[Deck] RG Chalice of the Moon/Antigoyf

[FoolofaTook]

This is a simple RG beats deck with fast disruption and virtually no graveyard presence other than creatures and the odd artifact that gets countered/destroyed. It has no fetches or Wastelands because it doesn't want to put land in it's own graveyard. It's designed to beat multi-colored decks splashing green for Goyf.

Creatures (29)

4x Kird Ape
4x Figure of Destiny
4x Magus of the Moon
4x Briarhorn
3x Vexing Shusher
3x Simian Spirit Guide
2x Hunting Moa
2x Eternal Witness
2x Loaming Shaman
1x Genesis

Artifacts (14)

4x Chalice of the Void
4x Aether Vial
2x Sword of Fire and Ice
2x Umezawa's Jitte
2x Engineered explosives

Instants (1)

1x Krosan Grip

Land (16)

4x Taiga
8x Mountains
4x Forest

Sideboard

4x Leyline of Lifeforce
4x Mogg Fanatic
4x Thorn of Amethyst
2x Krosan Grip
1x Engineered Explosives

The basic concept is to play a fast aggro rush accompanied by disruption in the form of Chalice of the Void and Magus of the Moon. There's almost always going to be a one drop that sets the pace between Aether Vial, Figure of Destiny and Kird Ape and the plan is to get the opponent laying back on his heels by turn three or four in reactive mode and unable to bring his plan on line.

There are very few two drops in the deck because it really wants to set up Chalice@2 at some point fairly early or failing that to set off some Engineered Explosives@2 as a sweeper.

The deck is trying to take aim at the two dominant cards in the meta at the moment: Counterbalance and Tarmogoyf. For Counterbalance it has Aether Vial, Vexing Shusher and Briarhorn, all of which impede Counterbalance in some way or another, Vial and Shusher by creating uncounterable effects and Briarhorn by being off of the comfortable counterable curve. For Tarmogoyf the deck is placing very few cards in the graveyard of it's own volition and those only being creatures, except for Engineered Explosives which will likely take Goyf with it. There are no sorceries or enchantments in the deck and only one instant, there are no lands that require a sacrifice of a land. Figure of Destiny, Briarhorn and Hunting Moa are all meant to make Goyf feel small and insignificant when he is on the board. Loaming Shaman is to make him miniscule in the mid to late game when standoffs may occur. Magus of the Moon is to make decks that tend to play both Counterbalance and Goyf together very uncomfortable.

Against combo the deck has Chalice of the Void and Magus of the Moon with Thorn of Amethyst in the sideboard. It's not a great matchup but it's livable.

Against Ichorid there is Briarhorn to kill bridges and Loaming Shaman to clear the graveyard. There is Engineered Explosives to easily sweep tokens. There are chump blockers galore to handle the Ichorid recursion when that turns out to be what is happening and there are ways to permanently grow those blockers out of chump range. In the sideboard there is Mogg Fanatic, who also tunes in against Goblins.

Against Landstill there are Magus of the Moon, Figure of Destiny, Vexing Shusher, Aether Vial and Krosan Grip.

Against Goblins there are a lot of little-middle creatures with equipment and there is Mogg Fanatic in the sideboard.

I've only been testing this for a week but it plays very consistently, although it does require mulliganing now and then due to artifact heavy hands. The Simian Spirit Guides have gone in and out and then got cut to three, still not sure where they will wind up. Ancient Tomb has also gone in and out of the deck and may well go back in. It makes Chalice@2 much more doable early and it works very well with Magus of the Moon and the equipment. It's got downsides though and it's hard to justify having it when you really want to drop a Kird Ape or Figure of Destiny turn one and potentially a Vexing Shusher turn two.

[edgewalker]

16 land and only 3 spirit guide seems kinda low, and by kinda low I mean real low. You can't play chalice and 1 since chalice at 1 and you're deck is not a combo, and chalice at 2 is going to be slow going, and just silly. Sure it shuts down counterbalance and goyf but guess what, it doesn't shut down the rest of their deck which has the components to get rid of said chalice.

Maybe next time?

[kicks_422]

Chalice doesn't go well with a lot of 1-drops...

[FoolofaTook]

Chalice doesn't go well with a lot of 1-drops...

There are several ways around Chalice@1 assuming that's what the hand says to do. Aether Vial and Vexing Shusher both get around it. What I'm seeing so far is that one drop followed by Chalice@1 is the most likely scenario when Chalice is going to land that way. Mostly it lands @0 turn one or @2 on turn three or four.

Typical hand is a one drop, two lands, an artifact and three other creatures. Most of the time that looks good and when it doesn't you have to mulligan. Now and then the deck gets stuck on two mana and that's a real problem with no Vial in play. That's why one land hands almost always get mulliganed, this isn't elves and it has no way to create permanent mana acceleration if it falls behind the curve. I'l keep one basic land and two Vials if that's what shows up but mostly I mull really low mana hands.

[edgewalker]

Still, you're only playing 16 permanent sources of mana, not even threshold plays that low and it has a lower curve and more ways to search out said mana. I find it unrealistic that most hands contain 2 lands. I also would believe that you get stuck on 1-2 lands more than you probably should. Personally I feel adding 2-3 more lands to this deck would take away from it's "suck value" (I haven't tested this yet, so I don't know what it's value is, but making a deck suck less always seems good)

EDIT: as far as the "combo" of shusher and CotV goes, a one sided sphere of resistance doesn't seem to hot, especially when you only play 16 lands (I'm noticing a recurring theme)

[FoolofaTook]

Still, you're only playing 16 permanent sources of mana, not even threshold plays that low and it has a lower curve and more ways to search out said mana. I find it unrealistic that most hands contain 2 lands. I also would believe that you get stuck on 1-2 lands more than you probably should. Personally I feel adding 2-3 more lands to this deck would take away from it's "suck value" (I haven't tested this yet, so I don't know what it's value is, but making a deck suck less always seems good)

EDIT: as far as the "combo" of shusher and CotV goes, a one sided sphere of resistance doesn't seem to hot, especially when you only play 16 lands (I'm noticing a recurring theme)

With Chalice@1 Shusher works just fine when you need to get a 1cc around it. There are only two 2cc spells that Chalice@2 counters in the main deck so that's really not an issue. Chalice@3 never happens, nor would I want it too given the deck construction.

The mana in the deck is low but not critically so. I probably open up a two or three land hand about 70% of the time. I open up a hand with an Aether Vial 40% of the time and one with two Vials maybe 10% of the time. I mull some, as almost all decks do, when I really don't like the opening hand. Occasionally I mull to four or five, as all decks do, and even to oblivion.

On the flip side the deck has virtually no mulls caused by mana flood, nor does it have many occasions where it draws into a pocket of land that shuts it down. The Taigas will cause a problem with opposing Wastelands if that's what is drawn at the start. There is a downside to not playing fetches and that is that the deck can't readily setup it's mana situationally but is more dependent on good draws or mulling to do that.

Where the deck gets stuck, when it gets stuck, is on two mana. That's a problem and it's the main reason that one land hands get mulled unless they are really nuts,

[edgewalker]

With Chalice@1 Shusher works just fine when you need to get a 1cc around it. There are only two 2cc spells that Chalice@2 counters in the main deck so that's really not an issue. Chalice@3 never happens, nor would I want it too given the deck construction.

The mana in the deck is low but not critically so. I probably open up a two or three land hand about 70% of the time. I open up a hand with an Aether Vial 40% of the time and one with two Vials maybe 10% of the time. I mull some, as almost all decks do, when I really don't like the opening hand. Occasionally I mull to four or five, as all decks do, and even to oblivion.

On the flip side the deck has virtually no mulls caused by mana flood, nor does it have many occasions where it draws into a pocket of land that shuts it down. The Taigas will cause a problem with opposing Wastelands if that's what is drawn at the start. There is a downside to not playing fetches and that is that the deck can't readily setup it's mana situationally but is more dependent on good draws or mulling to do that.

No, 70% of the time, that's bullshit, could someone do the math for me, I'm no stat major but this seems kinda over stated.

You also missed the point on my Shusher + COTV. I know they work, that's great. Why would you want to pay 2 mana for 1 mana spells? I was trying to point out that Shusher and CotV is counter productive, especially when you play such a low land count and even more so when you're trying to disrupt your opponent. What I mean is you can't disrupt your opponent when you're spending extra mana on your own spells.

I seriously don't know why you post deck lists, since you obviously don't post them to be critiqued.

[FoolofaTook]

No, 70% of the time, that's bullshit, could someone do the math for me, I'm no stat major but this seems kinda over stated.

There are sixteen land in the deck. The odds on having two of them in hand in a seven card draw is probably above 60% before you even add the three land scenario to it.


You also missed the point on my Shusher + COTV. I know they work, that's great. Why would you want to pay 2 mana for 1 mana spells?

So your opponent can't cast his cheap 1cc cantrips and solutions? So he can't cast his Nimble Mongoose? Seriously, is this a trick question? If you could cast a Figure of Destiny for RR with immediate immunity to Swords to Plowshares of uncertain duration would you rather do that or cast it for R naked? Particularly in a deck with no counterspells? And the side effect of having Vexing Shusher in the deck is that's an uncounterable FoD even when Chalice@1 is not in play. It's called synergy.



I was trying to point out that Shusher and CotV is counter productive, especially when you play such a low land count and even more so when you're trying to disrupt your opponent. What I mean is you can't disrupt your opponent when you're spending extra mana on your own spells.

It's not at all counterproductive because the two effects complement each other and are not designed to be a lock. They're designed to make decks that play Goyf and CounterTop unhappy. That they have synergy beyond that is a bonus.


I seriously don't know why you post deck lists, since you obviously don't post them to be critiqued.

I post them to be critiqued, but not dismissed. Read your first post. Also I don't think you've even really looked at the deck. What do you think the first person who looked at 9 land Stompy thought thirty seconds after he'd scanned the list? 9 lands? That's ridiculous. How about Belcher? Nope, never work. Magic is made up of deck lists that look preposterous initially and turn out to be quite strong because they find their niche and prosper.

This deck would not work with 19 lands and 4 SSG and 4 Aether Vial. It'd be too inactive right off the bat and it'd get swept on turn 4 and it'd be game over against exactly the decks it's trying to beat. The extra land would replace either one of the one drops it needs for the early game or some of the pumpers it needs for turns three to six when bigger stuff is going to be sitting on the other side of the board and it needs to sumo it's way by them.

If the deck was following a normal curve and casting a lot of 2cc spells things would be different, but it's really the anti-2cc deck and things have to stack up a little bit different before the midgame or that won't work. The entire idea would probably fail without Figure of Destiny, which is now the second creature that scales with the game state.

[edgewalker]

God I don't know how I can explain this better. Adding 1 mana to spells you play, but not you're opponent is a BAD idea. Sure it gets you're spells around chalice, but it stops you from playing more spells.

To sum it up:

Vexing Shusher + Chalice of the Void = NOT A COMBO, despite the "neat" synergy they have.

EDIT: Oh, I did look at you're list, it runs subpar creatures and is a niche deck that is out classed by better niche decks. I wanted to address you're low land count and dissynergous game plan first.

[FoolofaTook]

You still don't get it. You're looking at 1cc spells that I cast and telling me that adding an additional mana to cast them is some crippling detriment. At the same time you're completely ignoring the fact that when I am operating under that "detriment" my opponent is unable to cast ANY of his 1cc spells.

I can't explain that any better so if you haven't got it yet we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I totally agree with you, by the way, that if an effect I was playing made my 1cc spells cost two and didn't effect my opponent's 1cc spells it would be a detriment. That's just never the situation here.

The other thing I forgot to say above was that you thought that somehow using Shusher to get around my own Chalice of the Void@1 while I also needed mana to disrupt my opponent was somehow self-defeating. The error in that construction is, of course, that if I am using mana to get around my own Chalice@1 (or Chalice@2 in the midgame) my opponent is already likely being heavily disrupted. If I needed mana to activate that disruption then you'd be correct that the Shusher and the CoTV appeared to be working against each other, however with the CoTV in play I'm already doing what I want to be doing at no current mana cost.

[edgewalker]

No I get it, I got what you were selling from the opening post and I think you're wrong. There I said, you are wrong. I can't seem to persuade you though, so good day.

[Wallace]

No I get it, I got what you were selling from the opening post and I think you're wrong. There I said, you are wrong. I can't seem to persuade you though, so good day.

Your right, he is wrong, Chalice aggro decks use 18 land, 4 Moxen and 4 Spirit Guides. 8 of the land produce 2 mana when tapped, if you ever want this deck to compete you will need to add more mana sources.

[Apex]

No, 70% of the time, that's bullshit, could someone do the math for me, I'm no stat major but this seems kinda over stated.

Stat major here. The calculation you are looking for:

FoolofaTook claims 70% chance of seeing 1 or 2 lands in the opening hand, let's calculate this:

preposition 1: let all lands be the same (clearly, they aren't, but for calculation's sake, let's assume they are)
preposition 2: let the deck of 60 card be divided into 2 subgroups: lands and nonlands (again, for calculation's sake)

a) chance of seeing exactly 1 land in the opening hand: (16 choose 1 )*(44 choose 6)
b) chance of seeing exactly 2 lands in the opening hand: (16 choose 2)*(44 choose 5)
c) total number of possible combinations in an opening hand: (60 choose 7)

so chance of seeing 1 or 2 lands in the opening hand, given 16 equivalent mana sources = (a + b) / c = roughly 63%

However, this is the highest percentage possible calculated, given the assumptions. Obviously, not all lands drawn can cast all the spells (so a hand of Forest, Forest, all red spell is just as useless as a hand with no lands), and not all the spells are 4x, and some requires more than 2 mana to function, so they affect mulligan decisions.

In my opinion, I don't think 16 sources are enough, particularly when if you don't hit the requisite lands, you lose the game, and you don't immediately win when you do hit the lands (you merely becomes functional). 37% auto-lose to self is really big. It isn't like craps, where if a 63% odds on winning would make everyone in statistics instantly quit their job, and just hover in the casino all day. I think you need to up your land count before doing anything else.

[FoolofaTook]

Ok, I got out Magic Workstation and decided to use their probability generator as best I could. Given that we're just checking for two land and not the types and colors involved I made the land in the deck all one type (Mountains) and put 16 of them in the deck.

The probability of having 2 Mountains in hand, according to MWS, at the start of the game in 7 cards is 61%. Independently of that the probability of having 3 mountains in hand at the start is 27%. So the probability of having either 2 or 3 Mountains in hand at the start of the game should be at a minimum 61% + (39% * 27%) or 71.53%. The probability in 16 lands of having ONE land in hand at the start is 90%. How can you be a stat major and somehow miss the fact that if you have a 90% chance of having a land in your hand at the start you can't possibly have a 63% chance to have either one land or two lands?

One land or two lands BTW is not what I'm looking for I mull one land hands unless they are really loaded for bear. I want 2 lands or 3 lands.

[Apex]

Ok, I got out Magic Workstation and decided to use their probability generator as best I could. Given that we're just checking for two land and not the types and colors involved I made the land in the deck all one type (Mountains) and put 16 of them in the deck.

The probability of having 2 Mountains in hand, according to MWS, at the start of the game in 7 cards is 61%. Independently of that the probability of having 3 mountains in hand at the start is 27%. So the probability of having either 2 or 3 Mountains in hand at the start of the game should be at a minimum 61% + (39% * 27%) or 71.53%. The probability in 16 lands of having ONE land in hand at the start is 90%. How can you be a stat major and somehow miss the fact that if you have a 90% chance of having a land in your hand at the start you can't possibly have a 63% chance to have either one land or two lands?

One land or two lands BTW is not what I'm looking for I mull one land hands unless they are really loaded for bear. I want 2 lands or 3 lands.

I was about to lol first when I read your numbers, until you claimed that I wasted 3 years of my life.

Let me see, how did you get 90%? I got my numbers through combinatorics, and I showed you the calculations, its something we learn in high school math. 90% comes from? I also loaded up my own MWS and I loaded my Fetchland Tendrils list, and that one runs 17 lands. I also went to the statistical part, and I ran 100000 (the maximum number) simulations for the opening hand, guess percentage of 1 land in opening hand? 21.44% So, given the law of large numbers, I'm right. So quit bullshitting me about stats, and accept that you are running too little lands.

[FoolofaTook]

I was about to lol first when I read your numbers, until you claimed that I wasted 3 years of my life.

Let me see, how did you get 90%? I got my numbers through combinatorics, and I showed you the calculations, its something we learn in high school math. 90% comes from? I also loaded up my own MWS and I loaded my Fetchland Tendrils list, and that one runs 17 lands. I also went to the statistical part, and I ran 100000 (the maximum number) simulations for the opening hand, guess percentage of 1 land in opening hand? 21.44% So, given the law of large numbers, I'm right. So quit bullshitting me about stats, and accept that you are running too little lands.

90% came from the probability calculator in MWS under Probability Analysis, with 16 land listed as a single card type to draw from and 44 other cards listed in the deck under the T0 column. 16 Mountains and 44 other cards in the deck lead to a 90% chance listed that you will see a Mountain in your opening hand of 7 cards.

I apologize for the comment because it was not appropriate.

According to MWS the breakdown on land should be 9.9% no land (hence my 90% with one land or more although I expressed it poorly and should not have added editorial comment. Mulligan) 29% one land (mulligan most of the time). 34% two lands (hence your 63% chance to draw one or two lands. Keep.) 20% three lands. (Keep.) 6% 4 lands (usually keep.). And a very small chance at more than that. (mulligan.)