the sideboard and therefore outside the article.

[T is for TOOL]

Keep the comments on the article please.
-TOOL